VA APS-ers: Is the Potomac running red with the blood of the innocent yet?

[Perd Hapley]

Is there any political benefit to be gained from carrying everything loaded?  If so, is it enought to offset the gleeful media headline of: "Pro gun protestor killed by gun discharge at anti-government gun rally!"

Just saying.

There is political risk in a policy that all guns must be unloaded.  Critics could easily, and quite rightly, point out that the gun nuts want to carry guns everywhere, but don't even trust one another to carry live rounds. 

It's somewhat, but not entirely, along the lines of state gun groups (when concealed carry has just been legalized) telling their members to carry unloaded for the first few months/years, just to avoid bad headlines.  Edit:  I've never heard of that happening, just hypothesizing. 

It would sound like we don't even believe our own rhetoric. 

[mellestad]

There is political risk in a policy that all guns must be unloaded.  Critics could easily, and quite rightly, point out that the gun nuts want to carry guns everywhere, but don't even trust one another to carry live rounds.  

It's somewhat, but not entirely, along the lines of state gun groups (when concealed carry has just been legalized) telling their members to carry unloaded for the first few months/years, just to avoid bad headlines.  Edit:  I've never heard of that happening, just hypothesizing.  

It would sound like we don't even believe our own rhetoric.  

Maybe it is just my safety voice talking, I dunno.  Just seems....well, stupid, honestly, to carry weapons loaded unless you are planning on using them for self defense (or some actual purpose).  Seems like a dangerous gesture with no possible political benefit.

And I'm saying that as my gun owning, sometimes hunting, weapons enthusiast self, not as my liberal, hippie, peace loving, socialist self.

[kgbsquirrel]

Maybe it is just my safety voice talking, I dunno.  Just seems....well, stupid, honestly, to carry weapons loaded unless you are planning on using them for self defense (or some actual purpose).

And I suppose you know exactly when you are going to be put in a position of self-defense? Do you only put on your seat belt just before you get in a crash or put a fire extinguisher in your kitchen just before your pan of delicious bacon bursts into flames ( ). An unloaded rifle is just a poorly designed club, and I already have an ASP to fulfill that purpose.

I agree that mandating everyone to stay unloaded can have a negative political effect by giving the opposition grounds to claim that we are hypocrites with regards to our own message. Given the assumption that your position of zero-gain is correct that leaves us in the position where we gain nothing by having them loaded, but still lose something by having them unloaded. The better position is still to have them loaded.

If negligent discharges were a significant concern the organizations could always polite advise people to keep their rifles condition 3 (yellow) or to keep the loaded magazines in a pouch carried with them. Note I said advice, not something that could be construed as a condition of participation. As always though the basic safety rules should be posted prominently. It never hurts to have them refreshed.

[mellestad]

And I suppose you know exactly when you are going to be put in a position of self-defense? Do you only put on your seat belt just before you get in a crash or put a fire extinguisher in your kitchen just before your pan of delicious bacon bursts into flames ( ). An unloaded rifle is just a poorly designed club, and I already have an ASP to fulfill that purpose.

I agree that mandating everyone to stay unloaded can have a negative political effect by giving the opposition grounds to claim that we are hypocrites with regards to our own message. Given the assumption that your position of zero-gain is correct that leaves us in the position where we gain nothing by having them loaded, but still lose something by having them unloaded. The better position is still to have them loaded.

If negligent discharges were a significant concern the organizations could always polite advise people to keep their rifles condition 3 (yellow) or to keep the loaded magazines in a pouch carried with them. Note I said advice, not something that could be construed as a condition of participation. As always though the basic safety rules should be posted prominently. It never hurts to have them refreshed.

Don't make a strawman out of my argument, I just can't imagine the political benefit of having loaded long guns (in addition to typical sidearms) at a political rally.  I'm not saying anything more than that.

Edit:  And if you really think you need to keep a loaded long gun ready at a political rally, 'just in case' I'm not sure what to say, lol.

[kgbsquirrel]

Don't make a strawman out of my argument, I just can't imagine the political benefit of having loaded long guns (in addition to typical sidearms) at a political rally.  I'm not saying anything more than that.

Edit:  And if you really think you need to keep a loaded long gun ready at a political rally, 'just in case' I'm not sure what to say, lol.

Oblique stab at my temperament bordering on ad hominem aside, while you may see this bereft of benefit, I can certainly see a liability in the media by playing it out the other way, not to mention that firearms were quite germane to this particular event and the bearing of such was in fact the central point and principal.

[taurusowner]

Don't make a strawman out of my argument, I just can't imagine the political benefit of having loaded long guns (in addition to typical sidearms) at a political rally.  I'm not saying anything more than that.

I think it is a strong statement against us that we don't trust each other to carry loaded weapons.  So it's not that carring loaded long guns has a political benefit, it's that not carrying them loaded could be politically negative.  It says that the lack of trust the antis have in us is well founded, as we don't even trust ourselves.

[Perd Hapley]

It might be most helpful to look at the demonstrations that have already occurred with loaded weapons present, and ask whether any negligent discharges have actually occurred.  If not, we can proudly point to them as evidence that loaded guns in public are not a danger to the public.  Of course, the net advantage of crime-deterring gun carry should be pointed out as well. 

There's also a valuable psychological aspect to loading the weapon.  One purpose of the rallies is to accustom people to the idea that carrying guns is a normal, safe activity that should be accepted in everyday life.  IF word gets out that the guns were not loaded, some of that is lost. 

I also shudder at the idea of ND's at such an event, but it just has to be done.   


When it comes to long guns, I'm assuming chambers are empty, magazines loaded.  Unlike a sidearm, you can't carry a long gun in a holster with eighteen safety features to keep it from going off.  And unless you have it in hand, or in some kind of assault sling, it will be behind you, and easily manipulated by some psychotic hoplophobe saboteur. 

[mellestad]

Oblique stab at my temperament bordering on ad hominem aside, while you may see this bereft of benefit, I can certainly see a liability in the media by playing it out the other way, not to mention that firearms were quite germane to this particular event and the bearing of such was in fact the central point and principal.

I media liability by not having your longguns loaded?  Really?  What am I missing here kgb?

Edit:  I don't see anything in the media reports about the event in question saying anything negative about the long guns being unloaded.

If people want to carry loaded rifles to a rally because it makes them feel better, feel free I guess. I just don't see a rational motive.

[mellestad]

There's also a valuable psychological aspect to loading the weapon.  One purpose of the rallies is to accustom people to the idea that carrying guns is a normal, safe activity that should be accepted in everyday life.  IF word gets out that the guns were not loaded, some of that is lost. 

I'm not sure if this is a *good* reason but at least it *is* a reason.  Thank you for giving it some thought.

[Jocassee]

Let me ask a question out of curiosity.

Would the request to keep longarms unloaded keep any of you from attending the event, and if so, why? I will be passing this information along to the organizers for next year.

[vaskidmark]

Let me ask a question out of curiosity.

Would the request to keep longarms unloaded keep any of you from attending the event, and if so, why? I will be passing this information along to the organizers for next year.

You already had my vote on the issue.  Yes, such a rule would kep me away.

See all the comments above regarding the perception of distrust in my ability to properly comport myself and my longarm, as well as the distrust of all the others attending.  If I cannot trust my fellow protesters to maintain individual safety how the heck am I going to trust them to organize a recovery of the Constitution or anything else?

BTW - I never expected the liberal, left-leaning press to understand the craziness of chamber flags, as tthey are still trying to figure out that bolt-operated semi-automatic machine gun with the shoulder thing that goes up.  It's the gun crowd that notices the incongruity of the scene.

Final thought - I might as well rejoin the military - at least they are open and clear about the level of mistrust they place in people carrying arms.

stay safe.

skidmark

[Matthew Carberry]

I still don't really understand why carry long guns at all.

The only reason I can think of is that they attract cameras, other than that... "Because we can?"

To what end, what exact message is having a long gun, loaded or unloaded, supposed to send?  Carrying long guns around is a pain in the ass, barring some high-percentage likelihood of use I will, for the rest of my adult life, prefer to leave it in my car at best.

I spent far too long hauling a rifle around professionally to view it as anything but an annoyance if there's nothing around that immediately needs shooting.  Barrying a coherent purpose that is likely to have some desireable effect, I'll do my protesting with just a nice comfortable pistol.

[Perd Hapley]

I'm not sure if this is a *good* reason but at least it *is* a reason.  Thank you for giving it some thought.

We have already provided a very good reason.  If you don't understand it, I'm sorry.  Hope you catch up someday.

  Carrying long guns around is a pain, barring some high-percentage likelihood of use I will, for the rest of my adult life, prefer to leave it in my car at best.

I spent far too long hauling a rifle around professionally to view it as anything but an annoyance if there's nothing around that immediately needs shooting. 

Word.  I'm a little surprised they were toting long guns, but I'm glad they did.  The public needs to get over its fear of guns of all kinds, long or short.  It was probably a good idea.

[mellestad]

I still don't really understand why carry long guns at all.

The only reason I can think of is that they attract cameras, other than that... "Because we can?"

To what end, what exact message is having a long gun, loaded or unloaded, supposed to send?  Carrying long guns around is a pain in the ass, barring some high-percentage likelihood of use I will, for the rest of my adult life, prefer to leave it in my car at best.

I spent far too long hauling a rifle around professionally to view it as anything but an annoyance if there's nothing around that immediately needs shooting.  Barrying a coherent purpose that is likely to have some desireable effect, I'll do my protesting with just a nice comfortable pistol.

Because they look dangerous, project violence and threat and attract cameras and attention.  The people carrying them might have different opinions about why they are carrying them (maybe even some good reasons), but those three things are the 'real' message that is sent to the outside world.  The quotes like this don't help: "There will be blood, and they can have mine" or, "we will resist" or, "The types of laws and things that [Congress is] shoving down our throat, I'm not O.K. with that. It might come down to where the only way to stop that is to remove them, and they're not going to walk away peacefully".

Yea, yea, no-one is talking about murder or revolution.  There are even quotes like, "We don't mean anyone is going to get shot or blown up."

You get such a mixed message, I'm still not sure what the motivation behind these things really is.  It certainly isn't just about gun rights.  To your average urban resident though the message is probably pretty clear.


----


To me, carrying a long gun is about thinking you might need a long gun.  When do you carry a long gun?  Hunting, warzones, protection from large animals, target shooting, serious self defense, guarding sensitive areas, protecting VIPs, and political rallies.  To me, one of those things is not like the others.

I don't have much else to say though, I've made my point as best I can.  If people can rationalize carrying long arms to a political protest, fine.  Just be aware of the message you are sending because it might not be the message you intend.

[Tallpine]

Well, carry a pitchfork then 

[Perd Hapley]

Because they look dangerous, project violence and threat...

That is exactly what many people would say about side-arms, and it is precisely the misconception that needs to be countered.  Hence the peaceful demonstrations with long guns. 

and attract cameras and attention. 

Which is a very good thing for the success of the rally, and of your gun rights Constitutionally-protected human rights. 

You get such a mixed message, I'm still not sure what the motivation behind these things really is.  It certainly isn't just about gun rights.  To your average urban resident though the message is probably pretty clear.

Yeah, you're right.  It's a Klan rally.     If you've got something to say, you can say it.  We're all adults here; just say what you mean.

To me, carrying a long gun is about thinking you might need a long gun.  When do you carry a long gun?  Hunting, warzones, protection from large animals, target shooting, serious self defense, guarding sensitive areas, protecting VIPs, and political rallies that specifically address the right to keep and bear arms. 

Fixed that for you.  You're welcome. 

[mellestad]

Fixed that for you.  You're welcome. 

True.  However, many of the quotes make it clear that they were not at the rally purely for those issues and that is more my point. 

It would make more sense of there was any large gun debate right now, but there isn't.  I doubt there will be any time soon unless something dramatic happens to give anti's a boost.

[Perd Hapley]

God forbid gun guys should have any other issues on their minds!! 

Yeah, obviously, they should have all been giving talking points for the media.  That would have been a good idea.

It would make more sense of there was any large gun debate right now, but there isn't. 

Maybe they're trying to start one.  Ever think of that?  Given the growth of CCW, the Heller decision, National Park carry, and a third state going Vermont carry just recently, the momentum is in our favor.  Strike while the iron is hot, as they say.


But anyway, where were you back in the day, to tell MLK & friends when to demonstrate?  I'm sure they could have really used your help. 

[mellestad]

God forbid gun guys should have any other issues on their minds!! 

Yeah, obviously, they should have all been giving talking points for the media.  That would have been a good idea.

Maybe they're trying to start one.  Ever think of that?  Given the growth of CCW, the Heller decision, National Park carry, and a third state going Vermont carry just recently, the momentum is in our favor.  Strike while the iron is hot, as they say.


But anyway, where were you back in the day, to tell MLK & friends when to demonstrate?  I'm sure they could have really used your help. 

I probably wouldn't have told them to carry guns 

[Jocassee]

Come on folks, can we not play nice here?

What was the message of the rally? "Restore the Constitution." We made an VERY effective statement to that effect and the guns, longarms included, were part of that message. After all, the 2nd Amendment IS part of the Constitution and it IS being infringed upon in many quarters.

As to the trust issue, I repeat that no one was FORCED to follow the longarms guidelines. Skidmark, if that was the reason you stayed away, you needn't have. We would have welcomed you.

However, the safety requests made EVERYONE more comfortable.

[Perd Hapley]

I probably wouldn't have told them to carry guns 

But I hope you do get the point.  I was not just taking a swipe at you.  The right to bear arms is like the right to vote, or to ride anywhere on the bus you want to.  Our right to bear is currently being infringed in most parts of the country, in various ways.  There's something very wrong when you're telling people not to be active in pursuing basic human rights. 

[Jamisjockey]

I probably wouldn't have told them to carry guns 

Might have made it a little harder for the police to issue all those beat-downs....just sayin.....

[MillCreek]

Might have made it a little harder for the police to issue all those beat-downs....just sayin.....

If I recall correctly, the Black Panthers learned that lesson at their rallies. 

[Matthew Carberry]

If I recall correctly, the Black Panthers learned that lesson at their rallies. 

All of California paid for those lessons in increased gun control and it's taken(ing) 40 years to fix.

Fighting smart is not the same as surrendering.  Reading your audience and balancing what you "can" do with the smartest way to actually do it is the way to win.  When you're in the minority, playing hardball every time all the time can cost you big time.

[AJ Dual]

All of California paid for those lessons in increased gun control and it's taken(ing) 40 years to fix.

Fighting smart is not the same as surrendering.  Reading your audience and balancing what you "can" do with the smartest way to actually do it is the way to win.  When you're in the minority, playing hardball every time all the time can cost you big time.

Unless you mean "40 years to fix" everywhere else... yeah.

But in California, the legislature is now working to BAN OC, specifically because of the OC demonstrations. And in California, they're unloaded by law already. Although that may be what the OC protesters there want. If OC is banned in CA, CA may have a really hard time under Heller and McDonald/2A incorporation... and the third case working it's way up that I forget the name of right now, that has a lot more to do with the "bearing" part of the 2A.

And judging, at least anecdotally from the statements of anti's... they're very afraid the OC protests are working and "Getting everyone desensitized to having guns on everyone everywhere..."