by John Price
Congresswoman Batchelder quickly responded, “Senator, now you come on. The history of our nation confirms that the men who founded this nation were, for the most part, Christians who believed that God had granted them a special opportunity to create a free nation, not ruled by kings and tyrants, as they had experienced in European nations. Before the Constitution could be ratified, the Bill of Rights was written and included, and the First and Second Amendments in the Bill of Rights were the first two included for a very good reason – they didn’t want this nation ending up like Europe. What you, and your friends in the White House, are doing is tyrannical, straight up, a tyrannical effort to take away our Constitutional rights, but without doing it the legal way, by repealing the amendments which you don’t like. A tyrant despotically misuses his authority. Senator, you sir, are misusing your authority, and you know it. Oh, yes, you certainly know what you are doing.”
Camera three, which was focused on Senator Blevins, caught a well-known governmental leader appearing to be weighing his options. His first response to his opponent’s words was to say nothing. He seemed to be gritting his teeth, then he narrowed his eyes as he stared hard at the Congresswoman. With an almost imperceptible nod of his head, it appeared to those who would later spin the debate, he seemed to make up his mind, but only after visible internal wrestling.
“Ma’am, I was raised to respect women. In ya case, though, based on ya cutting words and ya false accusations, I’m gonna have to make an exception to how I was raised. Ya no woman deserving respect, no, ma’am, ya are a highly-paid attack machine, working for the wealthy gun makers and ya supporters in the NRA and such. I am not goin’ to allow myself to be subjected to any more of ya scurrilous attacks. Ya can just debate ya’self, cause I’m stoppin’ this sham debate. I’m leavin’ this here Fox News organized ambush.”
With that burst of agitated words, the Senator pulled off the lapel mike clipped to this tie, spun his wheelchair backwards and out of the studio, leaving Grenda open-mouthed, along with a perplexed Congresswoman, wondering what she should say next, if anything.
The studio floor manager signaled Grenda to go to a break, which she promptly did. After two minutes of commercials, Grenda informed viewers that with the Senator’s departure from the studio, the Blevins-Batchelder Debate was concluded. Most of the mainstream media who commented on the debate, and its abrupt termination, blamed Batchelder, many (not coincidentally) using the same description of her, i.e., ‘a right wing pit bully’. The White House Press Secretary in his daily briefing suggested that “no self-respecting Democrat, liberal or progressive, should ever again appear on Fox News”. One unnamed, undisclosed Democrat Senator who opposed Blevin’s bill, leaked to a Fox correspondent who covers the Senate, that he had understood before the debate even started that Senator Blevins would look for an excuse to terminate the debate, and would leave the studio before it was concluded. Blevins’ press spokesman called the report ‘another radical right wing attempt to smear a fine public servant.’
THIRTY FOUR
Rural America
Human beings generally prefer to lead a peaceful, quiet existence. Get up, go to work, come home, spend time with the spouse and the kids, go to bed. Repeat. Thus, it requires something extraordinary to make a normal human being protest some action or another of the government. The McAlister Bill was an incentive to protest. Once it became known soon after the Presidential election what the bill would do if it became law, rank and file members of gun rights organizations increasingly besieged the leaders of their national organizations, asking what they could do to help stop McAlister.
The national leaders, though, were limited in how far they could go to oppose the McAlister Bill. They could coordinate protest and lobbying efforts, which they did frequently and effectively. But, they couldn’t, nor would they, call for any level of violence. The nation was under martial law, which limited Americans from exercising their rights of free speech and assembly. Everything changed when the President declared martial law. The Department of Homeland Security issued an order to the nation’s Governors finding that public demonstrations and protest marches were “inherently illegal” and were to be banned by officials in each of the fifty states.
National gun rights leaders were careful that almost every member letter, news release and press conference included an obligatory warning to avoid any form of violence. They warned their members that any act of violence would immediately be used by the backers of the anti-gun bill to persuade Congress of the increased need to rid the nation of what the Administration labeled in every news conference as ‘hate weapons’. One national leader, Harry Flatt, warned his members, “Even one bullet fired in anger over this evil anti-gun bill will be used against us, and used to justify taking away our firearms. Don’t help the White House pass their bill by using your defensive firearm in an offensive way. We are peaceful Americans who just want to be able to obey the law and defend ourselves.”
In spite of DHS’s order, sporadic protests broke out across the country, usually in rural areas, where the protests were further away from law enforcement officials who were willing to forcefully terminate the public gatherings. The protests initially took the form of marches and rallies, usually held on Saturdays, and including large numbers of people carrying protest signs. Most involved speeches by gun owners opposed to the pending anti-gun bill and by free speech advocates, generally conservatives and Christians and Jews, worried about the Bill’s effect on religious rights. Most included chants, such as:
KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF MY GUNS, KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF MY GUNS
I SPEAK, YOU SPEAK, WE ALL SPEAK FOR FREE SPEECH
Some were throw-backs to the anti-Vietnam war protest of the 60s:
ALL WE ARE SAYING IS - GIVE GUN RIGHTS A CHANCE!
Some sang We Shall Overcome, with revised lyrics:
Gun rights shall overcome,
Gun rights shall overcome,
Gun rights shall overcome some day.
Freedom of speech shall overcome,
Freedom of speech shall overcome,
Freedom of speech shall overcome some day.
Most of the scattered protests were cut short by local law enforcement officials who were ordered to terminate the gatherings by DHS. Media coverage of the protests and their forced termination was sparse. The Nation’s mainstream media chose not to report what Americans were saying with their feet, their signs and their voices about the McAlister Bill’s sponsors’ plan to define away their rights enshrined in the Constitution.
As the vote on the bill neared, and as the debate that was being covered on a limited basis intensified, the nature of the protests began to change. In a nation with as many firearms as Americans, and still smarting from what they saw as a ‘stolen election’, it was inevitable that the anti-gun debate would eventually turn violent. Bullets were fired at several federal installations, usually at night, with no recorded arrests. When windows were blown out of federal offices, the national media was there to show the nation’s viewers, and to interview distraught federal employees. Since no one was ever apprehended for the late-at-night shootings, there was no real assurance as to whether the bullets were fired in anger by out of control opponents of the McAlister Bill, or instead, by supporters of the Bill, trying to demonstrate to Members of Congress the urgent need for passage of the Bill.
One tactic used by the opponents of the Bill was borrowed from American teenagers who used what they called ‘flash mob messages’ to call out hundreds, even thousands, of supporters on a moment’s notice, using Twitter, cell phone texts and instant messaging. With no advance warning, entire plazas or office parking lots full of opponents of the McAlister Bill were called out, when it was learned that a Congress person was expected to be at a specific location in his or her Congressional District. Nothing got their attention like thousands of their constituents showing up at their District office or outside of a Lincoln-Reagan or Jefferson-Jackson political dinner. But, true to form, the on
ly media who bothered to cover these demonstrations of public opposition were local.
Since most owners of firearms, as Flatt had said, were peaceful, and since they understood that using their weapons would help them lose their weapons, the number of confirmed and organized acts of gun violence decreased. It seemed as if American gun owners were holding their breath, hoping against hope that the Bill would fail. They wrote letters and made calls to their own Members of Congress. They protested, peacefully. They contributed funds for lobbying. They prayed. But….they were scared. Scared that America would become like Australia. Scared that they would be like the Brits in the 2011 riots who could only buy baseball bats to protect their homes and families. Scared that they would soon lose the weapons that they owned to protect their families. Scared that they would be unarmed in the face of criminals who would rob, hurt, rape or kill. Scared.
Likewise, religious leaders were worried that the seemingly innocent language of the McAlister Bill punishing speech deemed to be hate speech would be used against them, restricting the contents of sermons and religious writings. Conservatives of all stripes and from organizations across the country saw the Federal Hate Speech Review Panel as a direct violation of the First Amendment and an attempt to censor their religious views, if they conflicted with prevailing government policy. Most were scared that if the McAlister Bill became law, it would be used to punish them, including imprisonment, if the courts ruled that their words were illegal, in violation of McAlister’s definition of the phrase ‘hate speech’. Since the Bill categorized hate speech as written or verbal speech that unfairly or illegally attacked a federal public official, or which unlawfully denigrated or negatively criticized any public official, they were scared that any critical comments about public officials could land the speaker or the preacher or the writer in prison. Scared that any sermon, speech or book dealing with gender, race or sexual orientation could have the same result. Scared that the federal government would become the federal censor. Scared.
THIRTY FIVE
Omaha, Nebraska
The law of unintended consequences may have been meant for just such an occasion as this – the Omaha Gun Supporters Parade. The idea behind forming the Omaha Gun Owners Against Seizing our Guns organization was simple. The organizers announced that the February 17th “Parade was to demonstrate to the people of Omaha, and of Nebraska, and to that Crazy as a Loon Congress, that the people of mid-America aren’t about to voluntarily give up our firearms, even if the anti-gun law passes”. At least that was the underlying concept. The leaders of the group, as they planned the Gun Supporters Parade, were put on notice by the Department of Homeland Security in DC that the protest would be a violation of its order, and contrary to the President’s declaration of martial law. Thus the march would not be allowed and would be banned, by law.
The Mayor of Omaha, though, ignored the DHS order. He was more than happy to have his offices help the parade organizers obtain a parade permit. On first application, they had been turned down by a city hall bureaucrat who supported the McAlister Bill pending before Congress. Once the Mayor found out about the denial, though, the permit was swiftly granted. In return, the Mayor was invited to march in the front ranks of the Saturday noon event, an invitation he was pleased to accept. “Let’s send a message to DC,” he told anyone who would listen, including local media, “we aren’t going give up our guns, no, not under any circumstances, nor any threat, nor any federal government pressure. Not in Nebraska. Nor will we give up our rights of public assembly and free speech.”
Once officials at the DHS realized that their order banning the march was being flaunted by the Mayor of Omaha, they notified the Governor of Nebraska, demanding that he over-rule the Mayor and cancel the permit for the parade. This the Governor of Nebraska was unwilling to do. He responded to the DHS that he would handle it, though he had no intention to do so. He instructed his Chief of Staff to draw up the necessary order to the Mayor of Omaha, but privately advised his employee that he should “bumble” the service of the order on the Mayor, only finally delivering it to the Mayor late on the Friday before the Saturday march. He sent word to the Mayor that the order wouldn’t arrive until after hours Friday, and in any case, that the State of Nebraska would take no action to stop the protest, nor to seek to punish the Mayor for dis-obeying the late delivered order.
On Thursday before the march a suspicious DHS, not having received any verification that the march was being cancelled by the Governor, sent in the US Army General assigned to Nebraska as a part of the President’s order of martial law. The General and the Governor had known each other, as it turned out, since their days at the University of Nebraska, a fact unknown at DHS. After a brief private talk the two officials arrived at two decisions. The Governor and his wife left the state for a previously unannounced weekend vacation, asking his staff not to reveal his destination. The state’s Lieutenant Governor was on a trade mission to the Orient. The General informed the DHS and the Pentagon that he had exercised his authority to demand that the Governor prohibit the parade, but that he refused to do so. His report, though, was delayed in transmission, for unexplained reasons, until after close of business Friday evening. Thus the parade organizers had no legal impediment to their Saturday noon event.
In the planning for any public event, event organizers reach a point where the early decisions made for how the event will be conducted are either affirmed, or changed at the last minute. In the very first meeting of the parade organizers one member of the group casually said, “Won’t it look great when they show on TV all the thousands of Nebraskans carrying our firearms? Just seeing all those guns and all of us carrying them will make quite an impression, won’t it?” Many in the group nodded their assent, and the meeting moved on to picking a date for their parade. No one at that meeting, nor at any subsequent meeting, ever thought to re-examine their initial decision to openly carry their guns in the Omaha Gun Supporters Parade.
The chosen Saturday for the Parade was sunny and crisp, but not too cold, as tens of thousands gathered in Omaha, as planned, and without any legal impediment that organizers recognized, to assemble for marching down Farnam Street to Heartland of America Park on the Missouri River for speeches. Many marchers brought their children to make it a family event. All were there to demonstrate their opposition to federal gun control. The Mayor had his first inkling of personal doubt when his driver let him off at the Park. As the Mayor looked across the Park at the large crowd, he heard an organizer on a bullhorn say “Show us your guns”. As the marcher/demonstrators responded, the Mayor saw the sun glinting off of what at first appeared to be hundreds, but then reflecting off of thousands of rifles, shotguns and raised pistols and revolvers. The Mayor was one of the State’s highest profile supporters of gun rights, but it occurred to him as he walked across the Park to greet the marchers that maybe this wasn’t the best way to gain support from the general public. Seeing an individual defend themselves against a mugger or rapist, he thought as he walked, was fine for the cause, but this looked like an armed mob. This will feed into the White House’s propaganda machine. Oh well, maybe, they won’t be watching, he hoped. But, of course, at the same time, he knew that wasn’t at all likely. Why didn’t they just march, and carry signs, not guns? This will give the nation’s anti-gun President, who was from the Mayor’s own political party, he was sorry to say, ammunition for several speeches in support of the McAlister Bill. Ammunition indeed.
What the Mayor did not know, nor did anyone in authority in Omaha, was what the President’s Chief of Staff did once he learned from DHS a little after 8 PM on Friday night that the Mayor and Governor would not cancel the march through Omaha and planned to violate the President’s imposition of martial law. The President was located in the family quarters watching basketball, his favorite non speech giving activity. Once he was advised of the situation in Nebraska, the President speedily authorized his Chief of Staff to do whatever was necessary to enforce martial law. His
Chief of Staff confirmed that the President literally meant whatever was necessary. Once assured of his authority, he went into action.
Soon after noon, on schedule, the marchers filled Farnam Street, on their trek to the Heartland of America Park, and some hoped-for ‘whooping up the crowd’ speeches. Within half an hour, the entire length of the east-west thoroughfare was full of people and their uplifted guns. It was quite a sight, and one that many observers thought had never been seen before, not like this. Most large numbers of people who carry weapons in public are dressed alike, in military uniforms. These gun carriers wore the full variety of what everyday people wear when they are in public, but they certainly didn’t look like an army. Historically, people who showed their guns and who weren’t in military uniforms, didn’t usually march or pose for photographs.
Once the marchers had reached Heartland of America Park, overflowing the Park down each street that fed into the large open area, the program began with a prayer and greetings by the Mayor. The Mayor was almost finished with his brief welcoming comments when he heard what sounded like a distant bull horn shouted voice. Neither he nor most of the people in the large crowd could make out what was being said. Later, federal officials claimed that the shouted words were what were called a “final warning” to the protestors to “lay down your guns, now, or be fired upon”.
Within seconds of the unintelligible words, shots rang out. At first sporadic shots, then extended volleys of gunshots were heard across the Park. Analysis of audio recordings later indicated that over three hundred shots, possibly more, with some overlapping shots, were fired in a 75 second period. The result, the immediate result, was pure panic. The gun owners were, for the most part, trained and quite knowledgeable about what the shots they were hearing meant, though all marchers had been told not to load or bring any ammunition. Most immediately knew that they were being fired on. When hundreds tried to escape, but couldn’t, and hundreds of others tried to fall to the ground to avoid being shot, chaos and panic ensued. In the ensuing melee, many marchers were trampled and severely injured. Some who fell to the ground were trampled by others who meant to do no harm, but who feared for their lives and for those of their family members. The death toll from gunshot wounds came to one hundred and seven, including eight children. The number injured who were treated for their injuries at local hospitals was not released to the media.
