Drugs Gun Fetishists Guns

Pro-Gun Fetishist Adam Kokesh Charged For Possession of Shrooms With Guns


Remember the pro-gun fetishist who was organizing an armed march on Washington D.C.? His penis-extension march was ultimately canceled, but he went on to film himself brandishing and loading a weapon in Freedom Plaza recently and, since he was the only one who drank the funny Koolaid, only he was arrested.

U.S. Park Police Lt. Pamela Smith said her agency executed a search warrant at Kokesh’s home in Herndon about 7:45 p.m. Tuesday, looking for a weapon. The park police are the federal agency responsible for policing Freedom Plaza, the concrete park a few blocks from the White House where — in a video posted to YouTube on July 4 — Kokesh appears to load a shotgun in violation of D.C. gun laws.

But that’s not all.

Apparently his charges also include the possession of hallucinogenic Shrooms.

Police searched the Northern Virginia home of activist Adam Kokesh Tuesday evening and took him into custody on a charge of being in possession of hallucinogenic mushrooms while also having a gun, authorities said.

The charges he could have been facing for simply carrying a loaded weapon in D.C. may have been minimal. The charges for possessing mushrooms while carrying, however, are probably far greater.

I don’t necessarily agree with harsh sentencing for non-violent offenses, however I believe I could make an exception for a man who filmed himself in a public location loading a shotgun and threatening armed revolution. The combination of his faux bravado, his readily-available arsenal, and hallucinogenic drugs could be lethal to others.

These are all the hallmarks of a responsible gun owner of course.

If you’re really curious, you can watch the video of his ‘roid-rage chest pumping here.

  • AJ Slemmer

    …and yet another own-goal from Team Wingnut!

  • mrbrink

    I knew that guy had to be tripping.

  • Robo

    Roid rage chest pumping. Hah. If he’d have displayed his right to read a book, or speak or practice his religion. But displaying the right that ultimately protects and enables defense of the others is somehow rage. What a joke most Americans are now. Is there any right you’d lay down your life for?

    • PinkamenaPanic

      Yeah, his right to be a scared little boy hiding behind his murder-toys because he’s afraid of the browns is protecting SO much these days.

      Ask a gunshot victim’s family who’s being “protected”.


      • Robo

        Awww the dick argument. Aren’t you cute. Guns save so many lives each year it’s ridiculous. Haven’t you read the study Obama ordered of the CDC? Most gun shot victims have either self inflicted, are gang members or weren’t able to defend themselves because of idiotic gun control.

        • Treading_Water

          About 32ooo gun related deaths a year, give or take. 3 an hour. 1 every 20 minutes. Just think about how much worse it would be if there were real gun safety legislation in place. Like in Australia, which passed stringent gun safety laws. Oh yeah, the per capita gun death rate in Australia is 1/10 the rate as in the U.S. Okay, bad example. What about Japan or the UK, where private gun ownership is rare, they should have people dying in the streets from gang members and home invasions since they can’t easily own weapons or protect themselves. Oops, the death rate in the U.S. from guns is about 166 times higher than in Japan and 40 times higher than in the UK. Sadly, our gun death rate is only exceeded by such safe havens as Mexico, South Africa, and Columbia.

          What was your point again?

          • Robo

            First off what’s your source for the 32,000 figure. I’ve read closer to 10,000. Considering 60% are suicide you figure 4,000. Not to bad for a country with 300+million and probably just as many guns. Not to mention the study Obama recently ordered the CDC to produce ended up proving what every peaceable gun owner knows, guns in the hands of good people=less crime. http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/2013/07/08/front-sights-monday-blog-obama-shoots-himself-in-foot/, http://equalforce.net/EqualForce2/UNDERREPORTED_NEWS_OF_SELF_DEFENSE_THROUGHOUT_AMERICA.html
            As someone who’s had the experience of being approached by four hoodlums and dispatching them by merely displaying a gun I know how well they work as a deterrent to violent crime.

          • Treading_Water

            Instead of taking your talking points from obviously biased blogs, how about going directly to the report that the blog is lying about. First

            In 2010, incidents in the U.S. involving firearms injured or killed more than 105,000 Americans, of which there were twice as many nonfatal firearm-related injuries (73505) than deaths.”

            That actually adds up to about 31495, so I was off by about 505.

            Most of the rest of the “conclusions” that Ignatius Piazza claims are offset by the opposite conclusion from a different report, and the disclaimer that:

            Additional research is needed to weigh the competing risks and protective benefits that may accompany gun ownership in different communities

            The report that this guy is selectively quoting is actually a research agenda, and not the results of that research. This paper was written to indicate directions of research and questions that they would be researching, and the final paragraph of the conclusion begins thus:

            The research agenda proposed in this report is intended as an initial, not a conclusive or all-encompassing set of questions critical to developing the most effective policies to reduce the occurrence and impact of firearm-related violence in the United States

            But that would involve reading beyond the obviously biased and dishonest author of Front Sights blog.

          • Robo

            Bias in the cause of liberty and natural rights is no vice. I’d also highly recommend, Shooting Blanks: Facts don’t matter to the gun ban crowd. Also keep in mind that included in those figures are incidents of police and citizens using their firearms to protect life and limb, which in and of itself would require the injury or death of perpetrators. Just because someone has an opinion about something does not mean that they’re presenting biased facts. This is a false thought process regarding arguments, discussion and journalism. http://books.google.com/books/about/Shooting_Blanks.html?id=hQfiygAACAAJ

          • Treading_Water

            So lying is fine as long as you believe you’re right? I can see that there’s no use trying to debate you.

          • Robo

            Does having a bias imply that someone is likely to lie? My bias is towards liberty, justice, freedom, individual and natural rights and against tyranny, statism, etc. Does that give you the idea that I make a point of lying? I’m more Libertarian than anything else. I don’t believe in the initiation of force. You might be surprised by how much we agreed on.

          • Robo

            And by the way, you may want to do some more research about what happened after gun control was implemented in the UK. Gun crimes went down but every other violent crime skyrocketed because good peaceable people were turned into victims. They want their guns back. As with here it was the death of a thousand cuts to steal their natural right to bear arms. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuHgql_PADM

          • Treading_Water

            The same week that 1 man with a gun killed 27 people in the Sandy Hook massacre, another man in China with a knife injured 22. I’ll take 22 injuries over 27 deaths any day.

          • Robo

            Now just imagine if one of those teachers had a concealed carry permit and training how much less the loss of life would’ve been. Guns in the hands of peaceable people stop violent crime. I guarantee had I been there that knuckle head, satanist psycho wouldn’t have gotten off one shot.

    • Brian Vande-Stouwe

      There are many things I would lay my life down for. None of them are political or have anything to do with the country that I happened to be born in. My wife and I will start over somewhere else before we go down in flames for anyone or anything. You only get one life and I intend to live mine to the fullest of my ability. What is worth your life? What right would you lay your life down for?

      • Robo

        Your right to free speech? Your right to practice the religion you choose? To freely associate and assemble? Your right to keep and bear arms? Your right to protect your family and the ones you love? There are so many natural rights I’m not willing to give up without a fight.

        • Treading_Water

          Your right to bear arms is contingent upon your membership in a “well-regulated militia” Why do you hate the 2nd amendment?

          • Robo

            The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It’s an individual right and has been ruled such by the Supreme Court. Well regulated militia included all able bodied males who trained with their weapons. Like most laws that were biased towards men this obviously extends to women. Of course this was never in questions as women handled firearms all the time. I only hate your flawed understanding of the 2nd amendment. I can put two rounds center mass and one in the ocular cranial cavity in 1.5 seconds from the holster, pretty sure I qualify. What else ya got?

          • Treading_Water

            Why do you guys always edit out half of the second amendment?

          • Robo

            Because it doesn’t cancel out the first, most important, half. Every other of the first 8 or 9 has to do with individual rights and how the fedgov can’t violate them. They didn’t just throw in the 2nd that you mistakenly believe only applies to armies.

          • mrbrink

            It doesn’t cancel it out, but it changes the context you’re trying to conveniently forget about. “A well-regulated militia” is a pretty big caveat for “shall not be infringed.”

            The bill of rights doesn’t mention the regulation of free speech, or religion, or what have you, but it does specifically state that your right to bear arms comes with a catch, or regulatory oversight.

          • Robo

            “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” It’s mind boggling that some don’t understand the context. Or what militias are. Militias weren’t controlled by the government. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. The first 9 amendments all deal with individual rights. The 10th states that the specific powers not granted to the fedgov are reserved to the states and the people. Even your comment about regulation is flawed if you study what “well regulated” meant at that time. If you’ll do some basic research into the mindset of the men who put together the document it becomes quite self evident.

          • mrbrink

            That’s interesting because the “militias” were controlled by white landholders profiteering from their slave states who were also fearful of losing their grip and disproportionate control over the rights and liberty of others– using guns as a show of force and violent coercion to preserve their innately flawed version of the proper order of things. Or, what you would call in colonial times, “well-regulated.”

            No worries, man. Today it means the same thing.

            Whether it’s gangbangers in Chicago terrorizing communities, or right wing conservative gun zealots terrorizing congress, as a country we’re at the mercy, your ignorant mercy, of the tyranny of 300 million guns in America.

            I’m also pretty sure that the mindset of the ‘men’ who put that amendment together also had more faith in your ability, in your collective enlightenment— to not be led around by modern day carpetbaggers and misery profiteers who are casting a wide net to catch the minnows like you.

            300 million guns in the hands of felons and criminals aren’t the result of the preservation of liberty. It’s the maniacal theft of individual liberty in the same way an inpatient with a severe personality disorder breaks into the locked medication supply.

            The gun epidemic in America is the result of an obsessive sapping and ignorant understanding of original intent, as well as the power that rests in the palm of the American people to amend every last word of it.

            And for the record, the Ninth amendment is the unalienable pie in the face of Tenther zealots who think that they have the right to run roughshod over peoples’ actual rights and protections.

          • Robo

            Was wondering when you’d bring landowners and slaves into it as if that had some relevance. It’s ok, the south also wanted to use “gun control” to keep guns out of the hands of the slaves. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0226493660/ref=nosim/?tag=johnrlotttrip-20

          • mrbrink

            I’m not clicking your link. There’s just some things I don’t do.

            Guns in the hands of rebellious imbeciles are today what they were yesterday– a tool for the violent suppression of majority consent.

            It’s not the government with guns that is proving to be America’s tyrannical enemies of liberty, quite the contrary– It’s the 300 million guns in the hands of right wing community dis-organizers and urban terrorists you continue to empower unchecked.

          • Robo

            Majority rule (democracy) is two wolves and a sheep arging over what’s for dinner. A republic is a well armed sheep contesting the vote. The majority is often wrong, as in nazi germany when they decided to kill 6 million and in the ussr where the killed upward of 20 million. Individual rights cannot be trampled by the foolish majority and those of us who still believe in natural rights and liberty are willing to lay down our lives to prove it. I’d suggest googling democide to figure out the real enemy and who really uses guns to kill the most. Majority consent, what a laugh.

          • mrbrink


            That’s majority consent.

  • Jane Phillips

    Once again, Libertarians are Republicans for the right to have drugs but without a uterus and without too much melanin in their skin.

  • Christopher Foxx

    Kokesh and his ilk have a pathological need to see themselves as victims. I have no problem giving them a legitimate reason to feel that way.

  • BeachD1

    Score two fer the TP crowd. Gun loaded, might just put some mushrooms inna bag, no need to go tromp in a cow pasture…just get some in the veggie aisle…give the hippies another smear …DONE~
    Total fail, the guy is a loser ala a kindred to Zimmerboy in Floriduuuh…not part of a well regulated millitia, lie a lot…yet he his message to the clones got out. We think they played too many games , avoided service, no goals nor real action. Aaaarrrgggghhh let’s end this going forward.

  • PostSurgeOperative

    I lifted this comment posted by user ‘ph7’ from the article on this story in the Atlantic Wire; it is too good not to share:

    “Gun Nuts Paradox:

    Trayvon Martin smoked marijuana, so he clearly was a drugged-out aggressor, requiring George Zimmerman to stand his ground and fire into the teenager’s heart, killing him. After all, guns are needed to protect ourselves from drugged-out crazies.

    Adam Kokesh is just a patriot standing up for gun rights. His drug use is totally irrelevant, and the mention of his use of illegal drugs is just an unconscionable attempt to smear him.”

    • Christopher Foxx

      The terrible thing is, a large percentage of Americans would respond “Yeah, that’s right. So what’s your point?”

    • JohnnyP

      Where to begin…. Well, the amount of marijuana metabolites that were in his system did not even cross a nationally recognized (as in D.O.T. or NIDA) ‘positive’ test threshold. Metabolites are metabolized by-products of marijuana, which could have been in his system for days. I am involved in drug testing and I never come across a situation where the presence of marijuana metabolites were a direct correlation to one’s criminal behavior. I’ve seen lawyers and insurance companies try, but they fail every time because they have no peer-reviewed scientific data to validate their assertions. The amount of metabolites were so minute, it was purely worthless for the defense and they knew it.

  • blackdaug

    Well…I guess for shrooms to open up your mind…you have to have a mind to open in the first place.

    • Christopher Foxx

      “Now there’s a man with an open mind. You can feel the draft from here.”
      – Groucho