Two Rallies, Basically Same Objective, Compete

On Monday, April 19, 2010, there are two rallies planned in the Washington D.C. area.  One, on the banks of the Potomac at Fort Hunt National Park in Northern Virginia, rallies under the banner of Restore the Constitution.  The second planned rally rallies under the banner Second Amendment March, right on the streets of Washington D.C. proper.

The Second Amendment March rally, unbeknownest to me, was actually organized by a West Michigan individual by the name of Skip Coryell, and our local paper, The Grand Rapids Press surprisingly has a story reporting on this under the headline Allegan County man details inspiration, myths behind his upcoming Second Amendment march in Washington.

While I am pleased that individuals are actively participating in these rallies, I was a bit perturbed by a portion of the story, and a comment uttered by Skip Coryell, as reported in The Grand Rapids Press.  To wit, the following.

Because the District of Columbia prohibits the carrying of firearms, marchers are being instructed to leave any weapons behind when they attend the rally. In response, frustrated firearms owners scheduled a separate rally on the same date for Fort Hunt, Va. That state allows open display of firearms.

“That is causing a lot of confusion. It’s a totally peaceful march,” he said.

The status of the Virginia rally was uncertain, after the Oath Keepers, a controversial patriot group, pulled its name from the event.

First, why is Oath Keepers a “controversial patriot group.”  Are American patriots controversial, now?

Second, Coryell’s utterance, “It’s a totally peaceful march.”  Does Coryell mean to imply that the Second Amendment March marchers believe that the Restore the Constitution marchers are apt to be violent, or are somehow less legitmate than the Second Amendment March marchers, or what?

Why this competition?  It is counterproductive, and that is exactly why I wrote this back in 2003.

Why is there such a confounded need to label yourself or align yourself within a group? Can we not just be men with like minded ideas of liberty and sovereign individuality? Even if some of your political ideologies differ in regards to the size of government, as compared to other labeled individuals, does the group label offer you any kind of safety, or is it just a need to belong that is being fulfilled by the label? The group mentality, in most instances, only provides a bludgeon to use against other groups.

Judas priest, these two marches both have their eye on the same prize.  Why the competition for legitimacy?

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 04/17 at 10:48 AM
  1. The “competition” - if any - exists only in the mind of Mr. Coryell.

    He’s actually exhibiting a classic symptom of mind control - the apparent need to endear himself to his oppressor(s) and separate himself from those deemed “the enemy.”

    “*WE* are a PEACEFUL bunch”—leaves unspoken the obvious judement that the other bunch is not.

    My nome de plume is a remnant of just such a symptom as well - at the time I was seeking to separate myself from “all of those deadbeats.”

    The fact is that most Fathers are just as dedicated as I am, and the stereotypical “deadbeat” is extremely rare. 

    The deliberate creation of the “legions of deadbeats” allows men abused by the system to see themselves as the exception to a non-existent “rule”—as mistakenly caught up in the righteous campaign against miscreants—instead of as yet another in a long line of innocent victims in a veritable charnel-house of injustice.

    The fact is that Coryel’s comment is evidence that the Leftians’ campaign against Patriots is just as successful as their war on Fathers.

    God help us…

    DD

    Posted by Dedicated_Dad  on  04/17  at  09:22 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

<< Back to main