How do you all feel about this?
I feel only he can decide whether what he did was the best option or not.
Ultimately, were his aims best served? Which choice would have had the most positive effect?
For me the more important would have been exercising my right to vote, rather than carry.
Yes, he made a statement, but he paid for it by losing his chance at the ballot box, and I'm not sure how many will have noticed this gesture.
For me, it would have been simpler to go back and stow the gun in the car, or even a bag, then voting, making sure that the fact that the issue of OC had been raised and restricted by the polling station. Get the names of the officials, etc.
Then, once I'd have voted (I'd have got what I went for), I could have written a letter of complaint outlining the problem. Or better still, local press to highlight the fact I had been in the right. Then people may have taken more notice, poling officials may have subsequently educated staff to greater effect...
I'll walk away on principle for some things, but I won't lose my vote for a technicality that could be addressed at a later stage...
But if he felt he did the right thing...
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!