Standing Up

[Alberta Patriot]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTqipTcwxyA

[Willow]

Wow!   

[3fan4life]

Something tells me that someone in the Governor's mansion, finally realized just how bad the guy with the bull horn was making them look.

[Patrick]

Its good to see someone stand up. It kinda renews ones faith in humanity.

[John Schmidt]

 

[f6john]

I guess The Governor believes he owns the the Capitol instead of the citizens. In this case the “pandemic “ is proving itself to be vital to our freedom, freedom from the tyranny of our elected officials who hide behind riot police. This is all it took to show us how far they are willing to go to protect there power and position.

[shortleg]

 For health reasons I could not serve.
But that right there is a good example of a
 man that not only remembered his oath
but understood it.
  If you have the time read the bill of rights and most important
give yourself time understand each part of it.
  Then look at the amendments to and out Constitution.
 Take time to read and understand what a truly grate document
a bunch of old white guys gave us.
  Dont know if any of you know this but most of it comes from
the rules of a Masonic lodge. Now dont let that scare you its a
good thing. The bible Washington used to take the oath[which was an idea
from the lodge]was gotten from the local lodge.
   Now look at these documents and realize how we as a country are so blesses.
 We are only one election away from all these  wonderful freedoms being taken from us.

[Valkorado]

Great video, and great example of what protest can and should be.  This is America at its best.

Beats the hell out of some videos I've seen of folks marching around their capitol buildings with Bushmasters and the like.  Maybe they were well intentioned, maybe not.  Still, it garnered negative attention from the lamestream we all love so dearly.
 
This is a much better message and presentation, and shouldn't further rile up the ones that are coming after our 2nd.

We'll know if and when it's time to exercise that.  It's not.

[JimC]

 

[Robert]

WOW that was great 

[hubcapsc]

I'm glad they can safely protest  . The guy with the backwards hat
and the megaphone is full of hooey, though... the police line wasn't
there to "throw mothers and children on the ground like garbage",
they were there in case the illegal mob marched on the capitol.
I doubt, but of course don't know, that the police backed off because
the backwards hat dude shamed them, rather, the situation was
deescalated based on their commander's professionalism and
threat assessment...

-Mike

[GiG]

the situation was deescalated based on their commander's professionalism and
threat assessment...

^^^ That's the way I took it, too.

[Farside]

   Plain and simple display of Americans expressing their right to protest but not hard to figure what is going on when cops ordered with riot gear. Non-threating demonstration but just in case, sure that might be the spin that some put on it. Good to see / hear someone out of CA speaking up and to see all the supporters right there in front of the capital. The officers standing down, wonder if it was ordered or could it have been what was in the hearts of most of these officers? Good to see any who.  

[f6john]

One thing I didn’t see. No media reporters or cameras. Could be just coincidence that they were there and didn’t get in the video. The bullhorn certainly wasn’t spouting any message they want heard.

[Valkorado]

I'm glad they can safely protest   . The guy with the backwards hat
and the megaphone is full of hooey, though... the police line wasn't
there to "throw mothers and children on the ground like garbage",
they were there in case the illegal mob marched on the capitol.
I doubt, but of course don't know, that the police backed off because
the backwards hat dude shamed them, rather, the situation was
deescalated based on their commander's professionalism and
threat assessment...

-Mike

Good observations, was going to mention some of this yesterday.  I didn't really see the "bad guys" here that he was alluding to.

In general, those looking to dismantle Constitutional rights and destroy American freedoms are not attracted to careers in law enforcement.  To the contrary.

I might have missed something, and could be wrong.

[Alberta Patriot]

I'm glad they can safely protest   . The guy with the backwards hat
and the megaphone is full of hooey, though... the police line wasn't
there to "throw mothers and children on the ground like garbage",
they were there in case the illegal mob marched on the capitol.
I doubt, but of course don't know, that the police backed off because
the backwards hat dude shamed them, rather, the situation was
deescalated based on their commander's professionalism and
threat assessment...

-Mike

Illegal Mob??....
All those people have rights whether you like it or not. If you want to live in your cave that is also your constitutional right.  

[hubcapsc]

Illegal Mob??....

The backwards hat feller indicated in the beginning
that their permit had expired or been denied and they
were assembled illegally.

-Mike

[The emperor has no clothes]

I'm glad they can safely protest   . The guy with the backwards hat
and the megaphone is full of hooey, though... the police line wasn't
there to "throw mothers and children on the ground like garbage",
they were there in case the illegal mob marched on the capitol.
I doubt, but of course don't know, that the police backed off because
the backwards hat dude shamed them, rather, the situation was
deescalated based on their commander's professionalism and
threat assessment...

-Mike

Illegal Mob??....
All those people have rights whether you like it or not. If you want to live in your cave that is also your constitutional right.  

For you to insinuate that Mike doesn't understand the rights afforded to U.S. citizens is bullshit. If you as a Canadian would have researched this situation just a little bit you would have found that a judge had agreed with the CHP in stopping permits of protest on the Capitol grounds. For a foreigner to be preaching of OUR constitutional rights is a little rich.

(Mike doesn't live in a cave. He has posted pics of his home before. He does build some pretty good shed caves though)

[hubcapsc]

Mike doesn't live in a cave.

Some important parts of my house aren't finished yet
and are kind of cavey  ...

-Mike

[The emperor has no clothes]

Mike doesn't live in a cave.

Some important parts of my house aren't finished yet
and are kind of cavey  ...

-Mike

(cavy, cavie) ?

[Alberta Patriot]

If you don't like what they are protesting they are a mob...
Antifa...you know...those masked up creeps in all black carrying weapons that look similar to the cops with batons in the video...that's a mob.

[The emperor has no clothes]

For some, admitting they were mistaken is a near impossibility.

[f6john]

And then there are those who are never wrong.

I’m not disputing the new developments (to me) so since the permit was rescinded and they were there illegally (?), why weren’t they dispersed? I thought it was the police departments job to enforce the law. It’s really hard to have it both ways.

[The emperor has no clothes]

And then there are those who are never wrong.

I’m not disputing the new developments (to me) so since the permit was rescinded and they were there illegally (?), why weren’t they dispersed? I thought it was the police departments job to enforce the law. It’s really hard to have it both ways.

Permits were not rescinded, they never had any to begin with. The orders were no congregation on the Capitol grounds. The police stopped them going past the sidewalks.

[Alberta Patriot]

People will not be fine Americans for ever, however there are always those who will succumb to tyranny and stay home and follow all the rules, never questioning whether any of this makes any sense. The masks look more and more like muzzles as time goes on. Very significant numbers of Doctors and Medical Practitioners have reported on the ridiculous reality at ground zero and many of them have been banned by media tech giants and their stories buried by the usual suspects of the fake news PR arm of the democrat party. The disturbing lack of curiosity by the fake news industry about what these medical professionals report is business as usual, as mostly Blue States and Cities continue to shut in their populations with serious threat of reprisal for "breaking the edicts" much of which was never approved through a legislative process, just handed down from on high. Never mind the collapse of small businesses and overall marital stress and mental health of those being corralled....like sheep.

I wholeheartedly agree:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POZNxkUWW3Y

[Gryphon Rider]

For a foreigner to be preaching of OUR constitutional rights is a little rich.

Debating ideas and challenging others' opinions is fine.  Saying a Canadian shouldn't have a voice on American politics on a board that welcomes international participation is offensive.  Much of what America does has a huge impact on Canadians, as the US is our (Canada's) largest trading partner, has a huge impact on our economy, dominates our media, and influences our thinking.  It's like saying male MDs shouldn't be permitted to be OB-GYNs, that men shouldn't have a voice on abortion issues, that renters shouldn't have a vote in municipal elections because they don't directly pay property taxes, or that someone who has never used 'X' harmful substance can't have an opinion on society's restrictions of X or how it treats users of X.  On this board I've read many non-Californians' and non-New Yorkers' opinions on the politics of those states, without Californians or New Yorkers protesting, "You don't live here so you can't say anything about it!"

[The emperor has no clothes]

For a foreigner to be preaching of OUR constitutional rights is a little rich.

Debating ideas and challenging others' opinions is fine.  Saying a Canadian shouldn't have a voice on American politics on a board that welcomes international participation is offensive.  Much of what America does has a huge impact on Canadians, as the US is our (Canada's) largest trading partner, has a huge impact on our economy, dominates our media, and influences our thinking.  It's like saying male MDs shouldn't be permitted to be OB-GYNs, that men shouldn't have a voice on abortion issues, that renters shouldn't have a vote in municipal elections because they don't directly pay property taxes, or that someone who has never used 'X' harmful substance can't have an opinion on society's restrictions of X or how it treats users of X.  On this board I've read many non-Californians' and non-New Yorkers' opinions on the politics of those states, without Californians or New Yorkers protesting, "You don't live here so you can't say anything about it!"

Kevin, I have no problem with Canadians or any foreigners expressing their opinions and debating them here. I have stood up for a few in the past against the opinion of some here. What I do have a big problem with is AP saying that hubcap doesn’t understand our Constitution and that he has his head in the sand. (Paraphrasing)

[Valkorado]

I would again ask the following.  Stand up is vague.  In addition to legal activism in the forms of writing elected officials, atending public legislative input sessions on state and local levels, peaceful public demonstration and VOTING what do you recommend American Patriots do?  There are options ranging from campaigning for public office to civil disobeience or even complete armed revolution.

Which do you recommend?

[carolinarider09]

Answering your question would not be a good idea. 

1.  It would or could be misconstrued by someone who wished someone harm.
2.  No one tells the enemy what the plan of battle is.


And even if a plan did exist, "No battle plan survives contact with the enemy".  So, any plan that one might suggest would be just a notion. 

What you should ask is what is the objective, which is what plans of battle have as their beginning (remember i was just a submariner). 

The objective is that the freedoms expressed and codified in the United States Constitution are not to be infringed. 

This includes the amendments among which are the following:

Amendment One:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment Two: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

Amendment Four:The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

And finally the the Oath I took in December, 1967, which I still honor and hold dear.


I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (So help me God)."

[Valkorado]

K.  Just curious.

BTW, I ain't the enemy.  But some good Sun Tzu stuff there.  

I haven't seen that C19 militia yet, so there's another option.  Go start one.  Depending on how things unfold, I may join ya someday.

[Jess from VA]

Unlike the old song, the revolution WILL be televised.

But the usual best remedies (pre-revolution) include every form of lawful demonstration, lobbying, marching, agitating, writing, funding of best organizations, and so forth.  The trick of course, it to push right up to the limits, but not cross them. 

And then there's unlawful demonstration (un-permitted) but conducted entirely peacefully.... which would usually be no more than a misdemeanor, with no resistance to authority (but noise).  However, leaders of this type of peaceful but unlawful demonstration can be charged with inciting to riot which can be a felony.

But here's the rub..... large (or even medium) groups of humans gathered in common purpose (however righteous) can never be fully trusted to not pass the threshold of lawful active demonstration into unlawful active demonstration no matter how well organized and led.  Mob mentality is just that.

I am quite proud of Virginia's very active, very loud, very well organized and led, systematic rebellion to wrongheaded gun control from our Trifecta (D)imwit state government.  County by county, city, township and burg, packing county and city counsel meetings, packing legislative sessions, culminating in 20-40K (well) armed demonstrators in Richmond without any illegal mob activity or violence at all.... and corresponding bad press (though we still got lots of bad press, as you would expect).  To me, this should stand as the blueprint for widespread civil (but lawful) demonstration against overreaching governmental action anywhere.

------

And I also want to say that I welcome and appreciate all Canadian (and other) political comments and posts on this fine forum of good citizens everywhere.  After all.... we're all in this together.  

 

[Valkorado]

Unlike the old song, the revolution WILL be televised.

But the usual best remedies (pre-revolution) include every form of lawful demonstration, lobbying, marching, agitating, writing, funding of best organizations, and so forth.  The trick of course, it to push right up to the limits, but not cross them. 

And then there's unlawful demonstration (un-permitted) but conducted entirely peacefully.... which would usually be no more than a misdemeanor, with no resistance to authority (but noise).  However, leaders of this type of peaceful but unlawful demonstration can be charged with inciting to riot which can be a felony.

But here's the rub..... large (or even medium) groups of humans gathered in common purpose (however righteous) can never be fully trusted to not pass the threshold of lawful active demonstration into unlawful active demonstration no matter how well organized and led.  Mob mentality is just that.

I am quite proud of Virginia's very active, very loud, very well organized and led, systematic rebellion to wrongheaded gun control from our Trifecta (D)imwit state government.  County by county, city, township and burg, packing county and city counsel meetings, packing legislative sessions, culminating in 20-40K (well) armed demonstrators in Richmond without any illegal mob activity or violence at all.... and corresponding bad press (though we still got lots of bad press, as you would expect).  To me, this should stand as the blueprint for widespread civil (but lawful) demonstration against overreaching governmental action anywhere.

------

And I also want to say that I welcome and appreciate all Canadian (and other) political comments and posts on this fine forum of good citizens everywhere.  After all.... we're all in this together.  

 

 

[hubcapsc]

or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,

What I saw on that video was a bunch of people peaceably assembled and
yelling on loudspeakers and chanting and expressing their displeasure,
and also a bunch of riot police in case the people got out of hand and
marched on the capitol. In the end the police stood down and the backwards
hat guy declared a win.

-Mike

[carolinarider09]

Just for the record.   

"No one tells the enemy what the plan of battle is."

This is an unsecured open forum.  Anyone can search it, read it, so its an open book to all who would take a few seconds to look. 

I might be a little paranoid, but all you have to do is look at what happens to the words people type or put in a printed (in this case electronically printed) format.   

I don't know if we are truly at that proverbial "crossroads" yet.  I know liberties were taken away, freedoms take away with a stroke of a pen.  And it is obvious that they are hard to get back. 

I can accept reduced seating in enclosed spaces.  We allowed it before for other reasons.  Seating in outdoor "restricted access areas" is also controllable.  We allowed it before for other reasons. 

But, I draw the line at being told how close I can stand to someone else.  You can suggest to me that it is a reasonable idea (which I don't necessary agree with but...) and allow me the freedom to choose.  The same goes for the other persons so gathered. 

Blocking my travel between contiguous states is not allowed by the rights granted in the U.S. Constitution.  Requiring that I "self quarantine" is the same as being treated as a hostile stranger and is not allowed by the "Privileges and Immunities" clause.  These "rights" are not enumerated but implied since the founding fathers thought they were so fundamental during the drafting of the Constitution as not needing explicit enumeration.  But it happened.

And no I am not a legal type person, I had to look all that up, but it was what I was taught and I believed right. 

But, as we have seen, these rights have been taken away, if only briefly in some areas, but taken none the less. 

For instance, in my state of South Carolina, it appears that the Governor can declare a state of emergency for 15 days only.  It he wishes to go longer he has to get approval of the General Assembly.  But nothing prevents the Governor, it appears, from simply doing a new declaration.  We are on at least our fifth one in South Carolina.



This should be a grave warning to us all. 


 

[Valkorado]

I can accept reduced seating in enclosed spaces.  We allowed it before for other reasons.  Seating in outdoor "restricted access areas" is also controllable.  We allowed it before for other reasons.  

But, I draw the line at being told how close I can stand to someone else.  You can suggest to me that it is a reasonable idea (which I don't necessary agree with but...) and allow me the freedom to choose.  The same goes for the other persons so gathered.  

I thought this thread title was to be taken figuratively, not literally.  Silly me.  It really is about standing as opposed to sitting. 

Nitpicking here.  It's okay for a bar or restaurant to require reduced seating, but unacceptable for a grocery or hardware store to ask the same distancing from their standing customers?

If it's your freedom to choose how close you get to the blue haired lady in Piggly Wiggly, should she be allowed to require her consent before strangers like you insist upon invading her comfort zone?

Or should this freedom of nearness only apply to private events where folks are standing but not sitting?  You can dance cheek to cheek, but ya gotta keep 'em separated when seated for seated hors d'oeuvres?

[Jess from VA]

Another thing about lawful peaceable assembly demonstrating.

Unless you're specifically demonstrating the cops (or what they're doing), I would lay off the cops and focus the demonstration (and bullhorns) at the government abuses of power you are out there for.

I like cops (for the most part), I appreciate what they do, I couldn't imagine living in the world without them, and I appreciate that they routinely get handed sh!tty, distasteful, unpopular jobs to do.... in order to keep their jobs (and feed their families).  

And just because they're all dressed up in riot gear and helmets and clubs does not mean they are looking or hoping for a riot (which used to happen in the old days).  They're certainly told what to wear, and they're entitled to protect themselves (from unlawful behavior, if that happens).

Indeed, many of them if asked might personally be on your side on the issues being demonstrated against.  And it's better to try and treat them inclusively (and respectfully) than pick a fight with them or humiliate or embarrass them.  If you make them the enemy, they will be the enemy.  So make government over-reach the enemy.  

We did a very good job of respecting and including the cops in our Virginia gun demonstrations, policing all our own trash pickup, and even policing our own stupid and rowdy people's behavior (before they ever had to).  And we ended up with a number of uniformed sheriffs and cops who walked with us in Richmond.  There was handshaking and back slapping.  There was a connection.  And that's a very good thing.

And you know what?  When you treat them with respect and inclusiveness, and begin to get clear public signs of friendliness between them and the demonstrators, that has a large and worrisome impact on the socialists sitting up in their legislative towers looking down from above (and their media fok-buddies). No socialist politicians are ever going to go out and enforce their own lunatic policies personally, they need cops to do it for them.  If the cops are with you, who is going to enforce the lunacy?  Or how hard will they work at it?

Paraphrasing Romans 8:31:  If righteousness, morality, justice, fairness, the Constitution, common sense (and God) is with us, who can be against us?
 

If insurrection or revolution ever comes, this gets much more difficult, but it is still a valid strategy even then.   

[carolinarider09]

In general, at least as I understand it, there are laws that support the notion of safe occupancy of public buildings.  Often I see the term “Fire Code” or a similar term.  It means, as I understand it, that for the benefit of those inside the structure the occupancy can be limited.  These are not “public spaces” but businesses operating under established laws that were enacted by legitimate governments. 

A grocery store or other similar type establishment, since it has an owner, that owner can enact some standards within his/her establishment.  There are limitations on these “standards” ensconced in law or legal interpretations of laws.  At least as I understand it. 

For example, COSTCO can require a mask for entry.  Their store, their rules (within the limits mentioned above).  I just won’t visit COSTCO (you can get the same stuff on line by the way from them).  An interesting corollary is, can COSTCO require a that men entering the store wear a suit and tie and women wear evening gowns?   

Again, how close I am allowed to get to someone in a store, is their (the stores’s) call.  Its their store. If they mandate such and I enter, I am, by entering, accepting their standards.

The term comfort zone is an interesting “term”.  Reasonable etiquette and up bringing already influences how close I get to a stranger, male or female.  Infectious diseases not withstanding.

I don’t invade someone’s personal space, as a rule, unless they are blocking access to an area for a long period of time (grocery shopping for instance). 

Private events, are by their very nature, under the control of the organizer.  My home, my rules.  If the rules are not to an invitees liking, they may leave. 

Public spaces, walking down the street, walking in the park, on the beach, are public spaces, owned by the "public"  There are laws about indecent exposure but there are no laws, of which I am aware, that limit how close one can get to someone else. There are expectations and social standards but no laws of which I am aware.   If they want to enact this concept, they are free to try and pass such a law. 

[Valkorado]

I'm not aware of any laws on the books forbidding how closely to others one may squeeze out a dank lingering fart in a public space, either.  But that's something I try to avoid doing.