Rongone wrote:

Some interesting tidbits about the oath keeper organization:

Oath Keepers is an American nonprofit organization which encourages members — some of whom are said to be current and former U.S. military and law enforcement — to disobey any orders they believe violate the Constitution of the United States.

"The greatest threat we face today is not terrorists; it is our federal government… One of the best and easiest solutions is to depend on local officials, especially the sheriff, to stand against federal intervention and federal criminality."

Quoting the Las Vegas Review-Journal, MSNBC political commentator and former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan said, "Oath Keepers, depending on where one stands, are either strident defenders of liberty or dangerous peddlers of paranoia." Buchanan himself concluded that "America was once their country. They sense they are losing it."

Oath Keepers "may be a particularly worrisome example of the Patriot revival."


I'm gonna go with "a particularly worrisome example" and "dangerous peddlers of paranoia"
They think they can disobey any laws or regulations that THEY feel are violating the constitution? So, what gives them the right to decide what is the right or wrong interpretation of laws and regulation . . . And then act as the rightful enforcers of THEIR interpretation? They are heavily armed vigilantes . . . Pure and simple. They should be arrested by law enforcement for inciting violence.

 
I'm really on neither side of this, to be perfectly honest, but what do you arrest them for? Open carry is legal, as long as they legally own the guns, and that's all they're doing.  Openly carrying guns legally is not inciting violence, by definition.  Until they break a law, there's really nothing that can be done except for verbally discouraging them from doing what they're doing.

Last edited by The Man (8/11/2015 5:01 pm)

florentine wrote:

Is it legal to point a gun at another person?  Just wondering.....

 
For no reason? Absolutely not.  If they're being physically attacked, yes.  Did they point their guns at people?

Goose wrote:

The Man wrote:

Rongone wrote:

Some interesting tidbits about the oath keeper organization:

Oath Keepers is an American nonprofit organization which encourages members — some of whom are said to be current and former U.S. military and law enforcement — to disobey any orders they believe violate the Constitution of the United States.

"The greatest threat we face today is not terrorists; it is our federal government… One of the best and easiest solutions is to depend on local officials, especially the sheriff, to stand against federal intervention and federal criminality."

Quoting the Las Vegas Review-Journal, MSNBC political commentator and former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan said, "Oath Keepers, depending on where one stands, are either strident defenders of liberty or dangerous peddlers of paranoia." Buchanan himself concluded that "America was once their country. They sense they are losing it."

Oath Keepers "may be a particularly worrisome example of the Patriot revival."


I'm gonna go with "a particularly worrisome example" and "dangerous peddlers of paranoia"
They think they can disobey any laws or regulations that THEY feel are violating the constitution? So, what gives them the right to decide what is the right or wrong interpretation of laws and regulation . . . And then act as the rightful enforcers of THEIR interpretation? They are heavily armed vigilantes . . . Pure and simple. They should be arrested by law enforcement for inciting violence.

 
I'm really on neither side of this, to be perfectly honest, but what do you arrest them for? Open carry is legal, as long as they legally own the guns, and that's all they're doing. Openly carrying guns legally is not inciting violence, by definition. Until they break a law, there's really nothing that can be done except for verbally discouraging them from doing what they're doing.

I think the issue is that their treatment was much different than was the treatment of "others" who might have carried weapons in the streets of Fergusen.

 
But that's pure speculation.  If others, black people for example, would legally open carry guns, I don't see why they would be treated any differently.  Have they tried? Now, if they aren't following the law, are illegally possessing guns, yes they would be arrested.  I do know, from just a quick google search, that this group in Ferguson does have black members.

Goose wrote:

What color is the sky in your world?

 
What's your point? Prove that I'm wrong.

And please, no need for insults or little digs just because you disagree.  I thought we agreed to move past that a while back?  Debate intellectually, or at least respectfully.

Last edited by The Man (8/11/2015 6:58 pm)

Goose wrote:

The Man wrote:

Goose wrote:

What color is the sky in your world?

 
What's your point? Prove that I'm wrong.

Look at the treatment of Black protestors in Fergusen.
Look at the treatment of blacks in this country.
For god's sake, look at something.

 
The peaceful black protestors in Ferguson have been left alone.  The protestors in Ferguson who are being arrested aren't protestors, they are people who are shooting at police, throwing rocks at police, throwing frozen bottles of water at police, rioting and looting.  Do you not see any difference between that and protesting, or legally carrying guns peacefully?