One thing I will always be in favor of is protests, rallies, and peaceful civil disobedience (and I do mean peaceful as long as the government maintains the same status quo) when government overreach threatens our freedoms and/or begins to change our country into a Socialist or Dictatorship such as what it appears to be trying to accomplish. I am for an armed citizenry and militias. Both armed citizenry and militias remind our government that We The People are ready to defend our Constitution and from invaders, whether inside our country or from the outside. Anytime politicians decide to rape our Constitution, they need to remember our history. Militias and an armed citizenry stood tall against tyranny and will do so again if that time comes.
Reading about the ATV protest in Utah, I'm not sure what, if anything, they accomplished. Yeah, the Bundy situation was different (even if Clive is kinda weird in his views). The BLM came ready for bear, and that ain't gonna happen in this country without a dangerous response occurring. All sides should thank God that no shots were fired, because it would have been a blood bath with more blood to flow as Americans rose up against this Administration. The next time, it may not end with everyone letting out a big breath of relief. Back to Utah. Okay, you lost a road, and it has been closed for years, and you now suddenly want to protest the closing? Uh...why didn't you react this heavily when they first closed the road in the name of some liberals wailing about Americans encroaching on a sacred monument, even though the road had been used for years. What more damage could you expect? I agree it was an ignorant move to close the road, but the response today was really questionable by all.
You want to ride the ATV vehicles through the canyons on the old road, even though you knew you were breaking the law. Was anyone in danger of losing their freedoms, human life, or livestock? Was this a sudden event, committed by the BLM without the residents of the area and the state of Utah having a say? Did the BLM bring in 200 para-military soldiers with snipers? The answer is no. Yet today's protestors violated the law to accomplish...what? From what was reported, there were protestors armed with sidearms and one with an assault rifle. Now I am all for the NRA and gun rights (including assault weapons), but why today? Who did you intend to intimidate? Who was threatening the protestors? From what I can gather, it wasn't a Clive Bundy type of BLM assault against the Bundy family. Quite the opposite. The local sheriff and deputies were on hand to make sure everyone behaved themselves, but basically it was safe. I'm still puzzled why the violation of the law and what they accomplished? Yes, there were armed militia there as well. Why? A dangerous situation was created, an unnecessary protest and protestors even involved their children. All that was accomplished, in my view, was citizens making themselves look foolish (flat out stupid) and the only overreach this time was by the protestors!
To maintain your rights to protest, maintain a credible militia, and be taken seriously, learn when, where and how to pick your fights. If the law decides to prosecute the offenders, what, other than a criminal record will you have achieved? If it's a felony that you are charged and convicted of, there goes your rights to vote, sit on a jury...and oh, by the way, your right to own and bear firearms. I will probably have a group of people who disagree with me, but there will be those who realize what I am trying to get across is...common sense. Never lose your ability to protest and bear arms for something that will accomplish nothing. Learn when to pick a fight. You will be taken serious if you maintain a common sense approach to a protest and the calling up of our militias.