Armed Left-Wing Protesters? Thanks, But No Thanks

UPDATE: Colorado Springs CAN wants to clarify some details about the CS Indy’s report:

COS CAN is not directly affiliated with Redneck Revolt. Sherrie Smith is an organizer for COS CAN and is a member of Redneck Revolt, but the two organizations are entirely separate entities. We do not dictate which organizations or groups our members or organizers may belong to. COS CAN is an Indivisible group committed to interacting with and advocating to our elected officials.

COS CAN supports Redneck Revolt’s constitutionally protected right to bear arms and their right under Colorado statute to open carry. We do not believe legally carrying or possessing a gun to be an inherently violent act. [Pols emphasis]

As evidenced by the events in Charlottesville and the threats that have been received by multiple members of our organization, there are people who wish to do harm to those in the activist community. We appreciate the actions of organizations like Redneck Revolt who are willing to put themselves between peaceful protesters and those who would seek to do us harm.

Everyone is welcome to resist in the way that they feel comfortable. We do not dictate to other organizations what their rights or values should be.

And there you have it, folks. Please, be safe. Original post follows.

—–

Armed “Redneck Revolt” protesters in Phoenix earlier this year.

The Colorado Independent’s Nat Stein has a fascinating story up today about local liberals who are adopting a hotly controversial tactic often seen from the far right: showing up to public protest events openly carrying firearms.

The Smiths, Lawyer and most of the other shooters at this session at Whistling Pines Gun Club are members of the Colorado Springs chapter of the Colorado Action Network that goes by the more manageable acronym, COS CAN. It’s a group styled after the Indivisible project, which acts as a guide to resisting the Republican agenda by mobilizing a nationwide network of progressives to dog their elected representatives. Indivisible was itself modeled after the obstructionist successes of the Tea Party when Democrats held a supermajority in Congress during former President Barack Obama’s first term.

Several Indivisible-inspired groups sprung up organically right after the election, but COS CAN has persisted as one of the most tight-knit and committed. The group of mostly women and their more understated husbands gets together regularly to call their congressional delegation, stage sit-ins at their offices and attend protests against whatever has sparked liberal outrage that particular week. And now, in true Colorado Springs fashion, some of them have added regular shooting practice and open-carrying at rallies to their tactical repertoire.

Predictably, the presence of guns has intensified the ongoing debate about safety and violence in the political climate. Locally, activists are torn and trying to figure out whether their tenuous cohesion can withstand such fundamental differences of opinion. Nothing is settled, other than the guns are here to stay. Because this group of gun-toting leftists, a chapter of the aptly named national movement Redneck Revolt, isn’t here to have a debate…

Generally speaking, we ourselves are not inclined to have “debates” with people who are at that moment carrying big-ass guns, because it seems to us you never really know how that’s going to end. In Colorado, “open carry” is legal for anyone legally allowed to possess a firearm pretty much everywhere except for within the City and County of Denver.

That means you’ll never see the “Redneck Revolt” on patrol at the State Capitol. Colorado Springs, on the other hand, is (pardon us) open season. But does that make it a good idea?

Open-carry protests have become a fixture of the far right in recent years in the many states like Colorado where the practice is legal, and in most cases they have been condemned on simple public safety grounds without the need to make ideological judgments about their purpose. The strong relationship between armed protests and the extremist right wing, in particular white separatist and white supremacist groups, only further stigmatizes open carriers protesting and not.

If you agree that heavily armed right-wing protesters are not what you’d call an indicator of healthy political discourse, we’d say that logical consistency in this regard is called for on the left as well. The argument that protesters against the far right and racist groups require armed protection beyond what the police provides, as tempting as that may be after incidents like Charlottesville, only makes violent confrontation more likely. And it feeds into right-wing tropes in favor of everyone packing heat that progressives just shouldn’t subsidize.

Readers might disagree with us, and that’s why we have a comment section. But for us, all of this is trending in a direction we would prefer America to, you know, avoid.

0 Shares

9 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. bullshit!bullshit! says:

    Open carry loons are no less loons on the left. This helps nothing.

  2. ModeratusModeratus says:

    Federal law specifically says you can't smoke marijuana and legally have a gun.

    These leftists are all breaking the law.

  3. CS ActionCS Action says:

    If we let them convert us to their ways of violent intimidation and coercion at gun point, then the fascists win. This will only help them to destroy attendance at our protests. The media should NOT promote these people as representing the "left" because the left learned long before ANY of them showed up that nonviolence is the ONLY path to lasting, sustainable political discourse and change. This is a verrrrrry small group of people and they represent ONLY themselves. Of course we will all be slandered as violent politicos now and decades of successful nonviolent progress for first nations, blacks, women, LGBT, antiwar and ALL civil rights movements will be delegitimized.

  4. kwtreemamajama55 says:

    I think that self-defense is a right, as is free speech, freedom of assembly, and all other First Amendment rights.

    I also think marching with ostentatious weapons display is a provocative act, with intent to terrorize.

    The non-violent clergy protesters in Charlottesville reportedly owed their lives to the "violent, antifa" left with their shields and batons used defensively.

    Competing weapons displays cannot end well, and will lead inevitably to civil war and violence. Probably our buddy Negev went right out and bought new tactical armor, magazines, and gear to show off his latest acquisitions, in order to outdo leftists.

    Guns are tools, toys, and terrorizers. It isn't hard to see which purpose the people in the picture are using.

    I have enjoyed shooting guns as target practice, and am fairly good at it.

    I distrust instinctively those who seek to pressure people into reckless action by accusing them of being weak, soft, or cowardly. I've seen paid provocateurs ruin young idealists lives by playing on their emotions this way.

    These are just a few of my conflicting thoughts about this article.

  5. COSLib says:

    Dear Jeffco CAN; The author didn't conflate these 2 groups. The 2 in this article took down the whole group. Mostly because they bad mouth people and lie.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.