Protestors carry firearms near Presidential speech

[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.

[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?

[KSig RC]

Here's my thing . . . why do we assume these guys are dumb, or purely looking for "shock value"? Is that because we assume gun advocates are morons for some reason?

Think about it - a guy in NH (whose state motto is "Live Free or Die") carries a sign about retaining freedoms, while legally holstering a gun. Why wouldn't we assume this is in direct opposition to Obama's semi-moronic claim that non-urban states "cling to their guns" and all that (a claim which Obama basically recanted on)? Doesn't it seem most likely this guy is making a point, and one that is actually fairly well stated?

Sure, the guy with the AR-15 slung over his shoulder is creating a visceral image - just like Nancy Reagan's fried-egg "Brain on Drugs" or PETA throwing red paint or any number of other campaigns in the past. Does it work? Not generally, but that doesn't make it implicitly dangerous.

It really is fear-mongering of the highest order, a media-fueled level of stupidity that I just can't fathom. Let me tell you - a guy who is planning on taking a shot at Obama probably won't have the gun slung over his shoulder on a street corner, right?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Here's my thing . . . why do we assume these guys are dumb, or purely looking for "shock value"? Is that because we assume gun advocates are morons for some reason?

Think about it - a guy in NH (whose state motto is "Live Free or Die") carries a sign about retaining freedoms, while legally holstering a gun. Why wouldn't we assume this is in direct opposition to Obama's semi-moronic claim that non-urban states "cling to their guns" and all that (a claim which Obama basically recanted on)? Doesn't it seem most likely this guy is making a point, and one that is actually fairly well stated?

Sure, the guy with the AR-15 slung over his shoulder is creating a visceral image - just like Nancy Reagan's fried-egg "Brain on Drugs" or PETA throwing red paint or any number of other campaigns in the past. Does it work? Not generally, but that doesn't make it implicitly dangerous.

It really is fear-mongering of the highest order, a media-fueled level of stupidity that I just can't fathom. Let me tell you - a guy who is planning on taking a shot at Obama probably won't have the gun slung over his shoulder on a street corner, right?

Hmmm....Holocaust museum bring back any memories???

...just saying....

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.

^^^^That.


This isn't Afghanistan.

I understand the right to bear arms...but wasn't that taking it a bit too literally for a protest??

You are protesting about health care...what are you expecting to happen at a healthcare rally that you have to pack heat?

Thomas Jefferson: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Hmmm....Holocaust museum bring back any memories???

...just saying....

Dude . . . "just saying"? You really can't see the difference?

I even OUTLINED IT IN THE POST!

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Dude . . . "just saying"? You really can't see the difference?

I even OUTLINED IT IN THE POST!

Calm down...I was just picking with you.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

You are protesting about health care...what are you expecting to happen at a healthcare rally that you have to pack heat?[/I]

Nothing. That's not the point he was trying to make.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Here's my thing . . . why do we assume these guys are dumb, or purely looking for "shock value"? Is that because we assume gun advocates are morons for some reason?

Maybe some people feel that way because of WHAT they were carrying and WHEN they were carrying it. I firmly believe that they were looking for shock value. I don't think that's really a farfetched assumption. Does this man typically carry that rifle around on a daily basis since he's so concerned about his right to bear arms? I doubt it.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Here's my thing . . . why do we assume these guys are dumb, Is that because we assume gun advocates are morons for some reason?

Based on this type of behavior, I know I assume THESE (not all) gun advocates are dumb or moronic because of the manner in which they attempt to make a statement. Carrying an assault rifle under these circumstances is what makes people even more interested in gun control. I feel like if you wish to make a statement, do it in a respectable manner. Less is more. I think the man who is simply carrying his Glock in a holster on his belt in a legal manner is going to be taken more seriously and with more respect than someone who is carrying a firearm that looks like it belongs in a military or law enforcement setting. It's absurd and just horrifically backwards. I don't know Obama personally, but something tells me he doesn't respond well to this type of foolishness. You have a better chance of making headway with someone like him when you have an intelligent dialogue with him, presenting your points in a clear and effective manner.

[DaemonSeid]

Gun Toter @ meeting in New Hampshire

Ummm....he doesn't look too swift...

Nor does he....

Gun Toter @ meeting in Arizona

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

I never heard of anything happening like that when Bush was in office.

Playing Devil's advocate...but while Bush was in office, people didn't feel threatened about losing their rights to bear arms.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Playing Devil's advocate...but while Bush was in office, people didn't feel threatened about losing their rights to bear arms.

Yeah, I understand that. I was speaking however in reference to security measures in general. Even if people were carrying a weapon legally, they weren't allowed to get that close to president's bush's speeches and forums. One of my law school classmates was standing outside on the street across from where bush was in attendance one days and he had his gun holstered on his belt. The secret service made him leave the area.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

One of my law school classmates was standing outside on the street across from where bush was in attendance one days and he had his gun holstered on his belt. The secret service made him leave the area.

And he was carrying a gun because.......?

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

And he was carrying a gun because.......?

That does raise an interesting question, doesn't it?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

That does raise an interesting question, doesn't it?

Indeed.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

And he was carrying a gun because.......?

The more interesting question is why that gun didn't merit news coverage while the one in question in this thread does.