Mary Miller ran publicly unopposed, the only opponent couldn’t afford to advertise much, and many other offices are the same. So for the vote to change anything we’d also need candidates. Calling a few politicians is a good idea as well.

I figured it was just a thought exercise. That’s why I mentioned anything would have to be organized in order to happen - definitely no organization now only postulation.

You’d also want to be somewhere publicly visible or no one knows it happened and many of those places are out of the public eye. So I’d say an office or HQ would be a better idea.

You’d need to be on the lookout for bad actors, organize, protect your eyes and breathing, bring milk in plastic bottles, bring an umbrella, don’t take digital devices, make signs, make some of those construction saw horses to stand behind maybe at most. Thats the farthest risk can be reduced.

It’s nonviolent protest or wait to see what stands and both have risks. Whichever choice each individual makes they have to accept the risks inherent in the choice and prepare for those possible outcomes - that’s all that can be done.

I’m not saying that don’t nothing is without risk or not to act at all due to risk. I said to be realistic and prepared for those risks. Have things in order if you get injured or arrested. Know your rights. Don’t take digital devices with you and etc.

The umbrella shield wall has been commonly employed in protests the last few years and can be easily tossed to prove no threat. If you use barricades you’d want like construction site esque things made of pallets. Even empty vehicles can be rigged to harm so they’d be seen as a threat.

Any protest comes at great risk right now. Any reason to declare martial law would be welcomed by what we fear. Anyone should be very realistic about the risk of loss of life or disability or prison. You’d want to wrap your face, protect your eyes, and bring umbrellas to implement a shield wall.

I’ve witnessed a lot in this life and I have deep sympathy that you have as well. I’m talking about optics leading to physical harm, not arrest, or the risk of charges coming down. Force, up to deadly force, can be used if officals feel threatened - whether or not they truly are.

If there’s no one insidel then no one can direct it to be more than that and that might improve odds. I’m not a lawyer for the law parts but physical safety odds may improve some.

It’d possibly make it safer but also could escalate it as it could be argued a truck or car is a potential weapon

In many states it’s already legal to run over protestors impeding traffic/passage. They’d also likely send agitators to make it look like it stopped being peaceful to justify further response. Anyone would need to be prepared to face that if making that decision.