Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,633 posts)
Thu Aug 24, 2017, 06:49 PM Aug 2017

You Dont Need a Gun to Peacefully Protest

By Connor McLean at Slate

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/08/prohibit_open_carry_in_registered_protest_zones.html

"SNIP...........


Perhaps, instead of focusing on better arming the police, we should at least consider disarming the protesters. There are already limits on open carries for airports and some school zones; zoning where someone can and cannot openly carry a deadly weapon is nothing new. Let’s add peaceful protests to the list. There could be restrictions placed upon the armament of protesters and public assemblies.

Join Dahlia Lithwick and her stable of standout guests for a discussion about the high court and the country’s most important cases.
Sure, it’s a challenging proposal. Protests are large gatherings held at varying locations. People pour in from all directions. There might not be easy ways to tell who is affiliated with the protest and who is not, which could lead to some complicated question: Does someone forfeit the right to openly carry a weapon the moment he or she decides to join a protest?

But rallies, like the one in Charlottesville, also center around concrete locations for which permits must be obtained. Designating the official zone of the protest as an open carry–free zone when the permit is being obtained is a good starting point. For Charlottesville, this would have meant that Emancipation Park, the space where the protest was scheduled and permitted to take place, would have been designated a gun-free zone, something the organizers would have known when planning. Police could have further informed individuals as they entered the space that this was the policy and that those who violated it would be removed or arrested. It would not have entirely solve the problem. Armed individuals could have still remained in other parts of the city. But it would have at least minimized the presence of weapons in the designated areas of conflict, and it might have enabled the police action to have been more swift, targeted, and effective.

The terrorist who attacked my town came from a state where there is more paperwork involved with getting a drivers license than a rifle. I should not have to fear for the lives of my classmates, friends, and family if they are moved to be politically active. I should not have to fear for the safety and sanctity of my town every few months. If these protests are peaceful and the actions of these groups are truly in the interest of free speech, there should be no issue with taking deadly weapons out of the situation.

.............SNIP"

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
You Dont Need a Gun to Peacefully Protest (Original Post) applegrove Aug 2017 OP
The gun situation in this country is beyond madness. Eliot Rosewater Aug 2017 #1
And now with lone jihad attacks it is doubly madness. applegrove Aug 2017 #2
Sure, a certain "group" will use vehicles or anything to kill, if there are no guns, Eliot Rosewater Aug 2017 #3
Yes. Violent extremists. The charlottesville car attacker obviously was applegrove Aug 2017 #4

Eliot Rosewater

(31,109 posts)
3. Sure, a certain "group" will use vehicles or anything to kill, if there are no guns,
Thu Aug 24, 2017, 07:04 PM
Aug 2017

but getting rid of the guns is a start.

This "group" is extremists whether they be white christians or otherwise.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»You Dont Need a Gun to Pe...