Tough Question...

A large number of bloggers out there have made mention of the kerfluffle in DC wherein several hundred SEIU thugs stormed the private residence of a Bank of America executive, shouting slogans and otherwise trampling all over a man's castle in some bizarre attempt at intimidation. He wasn't home; only his fourteen year old son was there to witness the mob assault on his family's home.

Now, granted, this was Washington DC where it's highly unlikely that a private residence would have a personal firearm - perhaps that's why the protestors were so bold. Try a stunt like that in, say, neighboring Virginia, and they'd be very likely to have taken fire for such an assault. Look at the videos. Check out the pictures. There was some 500 angry people shouting at this house in some kafka-esque display of impotent rage; this could very easily have turned very ugly.

The media has, once again, been eerily silent on this; only the fact that a journalist lives across the street from the residence in question resulted in coverage. Nina Easton happened to be home at the time and witnessed the thuggery live and direct; who can say if we would even know this happened - save through the SEIU filter - had she not captured the event for posterity. No wonder Øbama doesn't like the rise of iPods and blogs...

It raises a fundamental question, though, for those of us in the 2A community. At what point in a protest such as this are within our rights to light these bastards up? Most states will prosecute the use of deadly force if employed to stop property damage/theft; however it's an easy argument that an angry mob constitutes far more than a threat to one's property. I've got a son not much younger than the young man in that house; if I were to arrive at my home to find a mob outside frightening the bejeezus out of him, very bad things would happen.

This is a frightening series of events on many levels. It represents true democracy - mob rule - in that this group of goons made a concerted effort to intimidate, harass, and otherwise physically threaten someone simply on the basis of the job they perform. It's a chilling glimpse into the future where a protected class - in this case a labor union - is allowed unchecked aggression simply because they agree with the cause. There are reports that DC police accompanied the protestors - if that is the case, every single officer who was there, along with the supervisors who authorized it, should be fired and prosecuted for aiding and abetting criminal action (trespass, at the very least).

If this is the direction they choose, it will lead to bloodshed. At some point there will be another "protest" like this one where someone panics and cranks some 00 buck into the crowd. Or maybe they'll just pick the wrong house and wind up on the receiving end of 30 rounds of .223 Remington. Hell, maybe they'll get real stupid, protest Dick Cheney's house, and wind up full of birdshot... I cannot see this sort of tactic going unchallenged. Not in the America I know, where people take a dim view indeed of mobs storming private houses.

"Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here"

That is all.