DC Police Chief Responds to Adam Kokesh's Planned Armed March

[dbill27]

Go Adam Kokesh! and I've been against a lot of what he's done. If we have the right to bear arms to prevent tyranny from our government well then here we fuckin are! This is what is needs to happen.

 

[S.Shorland]

Yes,the police are the ones denying THE law.Your Constitution.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 - Supreme Court 2008:

"wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person." We think [this definition] accurately capture the natural meaning of "bear arms."

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

15 pages? - WOW! I just finished page 3, so it's going to take a while to catch up. Sorry if this has already been posted, but it has relative info:

Protest group plans July 4 march on Washington with loaded rifles
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...2-aa9e-a02b765ff0ea_story.html?wpisrc=nl_buzz

An Iraq war veteran and Internet talk show host is trying to gather thousands of protesters to march into the District on Independence Day with loaded rifles on their backs.

But if Adam Kokesh follows through with his July 4 plans — 2,500 people have signed up for the cause — he and his makeshift band will be met on the Arlington Memorial Bridge by two police forces packing guns of their own.

Kokesh, 31, and D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier say they want to work together to ensure a peaceful airing of grievances. But the chief says only one side can have guns: hers. And she’ll have backup from the U.S. Park Police, which will also position officers at the District line.

“If you’re coming here to protest government policy, great,” Lanier said Tuesday on her monthly appearance on NewsChannel 8, reacting to the group’s plan to cross the Potomac River from Arlington National Cemetery. “If you’re coming here to break the law, we’ll take action.”

Lanier added, “There’s a pretty good chance we’ll meet them on the D.C. side of the bridge.”

Kokesh is calling the event an “Open Carry March” but described it as a general demonstration against “tyranny,” not a protest against specific gun laws.

News of the march comes amid a national debate over gun regulations that emerged after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. Kokesh has chosen to stage his protest in one of the most strictly regulated cities when it comes to firearms laws — and one of the most contested.

Washington allows residents to possess registered firearms on their property but forbids carrying them in public. And it was the backdrop for a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2008 that struck down a total ban on firearms — and guaranteed the right to own a gun for self-defense.

Kokesh’s timing is curious given the recent success of gun advocates in defeating a series of firearms restrictions in Congress that emerged in the wake of the Newtown massacre. However, efforts to revive the legislation are underway.

Authorities noted that they have not been in contact with Kokesh, who returned from Iraq a self-proclaimed libertarian and antiwar activist. Kokesh publicized his plans in Internet postings.

On his blog, “Adam Vs The Man,” Kokesh called on people to register for the march, which he called an act of civil disobedience. He said protesters with loaded guns slung across their backs will march around the District’s seats of power — the U.S. Capitol, the Supreme Court and the White House.

Kokesh wrote that he is planning a nonviolent protest, but he won’t predict what could happen if the police move in with force. He urged protesters to submit to arrests and said the group will peacefully turn back if denied entry to the District. Separately, he said some protesters plan to take a step into the District to prompt an arrest.

“We will march with rifles loaded and flung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated and cower in submission to tyranny,” Kokesh wrote on his Web site. “Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington. . . . We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.”

He said he wants to work with law enforcement and hopes that Lanier will make an exception to the law and grant his group safe passage, and even a police escort, through the District. A D.C. police spokeswoman said the protesters will not be allowed in the District while carrying firearms.

Sgt. Paul Brooks of the U.S. Park Police said guns are not allowed in the cemetery in Arlington. But he said it appears the group plans to start just outside the cemetery gates, along Memorial Drive. He said the organization has not sought a permit, as required for demonstrations on National Park Service property, but Kokesh said on the Web site he does not intend to get one.

Lanier said on the television program that city representatives are willing to meet with Kokesh and other leaders “to facilitate whatever they want to get accomplished in a legal way.” But, she said, “passing into the District with loaded firearms is a violation of the law and it will be treated as such.”

In 2007, Kokesh was photographed at the Hart Senate Office Building being arrested wearing a T-shirt that read, “Iraq veterans against the war.” He was arrested again in 2011 when he led a group dancing at the Jefferson Memorial, and he has gotten into trouble for protesting in a Marine uniform and for taking a souvenir gun home from the battlefield.

-t

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Rand Paul may very possibly be the next President of the United States, and you don't see how we are making progress?

And don't worry, Janet Napolitano will probably try and round up patriots at some point, but why make it convenient for her?

Why risk giving her the opportunity to do it in a way that has popular support behind it?

Until that actually happens, we're not making much actual progress. Sure, we're gaining ground, but Obama is still passing executive orders that are diminishing our freedoms. That tide has not reversed yet. We are still net losing freedoms.

I honestly don't know what you're on about with Janet Napolitano. Care to tell me why she's so hot about the idea of patriots in DC with loaded rifles?

 

[ninepointfive]

Kokesh will be on Alex Jones again at the bottom of the hour this hour to discuss the DC chief of police's statement on the matter.



www.infowars.com

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Until that actually happens, we're not making much actual progress. Sure, we're gaining ground, but Obama is still passing executive orders that are diminishing our freedoms. That tide has not reversed yet. We are still net losing freedoms.

I honestly don't know what you're on about with Janet Napolitano. Care to tell me why she's so hot about the idea of patriots in DC with loaded rifles?

Unconstitutional laws aren't laws.

 

[Pericles]

Which, of course, is why it is important never to surrender your weapon to begin with.

Bing! Bing! Bing! We have a winner - correct answer.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Please see my prior post; but no, not I. Generally, that is what the law requires whenever open carrying, otherwise there are other alternatives such as CCW or carrying inside of a locked box kept in a backpack or something.

Come on really? If you cannot load you gun within 1-2 seconds, you probably have much bigger issues to worry about... and if precious seconds really do count, you might be better off using a tactical pocketknife than a sidearm (e.g., in a close-combat situation).

Otherwise, just load up while taking cover and then worry about returning fire.

If it only takes 1-2 seconds to load a gun, then what's the point of keeping it unloaded? Also, do you realize how ridiculous it would be to try to enforce this? And yes, 1-2 seconds can be a long time when there's a bank robbery in progress or some imminent threat. "Taking cover" isn't always possible when you have somebody pointing a gun at you ready to shoot. How is it that you can't imagine, in a GUN FIGHT that people would be too far apart for close combat and also seconds being important, considering the fraction of a second it takes to fire a gun.

 

[brandon]

I bet they just close off the bridge entirely to prevent any conflict. They won't need to arrest anyone that way and it becomes a non-story.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Unconstitutional laws aren't laws.

I know that. What does that have to do with my post?

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I bet they just close off the bridge entirely to prevent any conflict. They won't need to arrest anyone that way and it becomes a non-story.

They may just march around and find a different way in.

 

[69360]

I bet they just close off the bridge entirely to prevent any conflict. They won't need to arrest anyone that way and it becomes a non-story.

I don't even think they will make it that far. They will probably get scooped up or sent home as soon as they try to assemble.

Well as long as the government doesn't invoke the patriot act and preemptively raid their homes and send them all to gitmo.

This march is just a stupid idea that no good will come of.

 

[klamath]

Unlikely. You can continue to keep playing that game, year after year, election after election, thinking this time will be different. But I won't.

Revolution after revolution body after body, devastation after devastation thinking next time will be different. This will be the war to end all wars because everyone will have FREEDOM!

 

[JK/SEA]

Revolution after revolution body after body, devastation after devastation thinking next time will be different. This will be the war to end all wars because everyone will have FREEDOM!

whats the alternative?

 

[klamath]

whats the alternative?

The alternative to killing people and causing distruction with no gain? Hmmm. I like to kill a lot, let me think about that one

 

[TheTexan]

The alternative to killing people and causing distruction with no gain? Hmmm. I like to kill a lot, let me think about that one

I wouldnt say no gain. The last revolution worked fairly well. It didnt last, but thats not necessarily the fault of the revolutionaries. Even though their gains are now lost, I still consider it worth it.

You have to understand, its the threat of violence that prevents people from trampling on your rights. Even otherwise good people will trample on your rights, because they believe it is right or necessary. The threat of defensive force is what keeps them at bay.

We dont necessarily need to use force to reclaim our rights, but we will need to be prepared to do so if necessary. If we refuse to take up arms in our defense, they will continue as they always have to take up arms against us, unopposed, with nothing to lose.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Sure this could go bad, but the man has some guts.

And nobody can take that away from him, regardless.

 

[Petar]

And nobody can take that away from him, regardless.

Don't you ever wonder if maybe he is just controlled opposition?

I mean couldn't Janet Napolitano really use someone like him to provoke something that will give her the excuse that she needs to round up the patriots?

The guy doesn't even seem to be aware of what kind of tightrope he is walking here, so at best he seems really reckless.

 

[torchbearer]

the DC cops will be breaking the law, they should be arrested.