Gunrights

Reader feedback sought: why carry weapons at a peaceful rally?

by Guy Page

In his first “Fair Game” column for Seven Days, veteran Vermont journalist Dave Gram discusses divisions within the Vermont Republican Party in the aftermath of the January 6 riot in Washington, D.C.. He also mentions the possible armed, pro-Trump rally at the Vermont State House on Sunday, January 17. In conclusion, he asks what (to many non-gun owners) must sound like a real stumper:

“Anyone packing for Montpelier on the 17th ought to answer this question: Why would you arm yourself for a peaceable assembly?”

Why indeed? Even as a non-gun owner, some rather obvious reasons come mind. First, Vermonters have the legal right to carry. Second, a firearm might come in handy if someone starts shooting at you or someone else. Vermont Daily‘s many, many gun-owning readers are encouraged to provide an informed answer Mr. Gram’s question in a comment below. Mr. Gram may read Vermont Daily, or he may not – if you wish to answer him directly, his published email address is dave@sevendaysvt.com.

* * * * * *

If the ratio of gun owners to citizens is any measure of the popularity of gun control, bills like Baruth’s may have a tougher time getting passed. Vermont gun ownership grew faster than ever before last year. Gun purchases exceeded 50,000 for the first time since the US government began making background checks in the 1990’s. A total of 57,965 firearms purchase background checks were initiated in 2020 by the federal NICS. The year before saw only 35,843.

  1. This is particularly funny. Each of these “villains” is a private company that operates in a capitalistic free society. Corporate…

  2. They most certainly are – unfortunately so are those who vote these lunatics into elective office. Look at the VT…

  1. This is particularly funny. Each of these “villains” is a private company that operates in a capitalistic free society. Corporate…

  2. They most certainly are – unfortunately so are those who vote these lunatics into elective office. Look at the VT…

Categories: Gunrights

Tagged as:

8 replies »

  1. Lesson #1 in how to guarantee new gun legislation being successful: bring a gun to a peaceful rally.

  2. If a person carries a weapon for personal protection as a matter of course, why would you not?

  3. A Vermonter would carry a firearm to a peaceable assembly for the same reasons that towns have police officers (who are armed), states have troopers (who are armed), and the US has armed forces (who are obviously armed) even in times of peace. It’s the same concept throughout the different levels of scope: protection. In times of peace, that protection is simply in the form of deterrence.

  4. The Constitution of Vermont and the United States very clearly states that the right to keep and bare arms is a right,and shall not be infringed!This of course is for self defense!!

  5. The Right to bear arms…the reasons why a citizen might exercise that right may not be to the point here. Would it be useful to consider the PRUDENCE of bearing at the Montpelier event. Perhaps we’re not really interested in provoking our more hyperbolic adversaries. I think we may have more important axes to grind at such an event. There are folks we’d like to convert…To get them to consider changing their way of thinking about the way government is functioning…to consider our views on these matters. Don’t we need to help these adversaries become our allies?

  6. At this point in history, there is nothing to be gained by protesting at the Capitol on that day, let alone doing so while visibly armed. All that will do is give more ammunition to Sen. Baruth to justify his latest anti-2A proposals to the majority-snowflake voters of VT. Gov. Scott is riding a thin line of supporting our 2A rights and having to pander to the paranoid Left, and he has caved once in the past and accommodated their whims. We have to realize that we now have a unique and dangerous collusion between the deep state of our federal and state governments and the private big-tech media to achieve a political end, and that is the classical definition of FASCISM. This battle can no longer be won with angry, shouting crowds and spray paint, it will have to be won in the courts and by the availability of alternative media sources and social media that cater to the entire ideological spectrum. First order of business is treating these tech media giants as publishers instead of “platforms” so they can be held legally and civilly accountable for content and bias. The internet is a PUBLIC RESOURCE, like the roadways used to deliver newspapers and like the airwaves used by TV and radio broadcasters. The fascist tech-media must not be allowed to promote political and ideological double-standards and to establish denial-of-use to those who dissent with their dangerous, mainstream ideas.
    PLEASE stay away from Montpeculiar on inauguration day. Bake some cookies, chop some wood or just make some tracks in the snow to take your mind off this lunacy.

  7. Concerning the proposed armed march discussed in the media. This is just a trap set by the progressive democrat media to use against those of us who cherish our 2nd amendment rights. By all means, do not attend this rally armed or better yet do not attend at all. The media will twist the facts against the 2nd amendment supporters to be used against us.

    The progressive democrats in Montpelier would like nothing better than to use this against us.

    Again I ask you not to attend this rally, do not give the progressives anything to use against us.

  8. Why wear a seatbelt? Or a PFD?
    Why have a smoke detector, or a fire extinguisher?
    Why pay for insurance?
    It’s so that in case the completely-imaginable happens, you aren’t relegated to bystander/victim.

Leave a Reply to Charles Wilson Cancel reply