Discussion of whether I should go to -- and get arrested in -- WA state.

Since I posted "In timor veritas" on Friday, I have been inundated with negative comments -- by email, phone and in person -- on my participation in the 7 February I Will Not Comply action at the WA state house. They cover a lot of concerns, but most are like this one:

I don't understand how you getting arrested will help anything. For better or worse, many people probably think not open carrying guns in public buildings is a "reasonable" restriction. Now if they forcibly arrest you during a rally for clearly utilizing free speech that's different, but I just am thinking this is one battle worth losing in order to succeed in the overall war. Who would take over the blog for one? I just don't think that this is a smart move at all tactically.

What about a massive open carry rally to the edge of the ok zone? I.E. right outside the capital. You could emphasize that all these guns are here and not one person has been shot and killed yet.

I don't know, I am sure you have thought this through. I guess I am just ensuring due diligence review of this strategy to get arrested which I believe has more cost than benefit.

I have thought this through, and I am submitting it to God in prayer that risking arrest is the right thing to do. Of all the criticisms -- friendly and unfriendly -- I have received, this one from Bob Wright caused me the most thought and reflection:

Mike,

While I am intrigued by the proposed armed civil disobedience in Washington state, and at least partially agree with some of the reasoning behind it I wish to share some of the concerns this proposed course of action brings to my mind and offer a few thoughts on other consequences likely to manifest themselves in the execution of this demonstration.

I agree with the concept of pushing this course to a point the media can no longer ignore the armed demonstrations that have grown over the years. I agree that this type of event could bring a spotlight on to the whole trend,( but only if properly managed.) And by managed I mean in the planning, execution and the handling of the aftermath.

Bob Wright, Palominas, AZ, 2005.

In 2005, at the onset of the Minuteman Project, 4 dedicated leaders and myself handled the physical execution of the mission. We were responsible for maintaining the operation on an operational and tactical basis. This included the assignment of personnel, setting up observation posts, gathering, collating and analysis of intelligence, housing, medical and logistics issues. In addition was the need to interface with local law enforcement and elected officials. Another essential duty was dealing with media . While we all prefer to do the physical stuff, the exciting stuff, the dangerous stuff the need for a talented person to deal with the media was essential to the success and continued survival of the Minutemen. Those who wound up filling that billet were often bitterly disappointed to be removed from other duties more exciting and satisfying.In spite of their disappointment they served in the position from which the most good for the mission! They were as essential to the success of the project as any Minuteman , Line leader of Area supervisor. In some ways more essential as the physical exertions of those Magnificent Minutemen would have been fruitless without those peoples skills that allowed what the troops were doing to be conveyed in such a manner as to explain the true nature and intent of the Project, dispel the lies and the calumny perpetrated by our foes and put the noble human face on those Patriots in the field. It was a thankless job that broke the hearts of one such person and diminished the personal satisfaction of the others. But they served the cause.They served where they could best further the cause.

Looking at the Washington operation I feel, most strongly, that your participation should be limited as far as risking arrest. I feel that you have a responsibility to the movement and the III%. As that Kerodin fool established really bad people want to piggyback on , or take over the III% movement. I believe whole-heartedly that without your clear expressions of the philosophy and direction of the Real III% we will see this movement fall into the disrepute that individual espouses. As I see it, and I think most of the III% will agree, your mission is to continue to provide that clear definition that has kept the III% on track and has built the movement to the point that it has arrived. You have hundreds who are building their own understandings and philosophies based on the history , context and insight you provide in the turmoil that is political America. You have made plain the noble origins of this movement and made clear that intent to preserve and restore the founders vision for ALL Americans. Who, would you recommend that may replace you should things go bad?

Who, could provide the narrative that would illustrate and bring to light the historic and ethical correctness of this demonstration? Who?

My friend, your job is not to go get arrested and while I know that just eats you up you are a victim of your own talent. You, as I, are condemned to serve where we may best serve the cause. As you well know that can change over time as it has for you. Some critics may charge that you “Must Lead from The Front” or you have no credibility. I would just about bet those who say that have never actually lead any one. While there is validity in the old saw “never ask a subordinate to do something you would not do yourself”, you fulfilled that requirement a decade ago my old friend. You lead from the front for more than a decade. Face to face with Fed Monsters, Nazis, Kluckers , writ writers. I know…I was with you.

No sir! Your Job is to continue to define and illustrate as only your pen can what the III% is all about. To continue to give voice to the shining nobility that all III%ers have but few can express. More and more you are being compared to Sam Adams and I for one feel it is a just comparison. Without Adams the revolution might never of been or might have been far less noble in it’s intent and result. But we must remember that Sam did NOT physically take part in the Boston Tea Party or any of a hundred other “demonstrations” he was responsible for. He like you chaffed at that limitation but knew…as you must know…had a much different way to serve the noble cause.

Bob Wright.

Wow. Where to start? First off, I AM going to WA state if I can arrange the logistics. Second, I have the utmost confidence in the common sense and competence of the leadership of the I Will Not Comply folks on the ground out there, including Anthony Bosworth and Kit Lange. I had the chance to observe them up close from the inside of the operation back in December and would trust my life with them and their supporters. No ifs, ands, or buts. I have implicit trust that they will carry this off with every bit of skill, determination and success that they exhibited last month -- including their preparations to deal with agents provocateurs. I will also stipulate that am an exceedingly poor substitute for Sam Adams and thus I am not as convinced as Bob that I am "irreplaceable."

The central question for me is how could I sit safely in Alabama and be impervious to this eloquent appeal? I could not, not and be true to everything that I believe, everything that I have sworn to uphold. So I am going. The only question is -- will I be arrested? I suppose that will be up to the "authorities" in WA state. Whatever happens, I suspect that the national press will no longer be able to ignore the NATIONAL armed civil disobedience movement afterward. And that is a result that the "authorities" who embrace citizen disarmament -- both in Washington state and nationally -- will not like, not one bit. In that -- in their fear that reveals the truth -- they cannot help themselves, for they are cowards and tyrants. And their attacks on liberty -- and, possibly, on those of us who resist that tyranny -- will make our point and sustain and further our larger cause. Thus it is worth the risk to me.

I invite your comments.

LATER: Seattle Times: Do as we say, not as we do.