Gun rights activists call for Capitol protest, but not violence
»Play Video
PORTLAND, Ore. – Some KATU viewers are asking if today's Patriot Party for Second Amendment rights planned at the Capitol poses a security threat.
But organizers say they're not calling for violence despite their YouTube messages that are delivered with urgency.
"There's a line – a clear line – between freedom and tyranny. That line has been crossed already," says Shane Freeman, with Blake Rinkin standing beside him in a YouTube video. "We have to start fighting back now. If we don't start fighting back now, by the time we're free again, this land, it will be called something else."
Freeman and Rinkin have produced dozens of YouTube videos. Now they're producing what they call a Patriot Party.
"Our freedom is slipping away. We need to reach for it with all that we have left and we need to grab it," says Rinkin in the video.
The protest is a follow-up to last month’s gun rally that brought thousands to the state Capitol to push back on gun control legislation.
"If we don't do this now, it's going to be too late," Rinkin says in the video.
And while Freeman and Rinkin expect lawmakers on hand as they demonstrate firearms safety and weapons handling, some people want to know if the rally will create a situation similar to last month in Southeast Portland. On that day two men walked the streets of Sellwood with their semiautomatic rifles in hand to demonstrate their Second Amendment rights. It led to 911 calls and a day care center lockdown.
"It's hard to have a dialogue with someone who's holding a gun," said Jenn Lynch, whose group, Million Moms for Gun Control, is holding its own rally this Saturday.
"Standing out publicly for your support for gun control is a scary thing when you know people who are pro-Second Amendment tend to be armed. It's just a scary leap to make," she said.
But Freeman and Rinkin are adamant they’re not calling for violence. They're fight is political, not with guns blazing.
"It's very important that as responsible gun owners and freedom-loving Americans, we need to stay calm and collective, but also be assertive," Rinkin says in another YouTube video.
Organizers say they're more than willing to debate openly with gun control advocates. They say they're just standing up for their right to bear arms and that this is a battle that will be won with a pen, not a sword.
The protest begins at 10 a.m.
I say just go in there and yell "" He's got a gun "" And watch them all pull and shoot each other before they realize ...they all have guns...
It's what they have been itching to do for a while...
@uknow2 ---- Oh yeah, I expect some low life to try that, but you will be surprised that nothing will happen. It will be like the people who showed up at the Tea Party rally and make a racist comment to put them in a bad light. I hope gun rights "activists" have someone pulling security at these events for the very purpose of catching freedom haters pulling that stunt. A gun butt to the old noggin will fix that problem.
Fear that is based upon ignorance is irrational and is not a platform for discussion. When the mom in the video said "it is hard to have a discussion with someone who is wearing a gun", that is her personal feeling but it implies that the person with the gun is doing something wrong or intends to do something wrong. I could sympathize with peoples fears more is they were based on facts. In the case of 'assault rifles' the key talking point of bans, the argument makes no sense. Semi automatic rifles (the ones termed assault rifles) are responsible for only .06% of all gun deaths in America annually, hammers actually kill more people in America than these weapons. So why then would they be called 'assault rifles' when they are involved in so little actual assault?
This makes it difficult to sit at the table and talk 'reasonable gun laws' when the fears of those wanting to come to the table are based off of fear, emotion, propaganda, ignorance, and inaccurate information. I think there are a lot of positive things we can do to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, reduce gun accidents(which are low already), and inform the public about the truth concerning responsible firearm ownership.
As far as the highest statistic for gun deaths in America, that would be suicide and I think there is a whole different table for that topic, and the medical community will have to be willing to have very real talks about anti-depressant drugs.Â
"And while Freeman and Rinkin expect lawmakers on hand as they demonstrate firearms safety and weapons handling, some people want to know if the rally will create a situation similar to last month in Southeast Portland. On that day two men walked the streets of Sellwood with their semiautomatic rifles in hand to demonstrate their Second Amendment rights. It led to 911 calls and a day care center lockdown."
Â
Rifles in hand? Â Or slung across their backs? Â Why are people so fearful? Â Why is Portland so densely populated with people who are irrationally fearful of nearly everything? Â Our kids can't even have imaginary weapons in school.
Â
"It's hard to have a dialogue with someone who's holding a gun," said Jenn Lynch, whose group, Million Moms for Gun Control, is holding its own rally this Saturday. "Standing out publicly for your support for gun control is a scary thing when you know people who are pro-Second Amendment tend to be armed. It's just a scary leap to make," she said.
Â
Again, why is it hard to have a dialog? Â Why is it scary that those who honor the 2nd Amendment, and all other Constitutional rights, all laws, and all rules of gun safety might be armed? Â Are Freeman and Rinkin, and people like them projecting their own insecurities, ignorance, and lack of emotional control onto others? Â Are they so pathologically afraid of inanimate objects that they can't function?
@Zeke Extra likes. The Eddie Eagle program should be taught in every elementary school. It would be taught by certified volunteers. Any MMFGC against this doesn't really care about safety for their kids.
Why are the news outlets not reporting on all of the gun violence that surely occurred in Salem today?
Interesting. Just picked my daughter up from school and while I was waiting outside the class with all of the other parents, I noticed the guy leaning against the wall next to me had the distinct characteristics of somebody concealing a gun.Ralph and some of the other LEOs know what I'm talking about but I'm not going to tell you hippies. Anyway, I watched him for awhile and before long you could see the characteristic bulge of the handle against the fabric of his jacket. I observed for about five minutes, but didn't say anything... what right did I have to that, since I was carrying a gun in the school today myself? (It's legal.) Then the door opened, his kid came out, and when the guy bent over to take a drink at the fountain, if you were looking at his kidney area it was fairly obvious to anybody who's ever carried concealed. Two dudes carrying concealed handguns in the same school at the same time, a gun battle didn't ensue, and Helicopters Were Not Deployed. The next time I see him I most likely won't be carrying, but that'll be when I follow him to his car, introduce myself and let him know that he blew his concealment.
 @Playanekes I pack a full size 9mm and it almost always shows. Nobody notices though, at least, nobody that cares. It's amazing how a little bit of cotton can make the difference between,
Â
"How can I help you today?"
Â
and
Â
"OH MY GOD HE HAS A GUN! CALL 911!!!"
 @Playanekes And....why I carry a pocket 380. True, it's diminutive, but still effective at close range (and only thing comfortable enough to carry consistently).
Â
Which also means I'm not out looking for trouble, no matter what some of our lefty friends would like to believe.
@NotAChance @Playanekes ---- - I have a .380 and a .32 just for the times my wardrobe doesn't permit my carrying a Glock. I play that same game, spot the CC. I nudge my wife or she nudges me.
 @NotAChance  @Playanekes My Wife packs a .380 also. I have my opinion about that round, but it fits her nicely and she loves shooting it. I myself alternate between a Glock 22, and a Judge depending on the occasion.
@Razor1 @NotAChance @Playanekes ---- Jeeez, a judge, how are concealing that hand cannon?
 @NotAChance  @Playanekes And why I carry this (although I do have a Glock at home).
Â
http://www.keltecweapons.com/our-guns/
 @The Resistance  @scoreboard  @NotAChance  @Playanekes Yep. I love it. Small and pretty much invisible under my jacket. I also got the +1 grip extension which extends the magazine from 7 rounds to 8....just in case. :)
@scoreboard @NotAChance @Playanekes ---nice and excepts +P ammunition.
 @NotAChance  @Playanekes Nice Pea shooter. I gave that to my wife who is now a proud packing mama.
I am not a gun owner. Â I do however supportthe second amendment. Â However, I am concerned that in the eyes of some they have forgotten about everyone's right to speak. Â
 @nyc8675309 That is one of the Obama administration's targets....The First Amendment. and the Second, and the Third, and yada, yada....on and on.....
@Reeldeal101 @nyc8675309 --- you said it.
You know, since Newton, there have been 1,280 gun related deaths. I keep hearing that gun owners are responsible people...how many more people have to die before even responsible gun owners conclude that we have to reduce the number of guns on the street.Â
Â
and by the way, you can still be freedom loving and not a gun owner...
@John M --- guess what John, not even gun confiscation will change this.
 @John M Make a rational argument and I'll listen.  This is NOT rational.  How do you propose that we limit firearms access to individuals that obtain them illegally to begin with?  I am pretty sure that no matter WHAT we do, they will find a way to get one if they want one.  Heck, most people can manufacture their own if they want to badly enough. There are even You tube videos on how to do it for heck sake.....So what you are saying is not only irrational, it is unfeasible.
 @John M Statistically, of the 1280 deaths a little over half will have been suicides.  Another 40% will have been gang/drug related (i.e. mostly willing participants).  Of the remainder, some will be accidents, some will be police shootings, and some will be self-defense shootings by law abiding citizens, which are almost always initially reported as criminal homicides.
 @John M Many of those issues are because state prosecutors are NOT prosecuting, and when they do, they get out anyway... thanks to bleeding heart democrats. Not that you are that.
 @John M How many of those deaths were caused by criminals and how many by law abiding citizens? Before you throw numbers out, get the facts right.
 @John M So basically you're saying that we need to confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens. Because when criminals are caught with guns they are confiscated.
 @John MÂ
I sure would be interested in seeing the numbers of how many of those deaths were criminal and committed by legal CWP/CHL holders.
Sadly, accidents do happen, not often but they do and they're always sensationalized. They become national news but you wont find many licensed gun carriers that use their weapon to commit a crime.
Â
Robbery, rape, murders committed by a concealed carrier? I'm sure it's happened but I'd be willing to bet it's a fraction of one percent.
It's CRIMINALS that use guns to commit crimes and making it tougher for law abiding citizens to buy & carry guns will NOT get them out of the hands of criminals intent on crime!
Â
Criminals will still get guns, they'll still use them for illegal purposes. Criminals do NOT care about laws, gun laws or otherwise. Putting tougher restrictions on guns will only affect responsible, law abiding citizens, ya know, the people that follow the law.
Â
I know we need some restrictions and we need to make sure guns stay out of the hands of certain people but no matter how tough the government makes it, the "bad guys" aren't going to suddenly start caring about the law. They don't care that murder is illegal or rape, robbery etc... So they're never going to follow gun restriction laws.Â
Â
 @John M Some of the deaths were caused by the liberals who let a guy out of prison after he killed his grandmother with a hammer. He went on to use weapons illegal to felons to kill firefighters.You know, God knows HOW many people have died from DUII, alcoholism or other alcohol-related deaths including many involving guns. I keep hearing thatblahblahdebullblshblah...By the way, you can still be freedom loving and not a beer drinker.  Nobody's trying to force you to own a gun, John.
If gun owners were as evil and unstable as gun control people make them out to be, there wouldn't be any gun control people....
 @Owt_Raged Never fear, the gun control people will eventually abort themselves out of existence.
 @TimBurr  @Owt_Raged No, they only abort their accidents. Which is a good thing because if they don't abort them, they grow up like Kip Kinkel.
Won't see this at the rally in Salem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=p-WS42BBBLs
@Tom --- extra likes. I couldn't even watch this for a minute, it was so disgusting.
This comment has been deleted
@Dr. Rawdog ---- classic, thanks for the link.
 @Dr. Rawdog Thanks for posting both of them.  Funny stuff!!
This comment has been deleted
 @Dr. Rawdog Gag, but then I realize you think he's the "bomb".
Â
Oh crap, can I say that? Bomb?
 @NotAChance  @Dr. Rawdog Sure you can...but you might be on a watch list now, that's all.
 @NotAChance  @Dr. Rawdog Thanks to the Patriot act....
 @deejm2112  @Dr. Rawdog Makes sense. This is, after all, the USSA.
Its nice the organizers say they're not calling for violence... how very consideriate of them. Now we don't have to call in the national guard and have them all shot.
@CorporateCowMoo ---- hummmm....Kent State......
This comment has been deleted
 @Dr. Rawdog Not enough flannel IMO....I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK....
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country." --Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. The original German papers were known as Bormann-Vermerke.
Â
Hitler may not have had a total gun ban but it's obvious he wanted one and of course we all know how his regime turned out.
 @scoreboard Great quote, and oddly, havent heard of it.... what is wrong with me.Â
 @scoreboard Germanys gun laws were relaxed after Hitler came to power. His opponent wanted much tighter gun restrictions.
 @deejm2112 The explain Hitler's quote above.Â
 @scoreboard  @deejm2112  @Errornaut  @Max Quinn Where do criminals get guns but from people who legally have guns and don't secure them as they should. Even gun stores are to blame. In my town we recently had guns stolen from two different gun stores. One of those guns was used to kill a young woman. It is three months since the theft and the guns are still out in our area.
 @Max Quinn  @scoreboard  @deejm2112 No, we are being conquered by an internal coup.  We now have no right to a speedy trial, to know what charges are against us, to avoid self-incrimination, or even to be safe from government assassination.  Welcome to the new order of things in America.
 @deejm2112  @scoreboard  @Errornaut  @Max Quinn Funny, since the BATF cant stop the 95.52% of felons and such who dont even attempt to buy from a licensed source to begin with, and only prosecute less than 1% of those they actually catch, and cant catch a single person using a fake id to begin with, much less the failure of the politicians to establish a proper mental health reporting function to the NICS with only 1.83 mil records of severely mentally ill out of 23.15 mil severely mentally ill progressives out there, then of course the BATF refusing to allow civilians anonymous access to the NICS, with 50% of current 2.7 mil prisoners severely mentally ill and 1.043 mil open felony warrants in the US today (50% of those severely mentally ill), then of course Haynes vs US 390, 85, 1968 & th 5th amendment that make 85% of current 22,417 gun control laws not applicable to felons and crazies because it is a violation of their 5th amendment right of no self incrimination, you know, registrations, bans, permits, insurance, etc, etc, etcâ¦.
Â
Amazing that in 2010 out of 76,000 initial rejections only 44 were actually prosecuted, wow. You dont even want to dig into the details of how few bad guys were actually rejected as the INITIAL REJECTIONS number 1.83 mil since 1994, and geez, it doesnt  get much over 100 each year now.
Â
By the way, what is the background check costing everyone?
Â
Explain what again full background checks will actually do?
@scoreboard@Errornaut@Max Quinn
I don't disagree with you but you do have the same kind of guns MOST criminals have (what like 90+% of crimes committed with a gun are handguns?).
Â
I'm for 100% background checks, period, I'm either way on the other stuff.
Â
Laws are in place because people do stupid and/or bad things, it ruins it for everyone else, it's normal, doesn't stop drunk drivers, it won't stop gun crimes but doing nothing hasn't worked very well either and arming more people is not the solution (imo).
 @deejm2112  @Errornaut  @Max Quinn And that kind of proves a point that I've posted ad nauseam on these gun stories.Â
Â
My point is that no matter how strict gun laws would be, criminals will still get them one way or another. The don't and won't register their weapons, the don't and won't submit to a background check, and they'll continue to buy weapons that have been banned/restricted. They don't follow the law. It won't be a deterrent to them. Sure, they might have to pay a little more but that still won't stop them.Â
Â
Now I'm not saying that there doesn't have to be laws in this country. We do need to make it as difficult as possible for the undesirables to get weapons but no matter what we do, they'll get them if they are determined enough. If they can't get a gun, they'll find something else, just like Timothy McVeigh and the masterminds behind 9/11.Â
Â
Why restrict something that is pretty much impossible to keep out of the hands of criminals. Let the responsible gun owners be on a level playing field. Let them have the same kinds of small arms that the criminals have.
 @Errornaut  @scoreboard  @Max Quinn I'm excluding the people he wanted to exterminate for obvious reasons (the "wanting to exterminate" part for example).
Â
We restrict laws for "undesirables" also, felons, criminal's, mentally ill, etc...the only problem is they know how to work the rules and buy them from unlicensed dealers and/or private sellers to bypass background checks, or other back markets.
 @Errornaut  @Max Quinn  @deejm2112 Yes, I was aware of that, regarding the Jewish people.
 @scoreboard  @Max Quinn  @deejm2112Hitler's gun laws were not relaxed for Jews or other "undesireables" it was also choked by registration that played favorites with party members. Don't believe me ask Theodore Haas a survivor of Dachau. Before Adolph Hitler came to power, there was a black market in firearms, but the German people had been so conditioned to be law abiding, that they would never consider buying an unregistered gun. The German people really believed that only hoodlums owned such guns.
Â
 @scoreboard  @Max Quinn Max is usually right, but regardless, "History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms" is a direct reference to Hitlers hesitation at allowing the people in his conquered territories to be armed, the evil psycho ruler inside me would tend to agree with him, unless of course you want to tempt fate.
 @Max Quinn  @deejm2112 I copied and pasted this from another site. Obviously it was not interpreted correctly if what you are saying is truly correct.
 @scoreboard He's talking about an occupied territory, would you arm a territory you just conquered?
 @scoreboard  @deejm2112 The actual quote is:
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so."
Â
He said this in 1942 after he had invaded and conquered most of Eastern Europe. It was a military policy, not a domestic one.
Â
We have not been conquered by a foreign power. That Congress is discussing the AWB is not an analogous situation.