One Arrested For Sneaking Into Portsmouth High Before Obama's Arrival

Fosters ^ | Tuesday, August 11, 2009

[kristinn]

Police stationed at Portsmouth High School for President Barack Obama's visit this afternoon have had their hands full this morning.

According to Detective Lt. Corey MacDonald, one person has already been arrested for allegedly sneaking into the high school.

MacDonald, who is also assigned to work as the city's "intelligence officer," as a liaison to the Secret Service, told Foster's that police have also encountered a situation where a protestor was armed with some type of firearm. It is unclear if the person has been arrested.

A shift commander on duty at the Portsmouth Police Station has also confirmed one person is under arrest at the protest, but was unable to provide more details.

Also, WMUR is reporting that the Secret Service had a pickup truck towed from outside of Portsmouth High School this morning for security reasons.

[dirtboy]

Maybe you can get together with the editor poster and read the article to each other.

Maybe you could realize that a short article doesn't usually have all the facts. The protestor in question was outside protesting alongside the street. He was not in the building nor did he try to enter such.

Secondly, I have been clear about what my issue is. If you want to waffle some more, just agree with my point and slither on by.

Your issue is not germane to the actual situation here. That is the problem. You don't have all the facts. And you apparently can't be bothered to run them down once you are appraised of such.

Accidental ignorance is curable. Your deliberate form of ignorance typically is not, and it leads to stupid strawman arguments like you have posted here.

[editor-surveyor]

This is my country, and I’m not going to give it up to a wasted pencil neck pecksnifferous fool like you.

[dirtboy]

If there are two of you, does that make you twice as wrong?

This coming from someone who doesn't have the facts straight.

It must REALLY hurt, with you having emptied your gun into your feet like you have on this thread.

[nufsed]

You are in serious need of reading comprehension skills. Did you see who and what I originally replied to or are you just here to make noise?

You have proven you're misreading and just carrying on an argument because you thought some newbie put you in your place.

God forbid a seasoned, perfect poster such as you would ever be wrong. Well you were wrong about newbie and wrong on your tie ins on your comments. Now go away before you're benched for the rest of the game.

[nufsed]

When they come for you, I’ll be the one lacing up the straigh jacket. Go ahead and carry near the president. I don’t want you to relinguish any rights.

[editor-surveyor]

BTW, I’m going to have your handle changed to “waytoomuchsaid,” and your password will be “poophead.” Remember this for the next time you log on.

[nufsed]

Good-bye girls. Last chance to get it right and show how classy you are.

Newbie forever!

[editor-surveyor]

"I’ll be the one lacing up the straigh jacket."

No, you won't. the laces are in back, so you won't be able to reach them.

[dirtboy]

You are in serious need of reading comprehension skills. Did you see who and what I originally replied to or are you just here to make noise?

Your original statement:

If you sneak into a building or are armned nearby where the president is coming to speak,

And I addressed the second part of that statment - "are armned nearby where the president is coming to speak" - which was the actual situation - yet you somehow then tried to shift the argument into the 'sneaking into the building' part while calling my statements about being legally armed along the street a 'strawman' - and I addressed the entering the building aspect as well. So the problem is not with my reading comprehension - the problem is with YOUR memory.

You have proven you're misreading and just carrying on an argument because you thought some newbie put you in your place.

No, anti-2nd Amendment jackasses like yourself deserve a good thrashing - doesn't matter whether they have been here ten weeks or ten years. You're just too stupid to realize you are getting your arse kicked here.

God forbid a seasoned, perfect poster such as you would ever be wrong.

I'm not wrong. Especially the part about you being a jackass.

Well you were wrong about newbie and wrong on your tie ins on your comments. Now go away before you're benched for the rest of the game.

You are truly a legend in your own mind, Mr. Black Knight.

[W. W. SMITH]

I DON'T REMEMBER MY ORIGINNAL REGISTRATION DATE BUT IT WAS WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE START. YOUR ACTIONS LEAD ONE TO THINK “NOB” SO NOW PUT A SOCK IN IT!!!

[nufsed]

How brave. Elvis has left the building or can’t you read?

[Admin Moderator]

Why don’t you stick to the issues and lighten up a bit.

[PapaBear3625]

Just because a lunatic like you who thinks your rights cannot be abridged in any circumstances and who wants to carry a weapon around a president doesn't mean you should or that you will be allowed to. The fact that you don't undertsnad that, just proves my point.

If the President doesn't want to be around armed people, then he should just stay where he won't have to meet them.

Explain to me where the Constitution authorizes a "rights-free" zone around the President's current location?

[Mila]

"Hey noob, are you aware that this looney, paranoid president prohibited the graduating midshipmen from wearing their traditional swords at the ceremony because he was speaking?"

New Navy Ensigns Allan H. Elsberry, Matthew Linsley and Catherine Ortman take the oath of office during the 2008 United States Naval Academy commencement ceremony at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium, May 23, 2008, Annapolis, Md. Defense Dept. photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Chad J. McNeeley

FWIW, they didn't wear swords last year either.

http://www.defenselink.mil/PhotoEssays/PhotoEssayImage.aspx?id=6827&name=Chairman%20Addresses%20U.S.%20Naval%20Academy%20Graduates,%20Annapolis,%20Md.

[stuartcr]

I agree. That guy showed very poor judgement.

[stuartcr]

This isn’t about a legal right, it’s about showing poor judgement and a lack of responsibility towards the secret service men. This is about the POTUS and the men who have to protect him.

[stuartcr]

Certainly makes for a good diversion...

[dirtboy]

This isn’t about a legal right, it’s about showing poor judgement and a lack of responsibility towards the secret service men. This is about the POTUS and the men who have to protect him.

Hey, a man openly carrying a handgun a hundred yards away from the president at a protest is less a potential danger than someone with a rifle in their home 300-500 yards away. Using your logic, the SS should also search every home within a 500 yard radius, remove any rifles, and ban the residents from entry to their homes until the appearance is over.

Just how far should the 2nd Amendment exclusionary zone extend from where POTUS is appearing? An minor outside degree of risk is the price of a free society. Totalitarians don't have these kind of security problems. Where do you draw the line here?

[SaraJohnson]

I doubt the police chief arrested him. He was lawfully carrying and had been checked out. MSNBC was wetting it’s collective pants because he was not arrested immediately. They do that in New Hampshire. :)

[SaraJohnson]

The hysterical left is making fools of themselves again. That is him; he was a young guy carrying legally and he was checked out by the town’s police and left alone - according to the law.

I doubt he tried to take his gun into the town hall and if he did the SS would not have let him in.

But it is New Hampshire where constitutional rights still mean something and liberals wet their pants about it. Which is why he probably carried to the protest - to make the socialists on tv hysterical.