Self Defense at a rally

[BillyJean]

I want to preface by saying that I don't agree with Fascist or Marxists, Leninist and the list goes on. The only thing I would like to point out is Fascism is a nationalist idea, with a social structure, and a totalitarian dictatorship. Socialism is a collective, with no social structure, government control and wait for it... wait for it....

A totalitarian dictator.
Wow. A government in charge of everything and a totalitarian dictator no matter what people choose. Sounds like garbage in and garbage out from both choices. I will just have to pass.

Hmm. That's an interesting take on socialism that I'm not familiar with. I think if that's how socialism was presented to me—as a totalitarian system—I'd be up in arms over it.

My definition of socialism is admittedly a bit more traditional: social and economic rules/laws should be governed and determined by the community it affects. What you're calling socialism—and for that matter, any form of totalitarianism—strikes me as the absolute opposite of what every socialist I've ever met has stood for.

If there's one thing I appreciate about these boards/this community, it's that no one seems afraid to disagree and have a positive, thoughtful dialogue about issues where as Americans we can gather under the umbrella of freedom for all, mutual investment in making our society stronger (which is to say, more fair, more just, and more inclusive), and to drool over other folks' slick guns =)

Appreciate the conversation.

 

[jlhopwo]

Concealed carriers myself included have a higher responsibility to avoid confrontation. If you knowingly put yourself in that situation...

 

[Hawaiian]

Looking at how the recent demonstrations turned out in PDX, I would not go anywhere near them period. So if I was carrying or not really does not matter as I will not be there. I tend to avoid trouble whenever I can. Maybe this is how I lived to become as old as I am.

 

[F2CMaDMaXX]

Everyone seems to be forgetting that turning up to someone else's rally/protest in opposition, is a stupid idea, why would you?

If you're there doing your own thing, fine, but if you do as that muppet in Portland recently, you're going to have the same problem he did: No reason to be there, provoked people, ended up having to defend himself (who didn't see that coming!?) and basically ended up with the book thrown at him, that's self defeating.

Avoiding trouble is a very sensible thing.

 

[Pete F]

I don't want to redirect this thread. I learn from others and am very open minded (in general), so I a learning and enjoying the debate. My question is: Why does Portland and other cities give a permit to one group and then turnaround and give a permit to the anti-group and place them right across the street? This is especially true for the pro-Trump rallies. Do they want to create mayhem? Are they trying to put Portland on the national map?

 

[BillyJean]

Having met and knowing several antifa members...

They are unpredictable and simply, racists. I work with a long-time member. I am white and proud of my heritage. Sharecroppers who were dirt poor, fought and bled for this country. They were long term allies of the Cherokee nation, though they did not intermarry. We are a tough people that rely on our wits. We are of Irish descent in an area where that was viewed as a negative. My dad remembers the "No Irish need apply" signs.

I noticed that you wouldn't decry violence towards a kid for his hat and a simple dose of patriotism fits your ideas of fascism. And I am uncomfortable with any group who tries to suppress the first amendment as you suggest that they do.

I am opposed to racism, but I believe the way to beat it is by letting fools speak and show themselves idiots. Remove the mystique. There are very few white supremacists out their at all. They have no cogent arguments.

While I acknowledge that I don't know you or who you know or your experience, it's difficult to believe that literally the *single* thing that anti-facists gather around is anti-racist direct action also happens to be filled with racists. That doesn't pass the smell test for me.

UNLESS: you're suggesting that the anti-facists are somehow "racist" against white folk? In which case, I'll pass on that bait.

In order do disenfranchise a group of people, you have to have the power to do so. In the case of our country, unfortunately, that's means white people. Racism is a social institution explicitly designed and implemented to oppress specific groups of people that by definition are disenfranchised—which is to say they lack the power and agency of the dominant class of people in their society—and not simply some sort of preference for people who look and act like you do. This is why people—correctly—say that in the United States there is not racism against white people. Not because there are folk who dislike white people, but because racism is predicated on a society that favors a certain class of people. And as we all know, if there is a protected, privileged class of people, that necessarily means there are others who are suppressed, punished, and in the case of our country and others, enslaved as evidence of this tiered, or racist, society.

Now, that doesn't make white people evil or ipso facto racists. But it does make our society racist. And you can't both be in the powerful/dominant class and also claim to be the victim.

 

[Kruel J]

An armed person avoids conflicts at ALL costs. Because it won't end well no matter what. I walk away from conflict, diffuse it and could care less if my manhood is challenged. I do NOT want to escalate a situation just to prove who has the bigger plume.

If my firearm is out of the holster, we both just had a really BAD day.

 

[Kruel J]

I can handle myself ok without a firearm, but because I have one on me if I'm awake, it changes things up a bit. Plus I'm 42, I really don't want to get into a brawl anymore. 10 years ago, not a problem. Although, a few months ago a guy working at Winco hit my wife with a small shopping cart "train"....and laughed when she stumbled. So I couldn't NOT confront him. He never offered an apology and when he said she should watch where she's walking (punk kid) his carts somehow tipped over and made a huge mess and he might have run away then missed his well deserved break cleaning up the mess. Maybe.

 

[F2CMaDMaXX]

"oops"

 

[jlhopwo]

Also consider the "mantle of innocence". This is a concept crucial to your defense in the case you are charged.

"In any self defense situation, it is imperative that your actions are viewed as reasonable and necessary. If they are not, then you will not be viewed as the innocent victim who was forced to defend himself, but rather as someone who created or at least helped to create the situation."

And further, "...In all cases, you want to wear the mantle of innocence like a halo so people look at you and think, "Poor guy. He had no choice but to pull the trigger." Once you lose the mantle of innocent, your legal ordeal becomes an uphill battle."

Second Call Article

Think about that before you strap up and go wading into a situation YOU KNOW will be confrontational. You will not be able to depend on the mantle of innocence in your defense.

 

[AK0perator47]

Hmm. That's an interesting take on socialism that I'm not familiar with. I think if that's how socialism was presented to me—as a totalitarian system—I'd be up in arms over it.

My definition of socialism is admittedly a bit more traditional: social and economic rules/laws should be governed and determined by the community it affects. What you're calling socialism—and for that matter, any form of totalitarianism—strikes me as the absolute opposite of what every socialist I've ever met has stood for.

If there's one thing I appreciate about these boards/this community, it's that no one seems afraid to disagree and have a positive, thoughtful dialogue about issues where as Americans we can gather under the umbrella of freedom for all, mutual investment in making our society stronger (which is to say, more fair, more just, and more inclusive), and to drool over other folks' slick guns =)

Appreciate the conversation.

That is the Wikipedia version of it. The thing is that it has a government that dictates everything. Otherwise it would be anarchy and chaos. Without a dictator to drive it forward it would once again turn into anarchy and chaos.

Fear of the unknown and jealousy supersede rational thinking. The idea that everyone would agree on all matters is really far fetched.
I guess in terms of definition you have a great answer. As far as the application of it all; it requires a heavily ran government and a strong leader if you prefer to the word dictator

 

[Wombat of Doom]

While I acknowledge that I don't know you or who you know or your experience, it's difficult to believe that literally the *single* thing that anti-facists gather around is anti-racist direct action also happens to be filled with racists. That doesn't pass the smell test for me.

UNLESS: you're suggesting that the anti-facists are somehow "racist" against white folk? In which case, I'll pass on that bait.

In order do disenfranchise a group of people, you have to have the power to do so. In the case of our country, unfortunately, that's means white people. Racism is a social institution explicitly designed and implemented to oppress specific groups of people that by definition are disenfranchised—which is to say they lack the power and agency of the dominant class of people in their society—and not simply some sort of preference for people who look and act like you do. This is why people—correctly—say that in the United States there is not racism against white people. Not because there are folk who dislike white people, but because racism is predicated on a society that favors a certain class of people. And as we all know, if there is a protected, privileged class of people, that necessarily means there are others who are suppressed, punished, and in the case of our country and others, enslaved as evidence of this tiered, or racist, society.

Now, that doesn't make white people evil or ipso facto racists. But it does make our society racist. And you can't both be in the powerful/dominant class and also claim to be the victim.

There is racism against white people. I happen to have had 3 broken ribs and a skull fracture because I am white. Just because you redefine terms to perpetuate a false narrative just makes you a perpetrator of newspeak.

Racists come in all races. Period.

Privilege is not a race thing. It is so much more complex. And it is telling that you refuse to decry violence.

 

[BillyJean]

There is racism against white people. I happen to have had 3 broken ribs and a skull fracture because I am white. Just because you redefine terms to perpetuate a false narrative just makes you a perpetrator of newspeak.

Racists come in all races. Period.

Privilege is not a race thing. It is so much more complex. And it is telling that you refuse to decry violence.

I think I understand what you're saying about racists coming in all flavors. You know I disagree, and I've tried to explain, however briefly, why I think the way I do. It does not seem like you've made a good faith effort to hear and understand what I am saying. It is becoming clear that you're not interested in having a conversation based on facts and a mutual appreciation for a thoughtful, healthy difference of opinion. My previous point stands.

Privilege is so much more complex than race. I absolutely agree. But if you're going to talk about privilege in the states, you have to be looking at race as a primary and defining factor, along with gender and sexuality. And like you said, they are major factors, but of course not the only ones, and there are of course people of color with enormous privilege, but that doesn't erase our—all Americans—heritage of racism.

There are many kinds of violence, sir. I don't accept your baiting me with a narrow definition in order to feel self-rightously ignorant of the actual points I am making.

 

[AK0perator47]

In order do disenfranchise a group of people, you have to have the power to do so. In the case of our country, unfortunately, that's means white people. Racism is a social institution explicitly designed and implemented to oppress specific groups of people that by definition are disenfranchised—which is to say they lack the power and agency of the dominant class of people in their society—and not simply some sort of preference for people who look and act like you do.

Actually this is not correct. Disenfranchised by someone else is by definition depriving them from legal rights, depriving them of a privilege or immunity. Depriving them the right to vote. Kinda why we have due process.

So, if someone tells you that you cannot say those words, then they make a law that says that you cannot use the words, and then enforce the law; you are disenfranchised based on the fact that the first amendment was written on free speech and it is a right and privilege.

You said the powerful and dominant class. Last I knew we all work for a living, making us the working *class* and not one person that I know has the means to financially dominate a large portion of a group of people. I am equating power to wealth.

The thing is that most people are not wanting to understand what this is all about so I will help break it down. The mass majority working class of people are the ones that make a society successful. The outnumbered the elite financial institutions and the people that run/own them. If the lemmings, I mean the working class, realized that they can make the giant institutions do what they wanted, that's when there would be a change. We are so wrapped up in fighting and bickering over stupid stuff that they are sitting back laughing at us and continuously stoking the proverbial fire.

If the economy tanked today and everyone's money was worth one hundredths of its face value could you do anything with it? Seriously, if you had $1,000,000 and then it's worth only $10,000 what could you do? Not much. Now picture the fact that most people have around $1,000 to $10,000. It tanks and then you have $10 to $100. Perspectives a little different? Now what if you had $1 billion and it was only worth $10 million. Yes it would suck but you can still be well off and the best part?.... you can get a bunch of stuff so when it bounces back then you have 10 times your original amount.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

I think I understand what you're saying about racists coming in all flavors. You know I disagree, and I've tried to explain, however briefly, why I think the way I do. It does not seem like you've made a good faith effort to hear and understand what I am saying. It is becoming clear that you're not interested in having a conversation based on facts and a mutual appreciation for a thoughtful, healthy difference of opinion. My previous point stands.

Privilege is so much more complex than race. I absolutely agree. But if you're going to talk about privilege in the states, you have to be looking at race as a primary and defining factor, along with gender and sexuality. And like you said, they are major factors, but of course not the only ones, and there are of course people of color with enormous privilege, but that doesn't erase our—all Americans—heritage of racism.

There are many kinds of violence, sir. I don't accept your baiting me with a narrow definition in order to feel self-rightously ignorant of the actual points I am making.

You are the one who has a narrow definition. As someone white who was the only white family for a three block radius and had worked in inner city Chicago, LA, Watts, and Compton. Your view is remarkably ill informed.

The defining factor of privilege is nothing you mentioned. It is socioeconomic. Race, gender,and orientation are far smaller. And those should be factored into the dominant sphere of one's specific surroundings.One's specific surroundings might make being Northern Chinese, Hmong, gay,or African-American advantageous.

All Americans do not have a heritage of racism. That is a ridiculous and baseless statement on your part. How about those who came here fleeing racial violence or religious persecution? What about those who came here and bought land from the native Americans as my ancestors did and lived side by side for more than a century.

And lastly, beating a kid is violence. Wearing a hat is freedom of speech. Not being willing to see the obvious and glaring difference would make one the problem.

I have seen hats far worse than a MAGA hat. "Kill Whitey", "F*ck the police", and more. None of those justified violence. If I were to go out and shoot someone because of a Bernie Sanders hat, that would be murder, and it is the exact same thing.

If you can't see the difference, you should sell all guns.

 

[BillyJean]

You are the one who has a narrow definition. As someone white who was the only white family for a three block radius and had worked in inner city Chicago, LA, Watts, and Compton. Your view is remarkably ill informed.

The defining factor of privilege is nothing you mentioned. It is socioeconomic. Race, gender,and orientation are far smaller. And those should be factored into the dominant sphere of one's specific surroundings.One's specific surroundings might make being Northern Chinese, Hmong, gay,or African-American advantageous.

All Americans do not have a heritage of racism. That is a ridiculous and baseless statement on your part. How about those who came here fleeing racial violence or religious persecution? What about those who came here and bought land from the native Americans as my ancestors did and lived side by side for more than a century.

And lastly, beating a kid is violence. Wearing a hat is freedom of speech. Not being willing to see the obvious and glaring difference would make one the problem.

I have seen hats far worse than a MAGA hat. "Kill Whitey", "F*ck the police", and more. None of those justified violence. If I were to go out and shoot someone because of a Bernie Sanders hat, that would be murder, and it is the exact same thing.

If you can't see the difference, you should sell all guns.

I can see you are attacking a straw man and not the substance of what I am saying. Still. OK.

I do have a p320 for sale in the classifieds, if anyone's interested helping me disarm.

 

[BillyJean]

Peace offering:

SIG 45 Auto 200gr V-Crown JHP shooting at -65°F

 

[parallax]

Maybe this has been said before on this thread, but I wouldnt consider bringing a gun to any kind of rally I was attending, where violence might occur. the judicial system will eat you alive if you draw it or use it. better to strap on body armour under your clothes, and get a helmet with a face shield ( spit guard)., ear plugs, mace, gloves,etc. just keep the helmet in a bag until you need it, if things go sour. I know this isnt what some want to hear.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

I can see you are attacking a straw man and not the substance of what I am saying. Still. OK.

I do have a p320 for sale in the classifieds, if anyone's interested helping me disarm.

I am not attacking a straw man. You happen to be making a bunch of false assertions that are demonstrably false and failing to interact with the problems. I am providing counters to your claims directly.

I see you are unable to defend your assertions. I am old enough and have survived enough gang wars and violence to know that almost nothing, if not nothing at all fits the stereotype you are presenting. I, raised broke, in poverty, as white, of minority status in the neighborhoods I lived in, don't fit your worldview.

If you spent time in the poor sections of our country and among the kids in gangs, you would understand how silly this all sounds to someone who has been n the inner cities for years working. I got out after I got my head smashed and got curbed, but not stomped, thanks to the interceding of a kid who didn't even like me much. If you saw me, and looked close, you would notice my upper teeth are all roughly the same length from that curb.

The substance of what you are saying is not true though.

The Antifa members I have known are still very against the first and second amendments and into violence. I am opposed to violence against other people except in defense of life, and an unabashed supporter of the freedoms granted in the bill of rights.

 

[BillyJean]

I am not attacking a straw man. You happen to be making a bunch of false assertions that are demonstrably false and failing to interact with the problems. I am providing counters to your claims directly.

I see you are unable to defend your assertions. I am old enough and have survived enough gang wars and violence to know that almost nothing, if not nothing at all fits the stereotype you are presenting. I, raised broke, in poverty, as white, of minority status in the neighborhoods I lived in, don't fit your worldview.

If you spent time in the poor sections of our country and among the kids in gangs, you would understand how silly this all sounds to someone who has been n the inner cities for years working. I got out after I got my head smashed and got curbed, but not stomped, thanks to the interceding of a kid who didn't even like me much. If you saw me, and looked close, you would notice my upper teeth are all roughly the same length from that curb.

The substance of what you are saying is not true though.

The Antifa members I have known are still very against the first and second amendments and into violence. I am opposed to violence against other people except in defense of life, and an unabashed supporter of the freedoms granted in the bill of rights.

I know I said this before, but again: I don't pretend to know your experience or you. It is clear that you do not understand the points that I'm making, and that's fine. If you are going to engage me in a dialogue, however, I'd appreciate it if you extended the same courtesy to me. That is, to be able to have my words taken as real, actual opinion that is formed from experience that is just as valid and real as yours.

It is clear that we cannot agree on definitions of some pretty critical terms we're both using. And that's fine. It doesn't mean I should sell my guns. It doesn't mean I support violence. It doesn't mean that what I'm saying is wrong or untrue.

I get it. You're not the only one in the world who doesn't realize I'm right