Constitutional Security Force Defends Kessler

If the comments section of Abreu Report is any indication, then it appears that Chief Kessler is a polarizing figure with not only detractors, but also a massive base of support. My previous article -- DHS Prepares for Confrontation Against Pennsylvania Militia -- was picked up by elements in the independent media, before Russia Today also reported what I had reported. There was a lot of disagreement as to whether plans had actually been drawn up, but make no mistake of it: plans are how government works.
Some members of the Constitutional Security Force -- the group inspired by Kessler -- denounced my piece as a "paid attempt to scare the sheep," and Russia Today was labeled as inaccurate. The simple, undeniable matter is that a lot of people are scared of Kessler. I was on the Yale Pistol team and was often seen fraternizing with the Party of the Right -- the libertarian wing of the Yale Political Union -- so I'm used to individuals like Kessler. I don't find him scary, and the people who socialize with him don't find him scary. However, it's fair to say that a lot of liberals at Yale would be terrified of a guy who makes an angry video where he discharges a machine gun. I had a close friend too afraid to even venture into Yankee stadium during daylight simply because it was in the Bronx, while another refused to go to the Rite Aid behind the gym in New Haven because there is an African-American barbershop and a hair salon in that largely desolate street. Is it acceptable that the chief of police is terrifying to the so-called liberals?
While I'm personally a libertarian and see the right/left paradigm in America as just two arms of the same beast, a lot of the comments on Abreu Report accused my piece of being far left. However, there is nothing far left about opposition to cavity searches for low-level offenses or for politically-motivated reasons. While the Supreme Court decided that strip-searches are legal for any inmate brought into a facility for any reason in order to ensure safety, Chief Kessler has not gone out of his way to fight this tyrannical usurpation against the people on the part of the corporate-activists sitting on the bench. If Kessler were to release a video where he denounced any unjust or unusual usurpation against the body, then perhaps I would take him more seriously as an anti-tyrant.
However, most of the commenters on Abreu Report even denied the fact that Kessler has a militia. Jeff Swiney wrote: "Actually, I'm from around there, Mark Kessler is a joke. He's a laughingstock. He has no 'militia,'  just a handful of old, fat, white guys whose guns are bigger than their dicks. Only the press and liberals take him seriously." Another commenter wrote: "Really? This is a laughable slander towards Chief Kessler. Yes, he is outspoken with fire for his constitutional love, and yes he has a small following of militias, but the man respects the law. "
The right to dueling shall not be infringed.
Suffice to say, the very definition of the word militia is under dispute, but there is no debate that Kessler has an armed following of non-conscripts. In a time before machine guns, their weapons would have made them a very formidable, irregular army. Technology has improved, but the body remains as frail. During the 1700s, there were restrictions on bearing arms. You couldn't, for example, walk around with a pickaxe. If our founding fathers believed that it was improper for a man to wander the streets with a pickaxe, would they have approved of weapons in a political meeting hall? No, a real man directly challenges another to a duel with a single-shot pistol. If you have a problem with a man who writes a complaint about you, you challenge him to a duel, you don't strip search him.
A lot of commenters denied the very allegation that people were prevented from coming into the town hall and speaking. It may be that no one has been physically denied entry into any meeting hall, or that they may not have been forbidden from speaking through an explicit command. However, would you feel comfortable entering an enclosed room surrounded by opponents carrying pickaxes? How about sports rifles? The very act of bringing a visible weapon into a political meeting is an act of intimidation contrary to our founding values. In an age of usurpations by every branch of government, and from every party, why does Kessler believe that tyranny is exclusively liberal? Why does he support the 2nd amendment so vehemently, while having no problem with himself abusing the 4th?