Men tote assault rifles at Obama event in Arizona!

[Benny503]

I really dont think he has just forgotten about firearms lol.

You are right, he just too busy Do we need to set sometime for him to work on this issue because some guy exercise his right by carry assault riffle open and giving those anti-gun heart attack? :huh:

 

[PDXGuy]

From Breitbart article:



Doesnt sound like Secret Service either......

I have a friend that works in the gov't and part of the strategy is to pretend to be the public and drum up some action from people who might be carrying secretly. That way you identify any potential threat to take them out. There are covert secret service and semi-covert secret service. FYI, you would be surprise at the amount of people involve in protecting the US spokesperson (President, VP, Secretary of State, etc...). There are over 21,000 people all over the USA that can kill anyone with immunity. Once they identify who he/she is...they will let them go.

 

[el gringo loco]

I'm sorry, but a guy carrying a rifle to political rally does not look like a guy exercising his rights to the general public--only to a few hardcore firearms owners. To most casual gun owners, neutral non-gun-owners, and anti-gunners, it looks like intimidation or a threat. If people want a fight over gun rights, they should keep this behavior up. It brings the issue to the forefront while turning off people who would have had a strong likelihood of being on the pro-gun side of the argument.

To me and a good portion of the population, this guy looks like a right wing nut-job. If this was a town-hall for gun rights, I'd say this was appropriate. But, what does it have to do with healthcare?

I have said this before, but it bears repeating: Just because one has the right to do something, doesn't mean they should do it. I have the 1st amendment right to cuss in front of old ladies and children or to fart in church--but I don't. It's not appropriate.

 

[swoop]

Obama and the rest of the far left, are not above planting a couple of guys packing AR's protesting in order to make real protesters and 2nd A folks look like gun crazed nuts.

 

[PDXGuy]

Obama and the rest of the far left, are not above planting a couple of guys packing AR's protesting in order to make real protesters and 2nd A folks look like gun crazed nuts.

It has been done before. I'm not saying that this is the case this time. Just know that this is one of the governments ploy. Don't assume the obvious.

 

[ZeroRing]

And, if this sort of thing keeps up and BHO get's denied on his "health care for all" plans who's to say he won't decide that new "common-sense" gun laws are needed to cut down on the "crazies"?

He's the sort of Chicago-type politician to do just that... (seek revenge)

Yup, just because it's your right doesn't mean it's appropriate.

 

[cameronhu]

I'm sorry, but a guy carrying a rifle to political rally does not look like a guy exercising his rights to the general public--only to a few hardcore firearms owners. To most casual gun owners, neutral non-gun-owners, and anti-gunners, it looks like intimidation or a threat. If people want a fight over gun rights, they should keep this behavior up. It brings the issue to the forefront while turning off people who would have had a strong likelihood of being on the pro-gun side of the argument.

To me and a good portion of the population, this guy looks like a right wing nut-job. If this was a town-hall for gun rights, I'd say this was appropriate. But, what does it have to do with healthcare?

I have said this before, but it bears repeating: Just because one has the right to do something, doesn't mean they should do it. I have the 1st amendment right to cuss in front of old ladies and children or to fart in church--but I don't. It's not appropriate.

I agree. In my mind, it's very similar to burning the US flag. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. The end result in either case, is that you make people, who wouldn't normally do so, question whether our freedoms should be curtailed.

All around bad strategy- We aren't going to pick up any new supporters this way.

 

[swoop]

IMO only a total nut or a plant would bring an AR-15 to a town hall where the cough, cough, leader of the free world is speaking. I've been to Arizona this time of year, locals are wearing tank tops and shorts, these thugs look to be out of there element..east coast plants making a case for the O against pro-gun people I'll bet.

 

[Jamie6.5]

As far as I'm concerned the more people that bring guns into the open with the prez around that DON'T shoot someone the better. If they appear outwardly to be his supporters that's even better.
As for the fight over gun laws and the 2nd Amendment? Fine let's have it and get it out in the open. Lets find out if Obama wants to do away with the Bill of Rights. But it may get him impeached if he does!
Think of all the wasted bandwidth here over whether Obama wants to rescind the right to keep and bear arms. Guns in public with no adverse affect are a good thing.
The press' perception of guns being a bad thing is what needs to change. Maybe if they get used to open carry and people hanging out with black guns we can get them used to it and they won't get their panties in a bunch every time!

 

[Jamie6.5]

Gun-rights advocates say they're exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protest, while those who argue for more gun control say it could be a disaster waiting to happen.

So I guess men shouldn't be allowed into an anti rape conference where women are present. What they have in their pants makes them a disaster waiting to happen!

Paul Helmke, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said people should not be allowed to bring guns to events where Obama is.

If Helmke had his way, no Constitutional lawyers would be around to advise the prez why he can't take away the 2ndA either.

 

[Mutoman]

Common sense should prevail here, don't carry a gun out in the open around or anywhere near the president, unless you are Secret Service. I know if it makes me question the motive, it really gives the anti's fuel for debate.

I'd rather the anti's make themselves look bad than our fellow gun rights folks to take a similar position in the eye of the media.

Those boys sure did have some balls though, gotta give them that.

 

[fromotoc]

I admire what this guy did. Look at healthcare- obama has been all gung ho about the public option, and now he's backing down from it. Why? Because people EXERCISED THEIR RIGHTS and showed tremendously they don't want it. Of course that isn't the end of the public option, but it shows that obama is having second thoughts about his 'baby'. If all this drums up a debate on gun laws, then let it. He likes having debates. I guarantee you, if obama starts seriously talking about gun legislation, the town hall meetings will REALLY get interesting. But I think he is going to wait until he starts doing something about that. He has a strategy, not sure exactly what it is yet, but it's a coming.

Right wing nuts, left wing nuts, whoever... They are Americans exercising their rights. That should NEVER be frowned upon or questioned.

 

[CEF1959]

So we're back to the empirical question: Does it help or hurt the cause of Second Amendment rights to do this sort of thing? Does it help or hurt the cause of First Amendment free speech rights for an American to exercise his right to shout anti-Semitic slogans outside a synagogue? Does it help or hurt First Amendment freedom of press rights for an American to exercise his right to publish autopsy photos on the internet?

I do indeed question or frown on some people's choices in how they exercise hard-won American freedoms. Why? Because I care about those freedoms and don't want to give the anti's unnecessary justification to curb them.

If these events result in legislation making it a federal crime to possess a firearm within 1000 yards of a presidential venue, would you still consider these guys heroes in the cause of gun rights?

 

[Teufel_Hunden]

Does it help or hurt the cause of First Amendment free speech rights for an American to exercise his right to shout anti-Semitic slogans outside a synagogue? Does it help or hurt First Amendment freedom of press rights for an American to exercise his right to publish autopsy photos on the internet?

Sorry, This doens't even compare!

I do indeed question or frown on some people's choices in how they exercise hard-won American freedoms. Why? Because I care about those freedoms and don't want to give the anti's unnecessary justification to curb them.

What makes you think they need or are even looking for any justification?

If these events result in legislation making it a federal crime to possess a firearm within 1000 yards of a presidential venue, would you still consider these guys heroes in the cause of gun rights?

If what you're saying is true we shouldn't even have this right so who cares?

Don't get me wrong CEF, I know you are a very well thought guy and I respect you!

If you have a right and you choose to not excercise it get ready for the right to evaporate.

In the fight to maintain any rights go ahead and sit idly by and it will be taken without a fight. This is just like Illegal Immigration (racists), the Socialization of Heathcare (Nazi's) Tax Revolt (Tea Baggers) and Gun Rights (Right Wing Gun Extremists). You cannot reason with these people!

I don't want to make it worse but I believe we are well beyond that point. We will either fight for our rights (all of them) and win or go down swinging. The alternative is to continue with the status quo by sticking our head into the sand and avoid making some goofy Socialist/Progressive uncomfortable. Thats how we got here BTW!

The gloves need to be off!

T_H

 

[treemanx]

The people who are responding negatively to this, with comments like:

If these events result in legislation making it a federal crime to possess a firearm within 1000 yards of a presidential venue, would you still consider these guys heroes in the cause of gun rights?

Or:

Common sense should prevail here, don't carry a gun out in the open

IMO have allowed themselves to be convinced that our rights are really not our rights at all. To believe that these rights were handed to you by some fat sweaty politician in Washington DC sometime since you were born. The fact is these rights were given to us by our Founding Fathers, and no fear or retribution from "anti's", Presidents, or Bradys is going to stop me from excercising them.

Do you know where the power comes from that makes you want to hide your rights away in some dark corner of the States? It comes from opinions like the ones quoted above. It comes from the people who believe BS. Anti-gun's want you to have that opinion. They want you to be afraid to carry a gun ANYWHERE. Not just at a Presidential function. Its a mindset folks, and until people stop treating gun ownership like something to be ashamed of, you'll be in danger of losing your rights.

 

[treemanx]

Great job T_H, I love it.

I don't want to make it worse but I believe we are well beyond that point. We will either fight for our rights (all of them) and win or go down swinging. The alternative is to continue with the status quo by sticking our head into the sand and avoid making some goofy Socialist/Progressive uncomfortable. Thats how we got here BTW!

The gloves need to be off!

I agree fromotoc:

Right wing nuts, left wing nuts, whoever... They are Americans exercising their rights. That should NEVER be frowned upon or questioned.

 

[KENOC]

The people who are responding negatively to this, with comments like:




Or:



IMO have allowed themselves to be convinced that our rights are really not our rights at all. To believe that these rights were handed to you by some fat sweaty politician in Washington DC sometime since you were born. The fact is these rights were given to us by our Founding Fathers, and no fear or retribution from "anti's", Presidents, or Bradys is going to stop me from excercising them.

That is how things were INTENDED by the founders. But that is not the real world today though. We do let sweaty politicians give us whatever rights they desire. Unless you are saying you drive without a license and carry concealed without a license? And refuse to pay property taxes?

 

[treemanx]

Here comes the spin folks:

MSNBC:

On Tuesday, MSNBC's Contessa Brewer fretted over health care reform protesters legally carrying guns: "A man at a pro-health care reform rally...wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip...there are questions about whether this has racial overtones....white people showing up with guns." Brewer failed to mention the man she described was black

Following Brewer's report, which occurred on the Morning Meeting program, host Dylan Ratigan and MSNBC pop culture analyst Toure discussed the supposed racism involved in the protests. Toure argued: "...there is tremendous anger in this country about government, the way government seems to be taking over the country, anger about a black person being president....we see these hate groups rising up and this is definitely part of that." Ratigan agreed: "...then they get the variable of a black president on top of all these other things and that's the move – the cherry on top, if you will, to the accumulated frustration for folks."

Link

Man this makes me mad. And Im sure some on this thread might say, "see! I told you this would end up making gun owners look bad!" But the fact is, I think this sort of thing opens more eyes than not. It makes the idiots talking the trash look bad.

 

[treemanx]

Really? That is not the real world today though. You do let sweaty politicians give you whatever rights they desire. Unless you are saying you drive without a license and carry concealed without a license? And refuse to pay property taxes?

Sorry bud, but the Constitution wasnt written the year after you were born. The Bill of Rights wasnt just passed by Congress when you were 5.

Yes, we have lawmakers today in Washington that have power to influence our rights. But you are obviously missing the point here.

 

[KENOC]

Sorry bud, but the Constitution wasnt written the year after you were born. The Bill of Rights wasnt just passed by Congress when you were 5.

Yes, we have lawmakers today in Washington that have power to influence our rights. But you are obviously missing the point here.

When the constitution and bill of rights was passed is a moot point. And i do get your point. My point is that we no longer live under the constitution or bill of rights. The politicians have subverted into some twisted living document and what we now live under are the rights granted to us by those same sweaty politicians. They now have the power to bestow upon us our 'rights'...when,where, how, what guns we have the 'right' to carry, what cars we have the 'right' to drive if they pass the EPA test, and what fuel we are allowed to put in those cars, and we do not even have the right to pump our own fuel in this state or have gas free of corn crap that ruins our government approved motors. Just about every 'right' we have is what the sweaty politicians grant us.
So as much as i love and respect those documents you speak of, we do not live under them in today's world, and our politicians do not adhere to them other.

Back to the topic, I am glad that man has the 'right' to carry that 'assault' weapon.
I also think it is a stupid thing to do in public and does nothing to further our cause or our 'rights'. It just allows the media to remind people that scary black guns are not banned, and we need to re-enact that 'assault' weapon ban.