Protestors carry firearms near Presidential speech

[Kevin]

So long as I can disown the shooter.

Even if that happens, it'd still be just a shooting. Maybe one by a fringe lunatic for political reasons, but all in all, just a shooting.

Now, when we're talking human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria, I'd at least like an opportunity to disown a few people.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Then again, I have a different perspective on guns than most of y'all who live in urban centers on the coasts. Around here, just about every other person carries a concealed weapon and it's perfectly legal. It is absolutely not uncommon to be out in public while in possession of a firearm.

A concealed weapon, yes. But is it common to see someone walking around on a city street with a semi-automatic rifle over his shoulder? That's the part I think is noteworthy, and I can see why it raises some eyebrows when a president (any president) is nearby.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Look over the last 2 decades.

During the Reagan years, you never heard about these guys. Bush I -- same story.

Then Clinton comes along and suddenly... they exist... almost out of nowhere.

Bush II comes along, they disappear. POOF.

Maybe you never heard about guys like this during the Reagan and Bush (I and II) years. I can assure you I did. I think it's a bit of an oversell to blame a sudden interest in them on the liberal MSM. Maybe that's part of the equation, but not all.

Originally Posted by KSigkid

I think it's pretty interesting how the health care debate has fired up the fear mongering on both sides of the aisle.

To me that's the interesting phenomenon here -- the depth of the reaction and fear-mongering all around.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

A concealed weapon, yes. But is it common to see someone walking around on a city street with a semi-automatic rifle over his shoulder? That's the part I think is noteworthy, and I can see why it raises some eyebrows when a president (any president) is nearby.

It's ironic that the protester who is apparently afraid his civil rights are being impermissibly curtailed is able to carry a semi-automatic rifle over his shoulder so close to the President.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

It's ironic that the protester who is apparently afraid his civil rights are being impermissibly curtailed is able to carry a semi-autoatic rifle over his shoulder so close to the President.

LOL. It is indeed.

('Course, counselor, that was unresponsive to my question. )

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

To me that's the interesting phenomenon here -- the depth of the reaction and fear-mongering all around.

Agreed - it's the part that I think is the most fascinating. I'll admit that I'm no expert on health care issues, although I have read through the President's various proposals. I have close friends and family who are very knowledgable on health care policy from previous jobs, so it's been interesting to talk to them about the different proposals and how they are different than what's come before.

However, to see both sides so badly mischaracterizing the other...it's just really interesting. Memo to all those out there: there are good arguments for and against the various health care proposals.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Even if that happens, it'd still be just a shooting. Maybe one by a fringe lunatic for political reasons, but all in all, just a shooting.

And you know this how?



And "just a shooting?" Kind of sad that someone is so nonchalant about shootings.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

And you know this how?



And "just a shooting?" Kind of sad that someone is so nonchalant about shootings.

Because shootings are pretty common. And if they are not attached to some greater movement with greater meaning, then one is just as meaningful/meaningless as the next.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Because shootings are pretty common. And if they are not attached to some greater movement with greater meaning, then one is just as meaningful/meaningless as the next.

Shootings in close proximity to a sitting President aren't common.


Based on your comments and attitude about the situation, I think it is safe to say that you wouldn't give a flying flip if one of them shot at Obama. However, there are some of us who want him to continue to be President and to be safe. I don't care how common shootings are, they are still dangerous.

In addition, I want to say that it annoys me how they are trying to play this off as strictly a second amendment issue. It's a veiled threat.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

Shootings in close proximity to a sitting President aren't common.


Based on your comments and attitude about the situation, I think it is safe to say that you wouldn't give a flying flip if one of them shot at Obama. However, there are some of us who want him to continue to be President and to be safe. I don't care how common shootings are, they are still dangerous.

In addition, I want to say that it annoys me how they are trying to play this off as strictly a second amendment issue. It's a veiled threat.

Why do you feel that this is a threat? Please explain how it is more then just a constitutional issue, which is bad enough. Also what did anybody say that suggested that they wouldn't care if somebody shot at Obama, who is the sitting President of the United States. I hated Bush with a passion, but I never wanted him to be shot because of the position he held.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

Why do you feel that this is a threat? Please explain how it is more then just a constitutional issue, which is bad enough. Also what did anybody say that suggested that they wouldn't care if somebody shot at Obama, who is the sitting President of the United States. I hated Bush with a passion, but I never wanted him to be shot because of the position he held.

I mainly feel that way because they were carrying firearms outside of a forum where he was discussing something OTHER THAN the second amendment. There is a proper time and place for everything. Also, I feel that way because of the political affiliations that some of them apparently have. Then there is the fact that carrying these firearms near his speeches is apparently becoming a little more prevalent, and some of these people, in addition to wanting to bear arms, would like to see Obama killed.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

I think it is safe to say that you wouldn't give a flying flip if one of them shot at Obama.

Wow. That's one hell of a leap there.

I think it's just fine that someone carries a gun in an area near the President which even the Secret Service doesn't have a problem with, ergo, I think it'd be hunky dory if someone shot the President. You got into law school?

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Wow. That's one hell of a leap there.

I think it's just fine that someone carries a gun in an area near the President which even the Secret Service doesn't have a problem with, ergo, I think it'd be hunky dory if someone shot the President. You got into law school?

Yes, I got into law school. And your point? Don't sit there and act like your attitude doesn't give one the impression that you don't much care of something happens to Obama. Whether you agree with his politics or not, any citizen should be concerned about potential violence towards a sitting President because of the consequences.

And just because the Secret Service doesn't have a problem with it does not mean it is okay or should be allowed. There have been incidents over the years that show questionable decisions made by the secret service with respect to security for their protectees.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Wow. That's one hell of a leap there.

I think it's just fine that someone carries a gun in an area near the President which even the Secret Service doesn't have a problem with, ergo, I think it'd be hunky dory if someone shot the President. You got into law school?

Why do you even bother responding? She just seems to like making extreme statements to get under people's skin.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Why do you even bother responding? She just seems to like making extreme statements to get under people's skin.

I think you may have a point.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Why do you even bother responding? She just seems to like making extreme statements to get under people's skin.

It isn't about "getting under people's skin." I'm simply calling it like I see it.