I think we’ve had this debate before around here, on the appropriateness of “gallows humor” after some awful event.
This came up way back in 1986 after the space shuttle Challenger blew up. The event was discussed extensively on Usenet, of course, and along with that there was an immediate “explosion” of gallows humor. And along with that, there was an immediate “explosion” of controversy over that.
Oh noes!
So now we have a concrete example of one extreme of “failure to launch”. 
“He’s not a patriot – he’s a very naughty boy!”
He got launched now.
This was not an awful event. It was a joyous occasion where a potential awful event was stopped.
It is also important to understand these are dangerous people.
That’s true, as it happened. (Could have turned out worse.) I was focusing specifically on the controversy over dark humor.
More likely between those two extremes.
Yes, they were planning an actual event that I would describe as domestic terrorism. Yes, they were “choads”. Problem is, cowards and choads get braver in a pack and they had enough numbers that they could have egged each other on into doing something really horrific.
Yay, someone was observant and called the cops. Yay, the cops did their job. Yay, the system worked this time. What about next time? The next group might be more stealthy and competent.
Yep. It’s only in the last few years that these groups have felt confident and comfortable enough to operate like this in the full light of day. Every one of these ‘failures’ is just calibration. They’re taking notes.
Dismissing them as morons and cowards is one of the most dangerous things we can do. They’re not dumb. “How to be a terrorist” is not an innate skill set. They’re learning and growing.
How does membership in this organization/being a participant in this actual attempt NOT disqualify them from EVER owning/forfeiting all their guns?
Isn’t that just common sense?
The general theory is that simple association and expression of a political position is exactly what the 1st and 2nd Amendments are designed to protect.
It’s action which violates the law and escapes the shadow of Constitutional protection.
Very worthwhile making this point.
Count me with the others who have a foot in each camp:
If you think about those participating in the parade, had these goobers been able to park near the site, cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war – however amateurish their plot may have been – I can’t help but think about the celebrants, and the depths of fear that would come over them, not knowing if they were about to die.
We’re all sort of revisiting 1/6 right now, and we are interminably on the heels of a mass shooting.
My guess is that the potential gravity of this story, and this bunch, wasn’t lost on any of us.
Still … very good post.
It’s a domestic terrorist organization, right? Evidence they’re clear intentions, spelled out in their handwriting. How/why is that protected?
And how is renting a van, arming, dressing in combat gear and loading into a transport to the riot making anything but ‘action’?
This is kinda why the rest of the world scratches their heads over your gun laws. If not these idiots than who exactly are you looking to disarm/bar from owning weapons?
In most countries if you pull out a gun and wave it around at a neighbour, you lose your gun rights. In America you have to shoot and kill someone first, yikes!
Since history is the nightmare America refuses to awake from, I’d go with; Blacks, “Mexicans”, and leftists.
I cannot find it at the moment, but I heard a report that a lawyer for someone in this group of idiots was proclaiming something like “…but they had not even exercised their first amendment rights yet, so how could they be guilty of anything??..”. Like, what, they were just cosplayers going to a party?
So, what are concerned citizens supposed to do, wait until these jerks started to actually stir shit up before doing anything? “See something, say something” has a meaning and is a good rule.
Unless you were scared for your life and your target was Black, Mexican, or Leftist, in which case your gun rights are intact. And you get a book deal.
These particular terrorists were caught. But they don’t always. We’ve had plenty of cases in the past couple of years when the terrorists weren’t caught, and succeeded in turning protests into riots, and blaming it on the protesters.
I think public ridicule is important for people like that. It is something they understand. It is how they behave, which is not ordinarily how we should behave, but in this case it is appropriate.
It’s not, that’s why they were all arrested and now have dates to show up in court.