The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old August 20, 2009, 09:31 AM   #276
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,890
Originally posted by JohnKSa
Quote:
Quote:
Exactly, we need to represent private use of firearms is a positive light. Perhaps through the public seeing responsible citizens openly carrying at high profile events such as Presidential Town Halls without the death and destruction that the anti's always predict, we can do this.

I'm astounded at the disconnect.

The overwhelming majority of the population of the U.S. (including gun owners) does not believe openly carrying firearms at high profile events such as Presidential Town Halls represents the private use of firearms in a positive light. Not even if no one is killed or hurt.

It's upsetting and feels "wrong" to them. What's more, if they get upset enough and stay upset long enough they will push for laws to help them feel comfortable again and that will NOT be a positive thing for gun rights.
Yes, the first knee-jerk reaction will be "Oh my god, that guy has a gun!" However, I think the goal should be not to hide our weapons out of fear that someone may be upset or feel "wrong," but rather to promote ourselves in such a way that the public can see someone open carrying and not be upset or feel "wrong." The key here, as I see it, is for everyone to be sure to conduct themselves as Kostric did in the Matthews interview. As I said before, I think that Kostric remaining calm, controlled, and relatively normal while the supposedly "impartial" journalist worked himself into a frenzy was even more powerful than the actual event itself. Really, this is a lot like the situation with concealed carry. Back when the first few states passed right-to-carry laws, people other than LEO's carrying felt "wrong" to many people and made them uncomfortable. However, when people didn't shoot each other over parking spaces and no blood ran in the streets as the anti's predicted it would, people eventually became more comfortable with the idea and more right-to-carry laws followed. Is there a certain amount of risk involved here, yes there certainly is. But I think it's a worthwhile risk as, if done right, the possible benefits outweigh the possible drawbacks.

Quote:
How is it that everyone is forgetting the fact that carrying openly to high-profile events is NOT a new thing in the U.S.? The Black Panthers have been doing it for decades. The fact that the goals may be loftier does NOT change the fact that the general public is going to lump the two movements together because of the similar modus operandus.
The situation with the Black Panthers is not really the same. The Panthers were an organization with a history of violence and had also made implicit threats of violence. I think the problem with OC and the Panthers was not so much that weapons were being openly carried, but that the Black Panthers were doing it for the express purpose of intimidation. Basically, I don't think that the same thing will necessarrily happen because the California OC laws were aimed more at the Black Panthers themselves than open carry in general.

Originally posted by Antipitas
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by divemedic
A law abiding, armed citizen, standing on the sidewalk not harming anyone, counteracts that negative image.

That's a far cry from doing the same at a Town Hall meeting. Especially with signs inciting the overthrow of the Government. And yes! that is exactly how Susie Soccermom views it.
I think a bit much is being made out of the sign Kostric held. First of all, everyone assumes that he was advocating an overthrow of the government when that may not have been the case at all. Perhaps he was suggesting that he was willing to have his own blood spilled as a patriot should someone act violently agains him for exercising his 1A rights. Perhaps he meant that he was willing to spill the blood of tyrants or agents of tyrants such as the thug that accosted him whould they try to suppress his free speech. We don't really know as Matthews never really let him explain, but the point is his sign, which is not even a direct quote, can be taken many ways. As far as how Susie Soccermom views it, honestly I kind of doubt that many people are familiar enough with the works of Jefferson to get much meaning from it at all. The point I'm trying to make is that while it probably wasn't the best choice of a sign to hold, I think it's a relatively minor issue.

Quote:
By all means, openly carry in your local environments. Get like minded folks to do the same. Have "Open Carry" picnics at your local parks. Conduct open air firearms safety clinics.

It doesn't start at the National level. It starts right here, right now, in your own home towns.
I would argue that we've already done that. While this has been useful in creating a grassroots base, unfortunately it has gone mostly ignored by the mainstream media. Basically, the grassroots activities you suggest are the first step which has already been taken. Now, it is time to bring the issue to national attention. While OC at a Presidential event may be rather "shocking" or "in your face," unfortunately we need a bit of shock value to avoid being ignored.
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 09:35 AM   #277
CortJestir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Southern CT
Posts: 1,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZAK
If you want to change your world, maybe start out with your own little corner. Yeah, grass roots education. Get enough of your locals, especially the younger generation, to be aware of the 2nd Amendment (And the rest of our founding father's documents), and see and "feel" that it really is O.K. to see someone OCing in your "neighborhood", guns can put food on the dinner table, and also are a great form of discipline and recreation punching paper, and we are rolling down the right road.
and

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antipitas
Quit relying upon the MSM to tell your story!...<snip>It doesn't start at the National level. It starts right here, right now, in your own home towns.
Hear! Hear! If all you're doing that's related to firearms is going to the range, reloading, buying guns, and hanging out here, then I'm afraid our 2A right will further be trampled into dust. Might as well take the BoR, clip it to the target holder, and send it down range.

Again, this is much bigger than the shock factor. I, for one, am glad these two fellas did what they did - if only to spark the discussion and motivate some of us. It may have been foolish to some in the short-term, but these events and this debate reinforces the fact that we all need to be more active in changing the culture and attitude of this country around the second amendment. Then maybe, just maybe, seeing a rifle or gun openly carried anywhere won't be such a "big deal". Heck, maybe you won't even need to carry openly at a presidential town hall to make a point!

BTW, I'm not singling anyone out with this post...just preaching to the "choir".

BTW2, you can start by attending an Appleseed and becoming an instructor [/shameless plug]
__________________
"They have men amongst them who know very well what they are about..."
- Lord Hugh Percy, on the events of April 19, 1775
Do you know what you're about? Find out at an Appleseed near you.
CortJestir is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 09:49 AM   #278
Homerboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,016
Never has the phrase "shooting yourself in the foot" been more appropriate. The people who post on these forums are a small percentage of gun owners, and an even smaller percentage of American's. The fact is that people ARE alarmed at a person walking around with an AR over his shoulder (or any other gun visibily displayed, when it's ONLY purpose is to make a statement). Nobody would be upset if the news was covering the opening of duck season and everyone had a rifle slung over their shoulder because it is appropriate for the time and place.

And not EVERY gun owner is entirely mentally stable. There's a guy I see at my range all the time. He's a Vietnam vet. He screams obscenities at the targets as he's shooting them, like "take that you slant eyed bastards", and "two to the chest, one to the head! See you in hell Charlie", etc. he refuses to wear eye and ear protection because "I'm not going to put them on when i have to light someone up for real!". The guy is nuts. I can see him standing at one of these rallies with his M1 carbine over his shoulder.

This is going to explode in our faces. People like this are no friends of mine. Every one of my friends has asked me how I feel about this guy and if I would take my AR to a rally. The answer is a resounding NO.

I think these people are idiots. The "Tree of liberty" sign is just icing on the cake. That, along with the presence of the gun, worn with maximum Rambo fashion in the mall ninja thigh rig, clearly stated what he meant to say. Of course he's not going to admit to that when he's interviewed.

Last edited by Homerboy; August 20, 2009 at 10:07 AM.
Homerboy is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 10:31 AM   #279
ZeSpectre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
Washington Post: "Leave the guns at home"

Leave the guns at home

Quote:
By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Thursday, August 20, 2009

Try a thought experiment: What would conservatives have said if a group of loud, scruffy leftists had brought guns to the public events of Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush?

How would our friends on the right have reacted to someone at a Reagan or a Bush speech carrying a sign that read: "It is time to water the tree of liberty"? That would be a reference to Thomas Jefferson's declaration that the tree "must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Pardon me, but I don't think conservatives would have spoken out in defense of the right of every American Marxist to bear arms or to shed the blood of tyrants.

In fact, the Bush folks didn't like any dissent at all. Recall the 2004 incident in which a distraught mother whose son was killed in Iraq was arrested for protesting at a rally in New Jersey for first lady Laura Bush. The detained woman wasn't even armed. Maybe if she had been carrying, the gun lobby would have defended her.

The Obama White House purports to be open to the idea of guns outside the president's appearances. "There are laws that govern firearms that are done state or locally," Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, said on Tuesday. "Those laws don't change when the president comes to your state or locality."

Gibbs made you think of the old line about the liberal who is so open-minded he can't even take his own side in an argument.

What needs to be addressed is not the legal question but the message that the gun-toters are sending.

This is not about the politics of populism. It's about the politics of the jackboot. It's not about an opposition that has every right to free expression. It's about an angry minority engaging in intimidation backed by the threat of violence.

There is a philosophical issue here that gets buried under the fear that so many politicians and media-types have of seeming to be out of touch with the so-called American heartland.

The simple fact is that an armed citizenry is not the basis for our freedoms. Our freedoms rest on a moral consensus, enshrined in law, that in a democratic republic we work out our differences through reasoned, and sometimes raucous, argument. Free elections and open debate are not rooted in violence or the threat of violence. They are precisely the alternative to violence, and guns have no place in them.

On the contrary, violence and the threat of violence have always been used by those who wanted to bypass democratic procedures and the rule of law. Lynching was the act of those who refused to let the legal system do its work. Guns were used on election days in the Deep South during and after Reconstruction to intimidate black voters and take control of state governments.

Yes, I have raised the racial issue, and it is profoundly troubling that firearms should begin to appear with some frequency at a president's public events only now, when the president is black. Race is not the only thing at stake here, and I have no knowledge of the personal motivations of those carrying the weapons. But our country has a tortured history on these questions, and we need to be honest about it. Those with the guns should know what memories they are stirring.

And will someone please tell the armed demonstrators how foolish and lawless they make our country look in the eyes of so much of the world? Are we not the country that urges other nations to see the merits of the ballot over the bullet?

All this is taking place as the country debates the president's health-care proposal. There is much that is disturbing in that discussion. Shouting down speakers is never a good thing, and many lies are being told about the contents of the health-care bills. The lies should be confronted, but freedom involves a lot of commotion and an open contest of ideas, even when some of the parties say things that aren't true and act in less than civil ways.

Yet if we can't draw the line at the threat of violence, democracy begins to disintegrate. Power, not reason, becomes the stuff of political life. Will some group of responsible conservatives, preferably life members of the NRA, have the decency to urge their followers to leave their guns at home when they go out to protest the president? Is that too much to ask?

ejdionne@washpost.com

I hardly know where to start with this one, especially since the people he's screaming about came peacefully, participated peacefully, and left peacefully, in SPITE of repeated attacks ranging from attempts at physical intimidation to an outright foam-mouthed assault by Chris Matthews on his tv show.
__________________
"The dogs may bark but the caravan moves on"
ZeSpectre is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 10:40 AM   #280
Yellowfin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2007
Location: West Upstate NY
Posts: 2,303
More references to the "gun lobby." Now maybe I'm going to the wrong ones, but I've never been to a single hotel or bed and breakfast that had a gun lobby. Or maybe it's a lobster that has pistol shaped claws, which I have also never seen.
__________________
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus http://www.concealedcampus.org
New York gun owners unite! Join now! http://www.nyshooters.net
May Issue is the new Separate but Equal.
Yellowfin is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 10:44 AM   #281
Fox1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Posts: 297
I'm really impressed by the race card... especially since the nicely dressed gentleman carrying the slung AR, who was shown so prominently on all of the news sites was, in fact, a black man.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/...protest.rifle/

Last edited by Fox1; August 20, 2009 at 10:45 AM. Reason: ETA: Link
Fox1 is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 10:49 AM   #282
Yellowfin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2007
Location: West Upstate NY
Posts: 2,303
Interesting that race is brought up, as basically what the antis do to us is segregation. "Keep it at home" as to say "Keep away from us, we don't want that around." "What works in Wyoming doesn't work in New York/Chicago/California"...heard that one? They want "separate but equal."
__________________
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus http://www.concealedcampus.org
New York gun owners unite! Join now! http://www.nyshooters.net
May Issue is the new Separate but Equal.
Yellowfin is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 11:03 AM   #283
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,501
While I believe that the protesters at the event are supporting a position I agree with, IMHO their methods are tasteless and overwrought, and their actions are bound to bring strong negative attention to our cause. The administration's quiet acquiescence brings to mind the old political adage: When your opponent is committing political suicide, do not get in his/her way.

I would also support establishing a "No Loaded Firearms" zone around the President- say, a radius of a 1,500' or so. A sovereign nation has an obvious interest in protecting the safety of its chief executive, and such a zone would obviously be a "sensitive area" as defined in D.C. vs. Heller, and would therefore be constitutional.

That said, I strongly, strongly disagree with the overall sentiment of the Dionne editorial. The fact that the men were armed is not a "threat" per se. It may be over-the-top, but the First Amendment protects their right to make statements that another person may find outrageous or distasteful.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 11:41 AM   #284
Poseidon28
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2009
Posts: 212
Perhaps we have a dividing line. People born after 68, and those born prior?

Perhaps the experiences in those time periods create just such emotional reaction to the presence of firearms around presidents?

E.J. Dionne Jr.'s article overlooks, as do many others, including the media, that the SEIU (Who are they?) is using violence to intimidate at these meetings, and, it's not getting any press coverage.

So, now that we have a dividing line, who should I vote for for congress?
A 56 year old that says he supports the 2A, even though he's a doctor, or a 32 year old, that while he doesn't say he's 2A has been through Iraq?

Last edited by Poseidon28; August 20, 2009 at 12:15 PM.
Poseidon28 is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 12:06 PM   #285
One way or another
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 13, 2009
Posts: 4
From the Washington Post article:

Quote:
The simple fact is that an armed citizenry is not the basis for our freedoms.
I imagine this "journalist" never heard of the Revolutionary War???
One way or another is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 12:23 PM   #286
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
The journalist is EJ Dionne

And while I will avoid going into a rant here, and will try to avoid making a purely political statement, I will say that I group the Post's Dionne with Paul Krugman over at the LA Times. Read a few of their editorials, the subjects won't really matter, and I think you'll find that the editorial cited in this thread is typical of either or both of them.

I don't think I've ever read an editorial from either man that I agreed with. Considering I read David Broder, David Ignatius, and Charles Krauthammer on a regular basis, and enjoy their insights (these three are dissimilar from each other), that makes Dionne and Krugman really stand out in a bad way for me.
MLeake is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 12:28 PM   #287
OuTcAsT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,196
Quote:
The fact is that people ARE alarmed at a person walking around with an AR over his shoulder (or any other gun visibily displayed, when it's ONLY purpose is to make a statement).
Really? while that may be your opinion, it has certainly not been born out as fact.

Please go back, look at all the footage, pictures, and accounts, and show me where anyone even remotely, appeared to be alarmed at any of these events.

(Save, of course, the NYT blatherings)

The record shows that; not only were there no "Oh my gosh, he has a gun!!!" comments (other than Matthews) but even LE was well aware of all these protesters and even began to educate people about the protesters right to do so.

Quote:
People like this are no friends of mine.
So, are we to assume, from this, and some of your other comments, that you do not support any sort of freedom?
You do not seem to like people exercising their 1A rights;

Quote:
The "Tree of liberty" sign is just icing on the cake.
Nor their 2A rights;

Quote:
along with the presence of the gun, worn with maximum Rambo fashion in the mall ninja thigh rig, clearly stated what he meant to say.
And you even have a distaste for military veterans it seems;

Quote:
And not EVERY gun owner is entirely mentally stable. There's a guy I see at my range all the time. He's a Vietnam vet.
I am curious, you obviously are interested in firearms, but I am guessing you are not involved in, nor support any "activism" of any sort, and are happy with the status quo ?

Maybe you feel you are supporting the cause by keeping your NRA membership? I am just puzzled at why you protest so loudly, over the otherwise "silent" protests of others ?

Idiots ? Morons ? Really? Or are they simply the folks who put themselves on the "front lines" to promote the activism that is necessary to guarantee your own continuing freedom to "go to the range" or "pontificate" on the internet?

Sometimes it is necessary to champion a cause, in an unusual manner, to keep it on the forefront.

And sometimes people just stand on the sidelines, and yell at the action on the field.
__________________
WITHOUT Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech. Silence Dogood

Does not morality imply the last clear chance? - WildAlaska -

Last edited by OuTcAsT; August 20, 2009 at 12:40 PM.
OuTcAsT is online now  
Old August 20, 2009, 12:39 PM   #288
Homerboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,016
Quote:
Really? while that may be your opinion, it has certainly not been born out as fact.

Please go back, look at all the footage, pictures, and accounts, and show me where anyone even remotely, appeared to be alarmed at any of these events.

(Save, of course, the NYT blatherings)

The record shows that; not only were there no "Oh my gosh, he has a gun!!!" comments (other than Matthews) but even LE was well aware of all these protesters and even began to educate people about the protesters right to do so.

Quote:
People like this are no friends of mine.

So, are we to assume, from this, and some of your other comments, that you do not support any sort of freedom?
You do not seem to like people exercising their 1A rights;


Quote:
The "Tree of liberty" sign is just icing on the cake.

Nor their 2A rights;


Quote:
along with the presence of the gun, worn with maximum Rambo fashion in the mall ninja thigh rig, clearly stated what he meant to say.

And you even have a distaste for military veterans it seems;


Quote:
And not EVERY gun owner is entirely mentally stable. There's a guy I see at my range all the time. He's a Vietnam vet.

I am curious, you obviously are interested in firearms, but I am guessing you are not involved in, nor support any "activism" of any sort, and are happy with the status quo ?
I wouldn't be nervous either if there were 10 cops around him watching him like a hawk. You want to do an experiment? Sling your AR over your shoulder and walk around in public. Let me know the reaction you get.

I support his right to own that AR. I DO NOT support his insistence to carry it in an inapproarite setting, ESPECIALLY since his SOLE reason for doing that was to make a statement and get on TV. How much you want to bet he doesn't tote that thing with him when he strolls around Arizona? And my voicing MY distate for what these guys are doing is MY right.

No distate for military veteran at all. MAXIMUN distaste for those who want to look like one. Halloween is still two months away. Mall Ninja's are clowns. Why did he choose THAT rig? And the Vietnam vet I see is nuts. No disaste for his status as a vet, just the fact that he has about 4 marbles rolling around his head.

What "activism" am I involved in? I'm an NRA member. I have a job, a family, and a house to care for. My weekends aren't spent slinging my AR over my shoulder to get my face on TV. Guns are a PART of my life. They're not my life.

Intention is what it's all about. My BS meter is PINNED when I see these clowns. They aren't "saviors" or "warriors for our cause". They're goofballs who are a detriment to our cause. There are so many better ways to get our point across, yet we put blinkey eyed dudes wearing a Cheaper than Dirt cheesey thigh rig on the altar and praise them? PLEASE!

Last edited by Homerboy; August 20, 2009 at 12:45 PM.
Homerboy is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 01:28 PM   #289
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 1,653
Quote:
By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Thursday, August 20, 2009

Try a thought experiment: What would conservatives have said if a group of loud, scruffy leftists had brought guns to the public events of Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush?

How would our friends on the right have reacted to someone at a Reagan or a Bush speech carrying a sign that read: "It is time to water the tree of liberty"? That would be a reference to Thomas Jefferson's declaration that the tree "must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Mr. Dionne very nearly makes an interesting point. Signs directly threatening or wishing a violent death on the exec were common during those administrations. They were so common, they weren't news. We just became accustomed to them.

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621
zukiphile is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 01:30 PM   #290
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Quote:
I imagine this "journalist" never heard of the Revolutionary War???
Im sure he did and in the context of his editorial he is correct.

WildheismakingapointwellbeyondhighschoolmythAlaska ™
Wildalaska is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 01:48 PM   #291
azredhawk44
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,465
Quote:
Intention is what it's all about. My BS meter is PINNED when I see these clowns. They aren't "saviors" or "warriors for our cause". They're goofballs who are a detriment to our cause.
Yeah... that Heller guy too.

Orin Hatch and the NRA were right... we were gonna lose that case anyways. 2A is a 100% defensive fight. I'm gonna go buy another box of WWB down at Walmart now that I've done my due diligence and chest-pounded on an intarwebz thread.

These types of people are the Rosa Parks of our movement, like it or not.
azredhawk44 is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 01:56 PM   #292
ZeSpectre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
Quote:
How would our friends on the right have reacted to someone at a Reagan or a Bush speech carrying a sign that read: "It is time to water the tree of liberty"?
I have photos, lots and LOTS of photos of protesters with far more graphic stuff than that from the Bush era. Especially during the "Bring Them Home Now Tour" that Cindy Sheehan and Jessie Jackson cooked up.

Compared to some of the stuff I saw there all of the current stuff looks really mild to me.
__________________
"The dogs may bark but the caravan moves on"
ZeSpectre is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 01:59 PM   #293
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Quote:
These types of people are the Rosa Parks of our movement, like it or not.
And so are the Foeti folks waving coat hangers or splashing tomato soup, the PETA folks handing out Ronny MCDonald with a knife pics to kids, the Klansmen with nooses, the Moveons with Bushchimphitler and all the rest of the political clowns with a message that galvanizes loons and no one else....

Sorry AZ, there is a difference between civil disobedience in the face of unlawful or immoral conduct like Rosa Parks and safe little shock tactics for the look at me crowd.

If those folks want to be Rosa parks, go march on San Franciscos City Hall with the guns, rather than playing mememeimsuchafeeedomfighter in gun safe Arizona.

WildtheniwillagreewithyouAlaska ™
Wildalaska is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 02:48 PM   #294
AZAK
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2008
Location: the object towards which the action of the sea is directed
Posts: 2,103
Homerboy

Quote:
Intention is what it's all about. My BS meter is PINNED when I see these clowns. They aren't "saviors" or "warriors for our cause". They're goofballs who are a detriment to our cause. There are so many better ways to get our point across, yet we put blinkey eyed dudes wearing a Cheaper than Dirt cheesey thigh rig on the altar and praise them? PLEASE!
Emphasis by AZAK

I, for one, would be interested in seeing your ideas of how to better get this point across.

Regardless of whether or not one agrees or disagrees with the actions of these two men, it seems to me that both were legally exercising a right secured to them under the 2nd Amendment; and apparently also recognized by the federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel at the events.

Thinking about the 1st Amendment, I have often heard, "I may not agree with you, but will defend your right to say it to the death." (Paraphrasing Voltaire?)

Perhaps we need a little more of that attitude when regarding others exercising their 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
__________________
The lowest paid college major/degree in this country after graduation...
Elementary Education.

Now, go figure...

Last edited by AZAK; August 20, 2009 at 02:53 PM.
AZAK is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 02:54 PM   #295
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,086
Quote:
Thinking about the 1st Amendment, I have often heard, "I may not agree with you, but will defend your right to say it to the death."
I know, with guns it seems to be exactly the opposite. "I do agree with you, but condemn you for actually exercising the right. Look at all these people you have upset."
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 02:55 PM   #296
Homerboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,016
Quote:
And so are the Foeti folks waving coat hangers or splashing tomato soup, the PETA folks handing out Ronny MCDonald with a knife pics to kids, the Klansmen with nooses, the Moveons with Bushchimphitler and all the rest of the political clowns with a message that galvanizes loons and no one else....

Sorry AZ, there is a difference between civil disobedience in the face of unlawful or immoral conduct like Rosa Parks and safe little shock tactics for the look at me crowd.

If those folks want to be Rosa parks, go march on San Franciscos City Hall with the guns, rather than playing mememeimsuchafeeedomfighter in gun safe Arizona.
Exactly. And so was Malcolm X and Khallid Muhammed, who both called upon the death of whites, and cops in particular.

Quote:
These types of people are the Rosa Parks of our movement, like it or not.
PLEASE! Rosa Parks took a stand KNOWING she would be arrested and possibly killed. These guys stand outside KNOWING they are safe from arrest or prosecution. Comapring these guys to Rosa PArks is like comparing a champion paintball player to a Medal of Honor winner!

Last edited by Homerboy; August 20, 2009 at 03:04 PM.
Homerboy is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 02:57 PM   #297
ninjatoth
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2009
Location: sanford,mi
Posts: 590
I think the situation where a dozen people had rifles was a bad way to go about it,semi auto rifles are pretty offensive.The event where the man had a pistol on his leg was a better way to do it.Not in the hand and being a defensive weapon
ninjatoth is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 03:00 PM   #298
ninjatoth
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2009
Location: sanford,mi
Posts: 590
I personally would only carry a gun in an appropriate area that I see socially correct.I would not open carry a handgun exept for anywhere I would carry a rifle,such as a firing range or the woods
ninjatoth is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 03:01 PM   #299
Homerboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,016
Quote:
I, for one, would be interested in seeing your ideas of how to better get this point across.

Regardless of whether or not one agrees or disagrees with the actions of these two men, it seems to me that both were legally exercising a right secured to them under the 2nd Amendment; and apparently also recognized by the federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel at the events.

Thinking about the 1st Amendment, I have often heard, "I may not agree with you, but will defend your right to say it to the death." (Paraphrasing Voltaire?)

Perhaps we need a little more of that attitude when regarding others exercising their 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
Sure. The Million Gun March that I have been hearing about for years.

Peaceful demonstrations by gun owners outside courthouses where recidivist felons using guns in their crimes are released daily (or outside prisons where parole board hearing of the same are occuring).

Most importantly, appointing spokesmen (or women) who don't give the willies to the rest of John Q Public. How about a Ivy League grad, captain of industry, politician, etc?

Sure isn't some dude with an AR (don't you LOVE how the media continues to say ASSAULT RIFLE, even though it isn't? How about somebody with clout holding a press conference refuting THAT misnomer? My brother looked at my AR once and said "why do you have a MACHINE GUN?")

Sending Elmer Fudd to be our representaive sure doesn't cut it.
Homerboy is offline  
Old August 20, 2009, 03:01 PM   #300
miboso
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2007
Location: Real northern California
Posts: 504
Quote:
In most states, we never see a civilian walking around with a sidearm. As such, they are going to attract attention and intimidate those around them just by their presence.
Then perhaps there should be much more open carrying by "civilians" until
Quote:
It is something we are very used to.
__________________
David
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of These United States of America, and to the Republic which it defines.
miboso is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.17164 seconds with 7 queries