Posted on 08/18/2009 7:12:45 AM PDT by JoeProBono
PHOENIX, Arizona (CNN) -- A man toting an assault rifle was among a dozen protesters carrying weapons while demonstrating outside President Obama's speech to veterans on Monday, but no laws were broken. It was the second instance in recent days in which weapons have been seen near presidential events.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
This is great!
The guy is a Black man too, and no mention of that?
The Obamanation is disintegrating.
You really think they’re that poorly trained that they’ll just start shooting at a random shout of “gun”? I don’t
This may come as a shock to you but girls and women like pretty things.
I’m teaching a female friend how to shoot and she showed up in camping clothes on my recommendation which she did but she also wore pink socks.
I opened the toy box to ask her which guns she wanted to shoot. She had no reaction to calibers, sizes or mechanical actions until I showed her the pretty guns I own.
Teaching women how to shoot is entirely different than men.
Not a shock....I figured as much as I have three grand daughters. However, to my mind, these aren’t “pretty playthings”. And, it’s still a damn shame to do that to a rifle.
They teach young children to yell “stranger” “gun” “hater” etc. now in school everyday. Normalization and display of a Constitutional Right is a good tool to use to keep that right.
Adults can yell too. That’s a good tool to use, but in the present now, there are certainly those that will yell something like that to get things started.
These two statements really have nothing to do with each other but I can see what you are trying to say. However, it is incorrect.
One point of having an armed society (yea, day to day running errands, etc) is that everyone encountered is likely to be armed therefore anyone thinking of engaging in criminal behavior is immediately stopped.
The BENEFIT of having a society accustomed to the citizens being armed is it takes away the very “bogyman” syndrome that you are reacting to right now. Stating that being armed in public in the U.S. implies “poor judgment” flies in the very face of American Citizens rights as enumerated in the Constitution.
For example, when in public is it “poor judgment” to refrain from engaging in protest and free speech?
How about being unlawfully detained?
Free from the threat of Excessive bail?
Public worship meeting?
Does any of that imply poor judgment?
So, what is soooo special about the right of the people to keep and bear Arms? And HORROR OF HORRORS, exercising that right in public?
Is it that such behavior would remove the “special” status of those that an oppressive government “grants” the “privilege” of being armed in public? Because that appears to be exactly the case.
And we can’t be having the sheep realizing they don’t need about 90% of their existing government, now can we?
The other (primary) point of being fully armed in public is when all citizens of a nation can protect themselves from immediate threat of harm or disruption of their daily lives, the dependence upon the “power” of government (and it’s consistently intoxicating “authority”) vanish like the wet dream that it actually was.
There is a parallel effect is the communists will not be able to control media by planting "disruptors" that are attempting to be photographed engaging in "taboo acts" such as being armed in public in order to manufacture a fake news story.
So, the Constitutional Right of “being armed in public” is continually vilified by media to the point that even quite a few folks right here have the same Pavlovian conditioned reaction to publicly armed Citizens as the “sheep-on-the-street.”
No one said anything about the SS shooting randomly. I think that stuartcr meant that the guy with the rifle would be a momentary distraction for the SS if someone else with hostile intent pulled out a gun and the crowd noticed this.
Besides, what point is the guy with the rifle trying to make? IMHO he has an immature need for attention.
Don’t think so. It will not change the minds of the anti’s or the pro’s, but may influence undecided, showing gun owners responsible.
Is it just me or does it seem odd to anyone else here that all the ‘newsworthy’ protester who have been carrying swastikas or obama hitler pictures or guns are all black lately?
We know for a FACT that one so-called protester carrying a swastica (also a black man) was later seen handing out fliers in support of health care. (he was a leftist PLANT)
WHY WASN’T THE MEDIA ALL OVER THIS MAN INTERVIEWING HIM??? DO THEY KNOW HE IS A PLANT?
The kind the left fears the MOST!
read post 72.
The fact is, the secret service doesn't give a whit about this guy, the guy in NH, or the guy in PA who was handing out bibles and, in each case, they said so to reporters on the scene.
Besides, what point is the guy with the rifle trying to make? IMHO he has an immature need for attention.
In my view, each of those armed protesters was making a very strong and valid symbolic gesture: It's a reminder to those that would destroy the constitutional foundations of the country that the people, their bosses, are still in charge.
OK
Well lefty, it is not a weapon until used as one. Until then all it is nothing but metal and plastic. All this guy did was tote it around.
Yes, just like a big sign that says...’look at me, I’ve got a gun’...just something I wouldn’t do.
This is a nice trend that is developing. I hope it continues and there are dozzens of AR-15’s and AK’s at the next Obama event.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.