Armed Protest

[BmorePat87]

(01-14-2021, 01:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Large scale protests are designed to intimidate as well.  That's the entire point of them.


I have to say these two answers are troubling to me, as they both come from intelligent posters whose opinions I respect.  For me it comes down to the law.  If open carry is legal where they are protesting then open carrying while protesting is perfectly acceptable.  It doesn't matter if it intimidates other people, that's not a bar the action has to hurdle.  "Intimidation" is obviously subjective, what intimidates one person does not intimidate another.  That being the case, whose standard of what constitutes intimidation do we use?  The answer is very simple, the law's interpretation.  Ergo, if the protest is conducted within the law the fact that a particular individual, or individuals, are intimidated by this lawful action is irrelevant. 

As for the ACLU, I used to respect them, but they're going down the SPLC path and becoming a partisan organization.  They should remove the "civil liberties" portion of their acronym post haste.

You're troubled that I acknowledged that some people who carry guns are compensating for insecurities and fears? I didn't say everyone, I just referred to a subset. 

I'm not advocating that people who engage in armed protest where it is legal should not be allowed to, but I am acknowledging that some are armed for reasons of personal fear or insecurities.