The March on Washington

[handejector]

Earlier this year, I banned discussion and promotion of The March. I promised we would eventually address the issue.

I do not support the March.

I will state the two reasons that I do not support it, and leave you to make up your own mind. I will not be debating the point, but you are free to do so within the rules of the board.

1. It is a very poor investment of time and money.
Let's do some simple math. Let's assume 100,000 people attend. Some will live close, and may spend no more than $25 to attend. Others will spend hundreds on travel and motels and meals.
So, to grab some arbitrary figures for the sake of discussion, let's say we get 100,000 people that spend an average of $100 each. That is TEN MILLION dollars.
That would do alot of advertising and educating to advance our cause. What will a march do?
Basically, I've heard that the purpose of the march is to strike fear into the hearts of anti-gun politicians, and just generally spread the word about what a great bunch of folks we are.
On the fear thing- don't forget that the guys you wish to intimidate are the guys that have armor support, artillery support, and air support if you want to get right down to it. I don't think they are scared.
On the public image and "message" we will spread- Hmmmm.......who are you counting on to spread that word to the world? Won't that be the regular old MAIN STREAM MEDIA?? What message will they be spreading for the $10,000,000 you just spent? Do you think they'll be interviewing the doctors and lawyers in the crowd?
No, I suspect the news will be slanted as usual, portraying it the way they want to. I would count on skinheads showing up and being interviewed shirtless so the swastika and "White Power" tats show well on the evening news. Maybe a Klan contingent or two for the film at 11. Maybe just being extremely dentally challenged and drooling tobacco juice will qualify one for an interview.

You actually need to assume the media will try to spin the whole thing so that the publicity is negative. Any gun crime committed during the march will be presented on the news as ocurring during the "Gunowner's March". If two murders were the average for a weekend, and three occur that weekend, you will hear that "murders increased by 50% during the Gunowner's march."

Bottom line- our money and time could be better spent elsewhere.

2. This could be a recipe for disaster.
You want publicity?
Assuming that there really are people who specialize in psyops and black ops, I have to wonder if any faction among our opponents would be willing to engage them.
I wonder if a relatively small amount of money, like $100,000, paid to a street gang in cash, AK's and ounces of meth, could inspire some occurence at the march worthy of publicity......
Maybe I just need a new tinfoil hat.


My summary-
Your time and money could be better spent elsewhere.
Though not perfect, the NRA has been our best spokesman for many decades.
Support them.

 

[Missionary]

Good morning
What you write may be all true. BUT politicians are impressed by faces also.
I live in the state of ILL when we are up there. Illinois has a long history of being run by Chicago and being anti-gun.
Two years ago many bans were coming up to vote. At least 1000 gun owners wearing bright yellow shirts marched to the capital in Springfield. They peacefully walked halls, knocked on doors and stayed very visible. Opponants of the 2nd Ammendment (from Chicago) arrived to have their rally, saw the mass of yellow shirts and returned to Chicago.
Bottom line... NO gun bills were passed.
Yes it does cost money, time and effort. But SQUEAKY wheels get greased. Politicians sometimes need to SEE Patriots walking about the little world they call home.

 

[george minze]

Well we certainly agree on something besides the love of guns and things associated. The march would be a prelude to disaster for our cause. DC has some very different laws, due to it being the seat of government. Any and I mean any, news would be negative and only provide ammunition to the anti gun crowd. I thought this had been put to bed a long time ago. When many wanted to go "packing" A recipe for disaster. The only packing in D.C. are D.C. Police, agents, and bad guys, how do you think we would be characterized.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

While I would very much like to see a large and peaceful demonstration on behalf of individual liberties, I must admit that Mr. Jarrett's comments and analysis are powerful arguments against the proposed Second Amendment March.

The facts are undeniable; there is no significant possibility that the mainstream media will cover such an event in an unbiased manner (much less any favorable commentary).

The risks are very high; any opportunity to portray the demonstrators as dangerous and angry people will be exploited to the fullest.

These factors, coupled with Mr. Jarrett's argument regarding how much better our funds might be used in other ways, I must agree with his summary.

I have just finished reading "Founders, The People Who Brought You A Nation" (Ray Raphael, 2009, The New Press). Excellent read with much in-depth analysis. Peaceful demonstrations had very little to do with the events of 1775 to 1791, as the United States moved from British Colonial rule, through the Revolutionary War, during the Articles of Confederation era, and into government under the present Constitution. Much prefered were strong-arm tactics, intimidation of opponents, riots, tar and feather parties, etc. All of these tactics worked best for the opponents of individual liberties, offering purported proof of the need for strong central government.

I expect the Second Amendment March folks to give it a good go. I also expect the media and politicos to propagandize such an event to the maximum possible degree.

 

[roundgunner]

I have to agree with Lee. We certainly can't expect the MSM to do anything like show both points of view.

My niece just got her first article published in the West Georgia collage newspaper. She is proud and we are all proud of her.
I started trying to get her to think about being different and showing both sides of 2A and CCW. We will see how it goes.

Thankfully my daughter is a firm believer in not counting on someone else to come to the rescue. (Except Daddy)

 

[PDL]

I can't say it's a product of our times, 'mainstream' media has been bias towards a number of things in the past. It's a fact that firearms are now at the top of their list of things to blame, right behind GB.
But I've got to totally agree with Lee's perspective on this. There's no way anything positive could come from the project. Look at the Tea parties if you want a recent example.

 

[Waldo]

I live not to far from Washington D.C. The big newspaper in town is the Washington Post. I have read it every day for over 40 years. They hate guns and gun owners. The pro life folks have a march every year. One year they had several hundred thousand people at their march. In the metro section of the Post was a paragraph about how traffic was disrupted. On the front page of the Post, above the fold, with pictures, was an article about the pro abortion counter demonstration, it had about fifty people. If a million gun owners show up it will be ignored. If only a handful show up it will be front page news about how weak and impotent the gun lobby really is. If a pro gun demonstrator gets a speeding ticket there will be an article about how the gun "toters" are in town trying to bully and intimate all the poor politicians. I agree that that it will cost a lot of money with little chance of positive results and a lot of potential downsides. There are marches and protests in Washington D.C. all the time. It is just part of the background noise. The politicians that agree with whatever the protesters want will come out and speak about how right you are and how you are doing a world of good. The politicians that disagree will ignore it. Then next week the politicians that ignored the demonstration the weak before will be out supporting the demonstration they agree with. And the politicians that supported the demonstration the week before will be ignoring this weeks demonstration. The money would be better spent trying to defeat our enemies and support our friends. Politicians on both sides of the argument have heard anything you are likely to tell them. It is very rare for one to change its mind on an issue like this.

 

[Spotteddog]

IMHO,
The only place that faces showing up matters to pols now, is in the voting booth.
If the ability to disregard public opinion hasn't been on full display in the last 12-14 months, I don't know what it would take too convince some!
I say, let their own voting records speak for themselves. Besides, isn't it written somewhere "by their words and actions you shall know them"?

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

Just an FYI for those who aren't informed with up to date info yet.

There are marches set, (and organized very well) to coincide at every state capitol on the same day as the Washington march, because the leaders of the March knew not everyone could make a trip to the nations capitol.

Of course the media is going to try and portray our side as a bunch of loons, but that isn't a good reason to sit on your hands and hope someone else like the NRA gets the job done for you. I am an NRA member and have been for most of my life, but they are more interested in court procedings and legislation than they are in actually getting out and doing something huge to get the attention of those who are currently in power.

No guns are being allowed at the marches even if it's legal in your area. The marches aren't about shaking any fists at the government, but rather to let them know we are watching everything they do, and will vote them out if they try to subvert the constitution.

I read in a post above that the tea parties were portrayed in a poor light. Well, that may be true of the liberal loony left media, but it didn't keep people from voting in a republican senator to hold a seat that a liberal gun hater held for 40 years in Mass did it?

The government needs to see that people are paying close attention. It is, after all, an election year and they care more about keeping their cushy jobs than they do voting on one or two anti gun bills, if that vote runs the risk of them losing said job.


Thanks for putting this up for discussion Lee!

 

[handejector]

The marches aren't about shaking any fists at the government, but rather to let them know we are watching everything they do, and will vote them out if they try to subvert the constitution.

I did forget to address this in enough depth.
My point is that a march won't impress them. They don't know where you are from, exactly what you want, or if you vote in their state.
They probably won't be in town during the march if held on a weekend. So, a park gets littered, speeches get made, beer gets drunk (drank? drinkened?), and the Senators never know who was there or why.

What we DO want is a slick lobbyist walking up to every Senator and Rep in the halls of Congress with an ORANGE postcard in his hand saying something like:
"Excuse me Sen. Jones, but we at the NRA are about to mail the Legislative Alert postcards about the vote on the gun bill to our 71,293 members in your state, and just wanted to accurately state your position."

Think you have his attention now?

 

[handejector]

And you are welcome.

 

[AZretired]

I agree we need lobbyists handing out postcards but I also think the march would be noticed and helpful if done peacably. Fox News, the #1 news network, supports the 2nd amendment and was a supporter of the Tea Party Movement which were held nationwide as well as DC and were very peaceful. Liberals claim they don't notice but they do.

 

[redlevel]

I am an NRA member and have been for most of my life, but they are more interested in court procedings and legislation than they are in actually getting out and doing something huge to get the attention of those who are currently in power.

There is nothing more important to gun owners' rights than court proceedings and legislation. If everyone who intends to spend a couple hundred dollars going to the march would give that money to NRA-ILA, we would all be better served. This is especially true now that the Supreme Court has ruled that the campaign finance laws that were directly aimed at squelching the NRA have been struck down. If you don't believe the NRA does "something huge" for gun owners, ask a bunch of anti-gun Congress Critters who suddenly found themselves looking for new employment after the 1994 off-year elections, due largely to NRA efforts to unseat them after passage of the Clinton AWB.

 

[oldRoger]

I agree with Lee especially in this sense; we have nothing in particular to protest for or against. Yes, there is a animosity in the progressive elites toward, guns, gun owners, and the whole idea of self defense. There is however, no particular bill up for consideration or seriously contemplated.
The progressives have much more pressing matters to worry about right now. If elections continue to go against them, progressives will continue to push Second Amendment issues to the bottom of their to do list.
Personally I think the protests in the Town Hall meetings were very effective, they were direct confrontations with the politicians and frightened the crap out of many. At that point the march on DC made sense since it was the culmination of the Town Hall meeting protests. However, as many here have pointed out this was mainly a feel good thing for the marchers, and probably changed few liberal minds.

What was effective: elections were! VA, NJ and MA that's what! That is were our energies should go. Lets find more Scott Browns.
As Lee says, if the NRA needs us we can petition in a hurry.

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

There is nothing more important to gun owners' rights than court proceedings and legislation. If everyone who intends to spend a couple hundred dollars going to the march would give that money to NRA-ILA, we would all be better served. This is especially true now that the Supreme Court has ruled that the campaign finance laws that were directly aimed at squelching the NRA have been struck down. If you don't believe the NRA does "something huge" for gun owners, ask a bunch of anti-gun Congress Critters who suddenly found themselves looking for new employment after the 1994 off-year elections, due largely to NRA efforts to unseat them after passage of the Clinton AWB.

I know the NRA is fighting for us, but I have witnessed time and again lately how they mis-manage funds on a basic level, and I have no idea how many others have the same experience as I have been having.

I always renew my membership early, sometimes up to three times a year. Since they are always asking us to donate funds, I figure what's the harm. Then I get triplicate copies of my chosen magazine, in which case I have to call (again) to tell them to only send the one I have coming and use the funds more wisely for better purposes, but it happens over and over. It adds up if you consider that this probably happens a lot more than most realize, if it has not happened to them.........yet. That kind of waste doesn't impress me with being very organized, or useful.


Lee- To your point about them not being around on the day of the march. You may be correct, but I gaurantee you that they'll know it happened and that people are extremely concerned about all the back room dealings going on behind close doors. The health bill isn't the only thing they are trying to pass without our aproval. There have been several reports of anti-gun legislation being written in on that bill, and that will get passed without the majority of folks even knowing about it. If the march can draw attention to the fact that they are trying to sneak in anti gun laws, then it comes out into the light for more people to be aware of, and vote accordingly. Also, from the news updates I receive, I believe that far more people are planning to attend their own state capitol marches right now, than there are those who will go to the nations capitol, so the point about not being from a certain senators state and him not caring because of that fact, doesn't really fit here.

I can't help but think that if our forefathers had had this same "lets not rock the boat" mentality, that we may still be under British rule. I know things are different now than then, but people are still people, They just learn about government happening a lot quicker now thanks to the modern electronic age.

In the end, it doesn't really matter if anyone is for or against the marches, because they are going to happen and there are an awful lot of guys who see it differently than most of the good folks here seem to.

I think it will help, and as stated above, Fox news is on our side, and at least we'll get a fair shake from the most powerful name in news- Fox.

Do I get paid now

 

[Aussie44]

I agree with Gun 4 Fun,Look what happened to us.


Ken

 

[oldRoger]

What ever works

Though not perfect, the NRA has been our best spokesman for many decades. Lee Jarrett

The NRA is definitely not perfect, nor should we expect perfection. The NRA is after all run by very fallible humans.
Despite their failings they are the best national organization we have. In Florida we have the Unified Sportsmen of Florida run by Marion Hammer who watches over the Statehouse for us. It behooves us to support both the national organization and your state organization. Actually it would be a good idea for those who live in a large Metro area to join or form a similar local org and hire a lobbyist.
IMO if people want to march to DC, fine. Again, IMO for the reasons Lee has stated it will not move our cause as much as some other approaches. Pelosi, Hoyer, Obey, Rangel, Frank, Waxman and their like who are running the USHOR will not change their thinking.
State marches could have a positive impact in some states, especially if you have a request/demand for the politicians. Imagine 500,000 people marching on the NJ legislature.
If you have a very orderly group, clean-up after yourselves, etc, you can do no harm and may have a positive affect.

All of that said, recall that even though some of the GOP Representatives were able to get thousands to meet and prowl the Halls of Congress in December, the vote for Obamacare was not changed much if any. It undoubtedly did help confirm for those in both the House and Senate that votes against the plan had support in the country.

 

[dennis40x]

The NRA is what it is and perfect it isn't. Example - Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania originally Democrat then Republican now Democrat is an example of the NRA at work. The NRA would rally behind Specter and send out by the thousands bumper sticks proclaiming Defend Freedom Vote ( ). In essence we're given the choice between the lesser of two evils. No matter how you rationalize it you're still voting for evil. The same situation applies in every state to one degree or the other.

The same applies to Bill Ruger and the former management of Smith&Wesson just to name entities. Job one was to protect their business interests and not necessarily the 2nd Amendment.

This march on Washington I liken to the open carry zealots. It's a looks good feels good endeavor but in the end totally meaning less.

In the end your enemy's enemy becomes your friend, you bark at the moon, and buy a ticket for the next Friends of NRA Dinner & Auction.

 

[pace40]

Excellent arguments on both sides. While I remain neutral, just a couple personal thoughts:

1) The NRA is the single largest pro 2A lobby we have. While certainly not perfect, you can't deny their impact over the years and I do support them.

2) I remember watching another march on Washington on a grainy B&W TV in 1963. A lot of folks thought that one wouldn't go anywhere either.

 

[flat top]

"We the People" have the right to gather and express our views to our elected officials, and I have seen some good things come about from citizens being active in the political process. I see The March as being just that.

The Tea Party rally's "did" make an impression, not so much on the governing party, but on other citizens who were feeling the pain of what the governing party was trying to accomplish at their expense. Then came the elections in VA, NJ, and Mass....The governing party started to put two and two together..."Oh, is that what they were trying to tell us at those TPR's!!!"

If we have the NRA, GOA, etc, working one end of the issue, and We the People working the other end, I happen to think that the politicians may just get the point.

What concerns me more than anything...an attack on "any" Constitutional Right, is an attack on "every" Constitutional Right. If you "truly" believe that it "is" your Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms, and that Right is not to be infringed, why would you not support any venue that could further that cause?

Some great inroads "may" be gained from The March...and possibly nothing may be gained...but, we wont know until we try.

Keep an open mind, and consider this....are you willing to sit on your laurels and let your Second Ammendment Rights be diminished, or denied? It has happened in other "free country's", and it could easily happen here.