Target Audience/ Success Criteria:
This was originally a response to someone who identifies themselves as a 2A advocate, but was skeptical about the “restore the constitution” rally concept.
Target audience is, in order of priority,
1) The real constitutionalists (especially those who acknowledge that the Constitution is not being followed, those who are fed up with the Supreme Court distorting the English language to expand the meaning of such things as “interstate commerce” “public use” “general welfare” so as to allow for virtually limitless expansion of the federal government.)
2) Second Amendment advocates who acknowledge 2A as a bullwark against tyranny in government (of this group, especially those who take the first part of 2A, “a well regulated militia being neccessary for the security of a free state,” seriously and don’t just dwell on the “right of the people.” I’m not trying to focus my message on the “it’s just about my guns for personal protection” crowd at this priority level. But I am saying that AWRM is neccessary for the security of a free state. IMO, we have no real Militia in the 2A sense and, lo and behold, surprise, surprise, we don’t have a free state. Imagine that.)
3) Law enforcement, national level security services, national level intelligence personnel (especially those who brief higher ups and non-intel “decision makers”). These people receive proffessional intelligence which would most likely not be from the MSM’s spin. As a matter of proffessionalism and practicality, these people would make an effort to know what our demonstration was really about through the course of their official duties. No intel type would brief his superior based purely on MSNBC’s coverage. Our reason for the rally would have to get through to this target audience; it’s their job to get their intel as accurate as possible. So with this audience, I’m not so concerned with media spin.
4) Higher government officials. Like I said, they get good intel, most of the time. At least better than the general public through the MSM. Who knows, maybe one of them will accept an invite to attend? Probably not, though.
5) Finally, the media and the general public. I understand that the MSM will attempt to distort much of our message. I don’t claim any media expertise. But I do think that some of our message will get through. There is Fox News, and there is hope that we might, just might, see a “restore the constitution” sign or at least hear some mention of the constitution needing resotration. Did you see the CNN piece on the Michigan militia? CNN at least gave the “patriots or extremists” a chance to talk, and I heard one of them say the words “it’s not being followed” in regards to the constitution. You see, HIS message got through. I saw it. Now, he’s not trying to win votes or court majority opinion, but, by God, his message got through, at least to me. I’m sure I’m not the only constitutionalist who saw that and said “that so-called extremist has a point.” Which brings me back to my #1 priority audience, the likeminded, a small but determined minority. Perhaps as small as 3%. Although some of the message will be distorted, the simple fact that X amount of legally armed civilians rallied just outside DC will be put out by the MSM. This is almost a case of “the medium is the message” or “a picture speaks a thousand words.” The simple fact that we’re out there should serve to “rally the troops” so to speak, in terms of getting the “small but determined minority” the “3%” to come out if there needs to be a second “Restore the Constitution” rally. If we can show the small but determined minority that, yes, it can in fact be done (even if the MSM doesn’t like it too much or distorts the message), then the prospects of a bigger, second RTC rally, or multiple state and local level rallies would be more likely.
At least increasing our ability to hold a bigger RTC event in the future would be a major guage of success.
How would I quantify that when I got back to GA? I’d look at internet traffic on hard core constitutionalist/ 2A/ libertarian websites and reports from others regarding the “3%’s” enthusiasm for the event and the “small but determined minority”‘s appetite for coming out for a second RTC rally. If after-action reports from fellow participants, internet traffic, and other communications were to indicate that our capabilities are improved, that at least the PROSPECT of holding a second, bigger RTC rally had increased, then I will judge the first RTC rally to be a success. And remember, this isn’t about Gravelly Point or any specific location. It’s about gathering as close to DC as possible, wherever that line may be. Wherever that line is, I’d like to see as many Patriots as possible willing to walk right up to it.
So far as “data points,” I can’t really give you a number. I have no control over how many attend. Maybe a handful, maybe a good deal more. But whatever the number, it will demonstrate to the fence sitters and the doubters that at least it can in fact be done. This, I think, will increase our ability to hold a second RTC rally. Now, I’m not neccessarily suggesting I’m actually planning a second rally just yet, but I would feel better at least knowing that our capability to hold a second, bigger rally was there
I understand the risks involved, believe me. And I’m not telling you that I can guarantee “success.” But there is no reward without risk, and the sorry state of our individual liberties forces such bold action. Sure, there’s a chance of unsuccess, meaning “little prospect for a second, bigger rally.” Something could happen to cause that outcome. But what I’m doing and the reasons I’m doing it are worth the risk of “unsuccess.”