PDA

View Full Version : How many assault rifles at the next presidential event?



blazespinnaker
08-18-09, 09:27 AM
Is it me, or does anyone else see a ratcheting up of aggression here?

Will we see the president avoiding states with open-carrying laws?

Can the secret service force people within a certain distance to not carry guns?

How long before one of these things accidentially goes off?

Crazy times..

token link:
http://news.google.ca/news/url?sa=t&ct2=ca%2F0_0_s_0_0_t&usg=AFQjCNFnsd8yzsiDl_xIIN6kbE7x1N5VtQ&cid=1296410227&ei=N56KSqC8IJLulQToxMajAQ&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FPOLITICS%2F0 8%2F17%2Fobama.protest.rifle%2F

flintlock
08-18-09, 10:46 AM
Yeah, that sort of thing would have been unheard of in the past.

Verrocchio
08-18-09, 10:50 AM
Crazy, indeed. The display of dangerous weapons marks a dangerous drift toward a politics of violence.

MulaMan
08-18-09, 12:26 PM
Is it me, or does anyone else see a ratcheting up of aggression here?

Just Republicans pumping up the extremist base through Fox News fear mongering to the Ann Rand cult crowd.

"War on Terror"
"War on Drugs"
"War on Evolution"
...
... same same

"War on Decmocracy" ? That would make Karl Rove happy, so that we can turn America into a true dictatorship once and for all.

The Montana Militia should be getting geared up again any day now...remember those middle aged, overwieght, white guys shooting off rifles on the farm...I always wondered where they disapeared too after Bush got elected

jtabeb
08-18-09, 12:42 PM
Is it me, or does anyone else see a ratcheting up of aggression here?

Will we see the president avoiding states with open-carrying laws?

Can the secret service force people within a certain distance to not carry guns?

How long before one of these things accidentially goes off?

Crazy times..

token link:
http://news.google.ca/news/url?sa=t&ct2=ca%2F0_0_s_0_0_t&usg=AFQjCNFnsd8yzsiDl_xIIN6kbE7x1N5VtQ&cid=1296410227&ei=N56KSqC8IJLulQToxMajAQ&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FPOLITICS%2F0 8%2F17%2Fobama.protest.rifle%2F

Apparently, the NH guy had links to white supremacist groups on his myspace page. (Sorry, I'll look for a confimation, I just heard a blip on the news).

As a gun owner, I agree that with whom ever said here someplace that a firearm is the LAST defense against tyrrany, NOT THE FIRST!!!

grapejelly
08-18-09, 12:44 PM
I legally carry a gun everywhere and don't want the government telling me I can't. In Virginia you can carry a gun into the state capitol building or a public meeting and I think this is very sensible.

metalman
08-18-09, 12:45 PM
how to turn the public against gun ownership... bring guns to public political rallies.

want more restrictive gun laws? keep bringing guns to rallies, idiots!

GRG55
08-18-09, 12:45 PM
I legally carry a gun everywhere and don't want the government telling me I can't. In Virginia you can carry a gun into the state capitol building or a public meeting and I think this is very sensible.

Sounds like Nirvana alright...:rolleyes:

grapejelly
08-18-09, 12:49 PM
Sounds like Nirvana alright...:rolleyes:

it's illegal to brandish or threaten people with a gun, BTW :)

GRG55
08-18-09, 01:06 PM
...As a gun owner, I agree that with whom ever said here someplace that a firearm is the LAST defense against tyrrany, NOT THE FIRST!!!

Couldn't agree more.

Seems the "gun thing" is just one manifestation on a spectrum of growing civil backlash against the Government. I think the town hall meeting behaviour, public protests against health care, "tea parties", deliberate defaulting on debt, and gun & ammunition sales are USA society variations of the riots in Greece last summer, the "Eat the Bankers" protests in London, & other forms of recent civil demonstrations in the developed economies.

Given the global [non-FIRE] Production economy is tanking, people now seem very resentful of the previously tolerated universal bailout of the global financial sector. Hardly anybody other than financial and political insiders are willing to accept current policy direction. If people can't change things peacefully there is risk they try to change them violently.

On the other hand, if people decide they are powerless, they don't try to bring about change within the system, nor do they try to overthrow the system. They just drop out. I expect the underground economy is going to blossom for years to come. If you have lost your job and don't have any income then you have to find alternate ways to provide for yourself. If large numbers of people find themselves in this situation [and certainly that is the case in many countries already] then a burgeoning economy that works without cash income develops. What happens if people deliberately decide to participate in that economy simply because they do not wish to be taxed on their income or transactions? That's the real danger from the "tea parties".

Edit Added: Obama's "Change" election campaign held great appeal to those that felt powerless within the system. Watching what's going on from across the northern border, I very much am under the impression that the US public feel this Administration's change credentials have been squandered in a remarkably short period of time...and the President's personal change credentials are not far behind. The implications of a collapse in confidence in the national Administration are rather disturbing...and I don't even live in that country.

jtabeb
08-18-09, 03:55 PM
Edit Added: Obama's "Change" election campaign held great appeal to those that felt powerless within the system. Watching what's going on from across the northern border, I very much am under the impression that the US public feel this Administration's change credentials have been squandered in a remarkably short period of time...and the President's personal change credentials are not far behind. The implications of a collapse in confidence in the national Administration are rather disturbing...and I don't even live in that country.


CHANGE! (You can make-believe in) :D

blazespinnaker
08-18-09, 06:37 PM
Amusing theory going around.... assault rifle carrying protesters are democrat plants. I certainly could believe that one..

flintlock
08-18-09, 06:52 PM
how to turn the public against gun ownership... bring guns to public political rallies.

want more restrictive gun laws? keep bringing guns to rallies, idiots!

I agree metalman. Here in GA that kind of display at a public event would not be legal.

The gun toters being plants does make a little sense when you think about it. But believe me, there are plenty of nuts out there who are into guns in a "ahem", unhealthy way.

This is coming from a licensed carry guy. I have a pretty substantial gun collection but even I think a lot of kooks are out there these days with guns. I don't even like going into gun shops or shooting ranges anymore there are so many losers hanging about.

Ditto, what Jtabeb said.

Rantly McTirade
08-18-09, 06:53 PM
Folks carried guns at political rallies-and all kinds of events-in the 19th century. Not much happened, maybe because it was a heavy majority
that had guns. Or maybe it was because politicos were less hungry for
power and less likely to believe themselves as something akin to a king or
emperor. In the last century, only Eisenhower, and perhaps Coolidge, generally seemed to be void of such illusions. As to whatever links NH guy
had on a website, so what(and just who is making the claims and doing the categorizing). He was obeying the laws of his local and state government. The uncomfortable little secret is the 2nd Amendment was thought of to ensure the citizenry's ability to fight off, and overthrow(as in how this nation first came into being), an oppressive central state.

jmdpet
08-18-09, 06:54 PM
This Salon article covers his MySpace page:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/politics/2009/08/12/william_kostric/

bcassill
08-18-09, 07:01 PM
Okay, while I think taking a gun to a presidential rally is a numskull thing to do, it seems that these folks broke no laws to speak of and were NOT in the venue area where the President was. Seems that the venue area is under Federal jurisdiction (where guns are a no no) while the President is around, everything outside is covered by state law (where guns are okay). The Secret Service is very good at what they do in protecting the President's personal safety. I doubt for an instant that any of these numskulls could seriously gotten to a place for a clear shot. Just my honest opinion.

flintlock
08-18-09, 09:28 PM
Folks carried guns at political rallies-and all kinds of events-in the 19th century. Not much happened, maybe because it was a heavy majority
that had guns. Or maybe it was because politicos were less hungry for
power and less likely to believe themselves as something akin to a king or
emperor. In the last century, only Eisenhower, and perhaps Coolidge, generally seemed to be void of such illusions. As to whatever links NH guy
had on a website, so what(and just who is making the claims and doing the categorizing). He was obeying the laws of his local and state government. The uncomfortable little secret is the 2nd Amendment was thought of to ensure the citizenry's ability to fight off, and overthrow(as in how this nation first came into being), an oppressive central state.

You mean the 2nd Amendment wasn't about hunting? :D

It's amazing how many people use that as an argument against the right to bear arms. " You don't need an AK-47 to shoot deer!" :rolleyes: They completely miss the point.

I think carrying a AR-15 to a public rally is probably a little much though. At least for now.:D

cjppjc
08-18-09, 09:34 PM
Seems the "gun thing" is just one manifestation on a spectrum of growing civil backlash against the Government. I think the town hall meeting behaviour, public protests against health care, "tea parties", deliberate defaulting on debt, and gun & ammunition sales are USA society variations of the riots in Greece last summer, the "Eat the Bankers" protests in London, & other forms of recent civil demonstrations in the developed economies.



As you say, it is the American flavor.

Ghent12
08-19-09, 12:33 AM
This Salon article covers his MySpace page:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/politics/2009/08/12/william_kostric/
Thanks for the link. I didn't verify with his MySpace page, but if the account is accurate, all it does is make the guy out to be a radical, not a racist or otherwise.

I have a question, though, for people who think it's a bad idea to bring guns to a presidential rally. If a majority or large minority exercised their open carry rights a majority of the time, would it still be a bad idea to bring a gun to a presidential rally?

To answer an earlier question: I am pretty sure the Secret Service can and will do almost anything it needs to in order to create a safe corridor for the POTUS. Their limitations seem more physical than legal, if you catch my meaning.

cjppjc
08-19-09, 11:56 PM
As Dr. Paul pointed out, making a point about the second amendment in this fashion is alot like those who make a point about the first amendment by burning the American flag.

Ghent12
08-20-09, 01:13 AM
As Dr. Paul pointed out, making a point about the second amendment in this fashion is alot like those who make a point about the first amendment by burning the American flag.
I guess that's an issue where I disagree with Dr. Paul. Guns make the world safer, not less safe, though I expect a lot of disagreement about that statement as well. The only way to desensitize people to the mere sight of firearms is to actually make them seen, and therefore an action like this, which is perfectly legal, is doing a service more than a disservice.

I like the quote from the CNN article (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/18/obama.protest.rifle/) about it.
Asked whether the individuals carrying weapons jeopardized the safety of the president, Donovan said, "Of course not."

cjppjc
08-20-09, 11:36 AM
I guess that's an issue where I disagree with Dr. Paul. Guns make the world safer, not less safe, though I expect a lot of disagreement about that statement as well. The only way to desensitize people to the mere sight of firearms is to actually make them seen, and therefore an action like this, which is perfectly legal, is doing a service more than a disservice.

I like the quote from the CNN article (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/18/obama.protest.rifle/) about it.

Asked whether the individuals carrying weapons jeopardized the safety of the president, Donovan said, "Of course not."



You are not disagreeing with Dr. Paul. He of course supports all manner of protest under the first amendment. He was pointing out that just because someone doesn't like the way a person is making their point, they have a right to make it.

doom&gloom
08-20-09, 07:01 PM
would someone please tell me WTF an 'assault weapon' is? because besides the 'mean-ness' factor of looks or potential military application, a rifle is a rifle and a handgun is a handgun until you modify them to full auto mode. this 'assault' label is stupid and ridiculous -- talk abouth the politics of fear -- there you go -- FEAR the mean-looking gun. ridiculous.

jtabeb
08-20-09, 08:03 PM
You are not disagreeing with Dr. Paul. He of course supports all manner of protest under the first amendment. He was pointing out that just because someone doesn't like the way a person is making their point, they have a right to make it.

X2! Good point, Much as I have distaste for someone burning the US flag, I fight for their right to do so.

Slimprofits
08-21-09, 10:30 AM
a rifle is a rifle and a handgun is a handgun until you modify them to full auto mode. this 'assault' label is stupid and ridiculous -- talk abouth the politics of fear -- there you go -- FEAR the mean-looking gun. ridiculous.

Machine guns were not referred to in the media and society as "assault rifles" until sometime in the 90s, I think.

But if you search around the internet, there are plenty of gun dealers that use the term too. Maybe because it was popularized by the msm?

I'm curious when the Europeans at large started calling machine guns, assault rifles. Around the same time we did?

Verrocchio
08-21-09, 11:33 AM
X2! Good point, Much as I have distaste for someone burning the US flag, I fight for their right to do so.

The willingness to defend another's right to do or say something with which one disagrees is honorable and an impulse I fully share. At the same time, as can be inferred above (I have distaste), one can heap hearty disapproval on the person exercising his or her right.

...And, I do heartily disapprove of public display of dangerous weapons at political events but vigorously support the right to do so. My disapproval stems from a deep-seated aversion to threats and implied threats -- any form of political bullying. Rightly or wrongly, I associate the recent images of the guntoters in New Hampshire and Arizona with the last century's goose-stepping Brown Shirts. That's a road I'd rather not see us travel.

flintlock
08-22-09, 11:23 AM
Well a 30 round magazine does make it a little more impressive than say, you're old Marlin 5 shot .22.:D