"Open Carry" laws being abided by at Obama protests

[Lazlo]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/...fle/index.html

[firerat]

Wow, that's quite suprising!! Rare you see a news article about a gun that isn't negative or end in someones rights being trampled. Especially considering the prez was around.

Good find Lazlo!!

[Lazlo]

I was surprised too! Surprised that the gun holder's didn't get the shit kicked out of them.

[usagolden]

who wants to try and kick the shit out of someone with a gun?

[firerat]

Originally Posted by usagolden

who wants to try and kick the shit out of someone with a gun?

Someone with bigger and many more guns and friends maybe.

[Hippie3]

not a very hopeful omen for our future, imo .
if some fool shoots obama
america's cities will burn.

[wildburr]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

not a very hopeful omen for our future, imo .
if some fool shoots obama
america's cities will burn.

That is an all too true statement, Scary too.

[Lazlo]

I would definitely agree with that. You can guarantee that every single person there with a gun had eyes glued to them big time!

[Hippie3]

bet yer ass
their names and pictures
will go in a file
for 'reference'.

[catdaddy]

This is also true, perhaps to a lesser extent, with ANY extreme violence shown toward other officials, and no doubt even a good fistfight at a 'town meeting" or "tea party" could result in some fairly drastic measures being taken.

In fact, I am quite sure that "plants" have been staged at some of these gatherings to try and foment trouble.

Personally, I think if the political / national climate continues to deteriorate it is only a matter of time before there are armed confrontations somewhere- or perhaps just a bit of light rioting and looting, to begin with,

[Hippie3]

america has been a tinder box
ever since bill clinton won his first term-
that never settled right with some elements.
when bush snatched florida from gore
i thought there were some pretty tense moments
when party activists were very close to actual fighting.
then it ratcheted up another level
with the vilification of bush as worse than hitler-
a debt now being paid forward , with interest, to obama.
small wonder if the 'average american' is reaching boiling point
when both parties are at each other's throat,
and throwing more gas on the fire daily through the media.
i remember when they shot j.f. kennedy, and then m. l. king.
wasn't pretty at all.
it could be much much worse
the day someone shoots obama or some senator, etc.

[LotRev]

Mmm...not really a fan of that.
People in America are too antsy and anxious.

Have your gun, and have it ready to go,
but I don't see a need to display it in a protest.
And it should be understood that you don't
bring guns around your country's leading face,
unless you plan on using it, and likely getting
killed yourself shortly afterwards.

However, that is a bit of a throw back to the old west,
and showing your weapon serves a purpose - it keeps idiots
at bay, and makes most folks think twice about
trying something stupid. But then again, do you
really trust everyone who owns the guns not to be
the idiot themselves?

[firerat]

These people were excercising their rights to open carry. Nobody got shot. No civil unrest and for once the police and secret service didn't abuse their power.

I see this as a triumph personally. It shows people can be responsible with firearms.

As stated, the ones carrying probably had a high powered rifle trained on them anyways just in case. And the guy who's gonna take a shot at the prez probably isn't going to do it with an open carry weapon anyway.

Just my opinion anyway.

[Sideshow]

Originally Posted by firerat

These people were excercising their rights to open carry. Nobody got shot. No civil unrest and for once the police and secret service didn't abuse their power.

I see this as a triumph personally. It shows people can be responsible with firearms.

As stated, the ones carrying probably had a high powered rifle trained on them anyways just in case. And the guy who's gonna take a shot at the prez probably isn't going to do it with an open carry weapon anyway.

Just my opinion anyway.

I couldn't agree more

[Hippie3]

it's not 'exercising the right'-
they are being intimidating.
no one needs a gun at a town hall meeting
except the security guards.
we have open-carry here too
but lugging around a rifle is an 'as needed' chore,
most folks just leave them in the truck.
no,
these guys are trying to use their guns to send a message,
and it sets a bad precedent.
i would not feel comfortable around a guy like that-
and that would inhibit my legitimate right to
express my views free from intimidation,
be it from the government or from fellow citizens.
i wouldn't take the kids to a political rally where
men are milling about brandishing firearms-
and i should be able to.

[ishkaboo]

Yeah I was watching this on CNN yesterday.

I think the guy has every right to do what he did, I just think it is foolish to make such a display at a damn political venue. On one hand, the man showed that people can be responsible with guns, but on the other hand, it was definitely not the time or the place.

I personally think he picked that time and place because he knew the cameras would be on him and he would get his 15 minutes, why else would you bring a loaded AR-15 to such an event?

[firerat]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

it's not 'exercising the right'-
they are being intimidating.

In what way were they being intimidating? And who exactly were they intimidating?

No one was waving their gun around threatening anyone.

Originally Posted by Hippie3

no one needs a gun at a town hall meeting
except the security guards.

Maybe, maybe not.

Originally Posted by Hippie3

these guys are trying to use their guns to send a message,

I don't see any proof of that. You may be right but there's no proof in this report.

I see a guy carrying a rifle where open carry is legal. What message is he prooving other than it's legal to open carry in Arizona?

That a matter of interpretation.

Originally Posted by Hippie3

i would not feel comfortable around a guy like that-
and that would inhibit my legitimate right to
express my views free from intimidation,

You do have that right.
As does this gentleman have the right to carry his rifle.

Originally Posted by Hippie3

i wouldn't take the kids to a political rally where
men are milling about brandishing firearms-
and i should be able to.

You are able to. You choose not to.

I'm sorry Hip, I just don't see what you see in this.

[firerat]

Originally Posted by ishkaboo

why else would you bring a loaded AR-15 to such an event?

How do you know it was loaded?

[Hippie3]

doesn't matter,
ALL guns are considered to be loaded
unless proven to be otherwise.
that's basic gun safety 101, rule #1.

[firerat]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

doesn't matter,
ALL guns are considered to be loaded
unless proven to be otherwise.
that's basic gun safety 101, rule #1.

Now that I agree with Hip.

[Hippie3]

being ABLE to go is irrelevant if i have to fear for the safety of my family.
that's not just me 'choosing' not to go-
that's intimidation and suppression of my rights.
i have no assurance whatever that the fool is even mentally stable,
yet you're telling me it doesn't matter ?
get real man.
you're no politician
so no need to talk shit here.
you know as well as i do
the chilling effect of a gun on a free debate.
you'd scream foul if it was a cop with a gun
but some civilian is no better in my book-
worse as he has no training and political motives.
the only reason to have a gun is if you are concerned about your safety-
and there should be no such concern for citizens at town hall meetings.
they are abusing their civil right, their gun, and their neighbors
to make some political threat
and i for one will keep my gun on them...

[LotRev]

Truth is I don't really care what the law says,
I think it's unnecessary. I don't see why there
is a need to exercise your gun rights at what
is to be a gathering of opposing viewpoints,
especially a political function (which we all know
boils a lot of blood).

I wouldn't have been near that guy unless I knew him,
and even so, probably wouldn't have just to avoid
the heat.

[firerat]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

get real man.
you're no politician
so no need to talk shit here.

I'm not talking shit and have no desire to be a politician.

I just don't see why or how this was a threat or intimidation tactic or whatever. I see the other side.

You could be right. I just don't see it.

Maybe I'm missing something.

None of us really know exactly what motivated this guy to carry his gun. You could be right, he could be trying to intimidate people. Maybe it was Billy Bob on his way to the range decided to stop for a minute and hear what was going on. How do we know this guy doesn't carry his rifle everywhere he goes? It's his right. No way to know.

[Hippie3]

oh bull,
no one carries their rifle everywhere
and i guaranty any investigation would
prove this was strictly a political gesture
as it was not just one guy, one time.
and if it's so common for folks to go to town hall meetings
slinging an automatic rifle
then why is it all of a sudden NEWS ?
why didn't it happen before now ?
cite other cases if you can.

[catdaddy]

I think the guy WAS definitely sending a message- and probably more than just the one he intended. Like the idea that 2nd amendment supporters are to be watched because they might do something stupid- like carry an assault rifle to a public gathering.

He exercised his right to be an asshole as well, IMO.

[dfar]

do i smell conspiracy!!! , what if it was planned to have this "radical" enforce his rights... people become scared, angry about guns being flaunted... sets the stage for stricter firearm laws, it's a possibility, however in all likelihood the guy probably had his own agenda and not one of a political movement.

Personally i find it pretty funny how people react to all this, can't say whether it's right or wrong, but it sure fucks with peoples minds , people will definatly "wake up" once assult rifles start being toted around like a wallet or a purse "you'd never think of leaving home without it"

[Doctor D]

It's this sort of behavior which leads to restricted gun rights. IMO, this is the gun-rights equivalent of an an 18 year old salvia smoker "exercising his legal right to smoke salvia" while making a kewl video of it and posting it on Youtube. Yeah it might be legal... for now. But it won't be for long! Thanks buddy!

[LotRev]

Originally Posted by Doctor D

It's this sort of behavior which leads to restricted gun rights. IMO, this is the gun-rights equivalent of an an 18 year old salvia smoker "exercising his legal right to smoke salvia" while making a kewl video of it and posting it on Youtube. Yeah it might be legal... for now. But it won't be for long! Thanks buddy!

Hm, well executed Doctor D. Like I said, it's not the law that worries me,
it's the guy toting around an assault rifle for god knows what reason.
Even assuming he just got back from hunting, I would be far less skeptical
of his intention to just see what's going on if he left the assault rifle in his vehicle.

[Ras Asad]

Originally Posted by Doctor D

It's this sort of behavior which leads to restricted gun rights. IMO, this is the gun-rights equivalent of an an 18 year old salvia smoker "exercising his legal right to smoke salvia" while making a kewl video of it and posting it on Youtube. Yeah it might be legal... for now. But it won't be for long! Thanks buddy!

fukkin aye.

[Hippie3]

i just wonder how it'd feel
with the shoe on the other foot-
say a bunch of young black men from ACORN show up
slinging ARs and AKs in support of obama.
i doubt the white redneck crowd would be supportive.

pretty soon that's what we'll see-
angry groups of armed men shouting at each other.
how long before gunfire erupts ?
that's why this needs to be taboo, condemned and forbidden.
hell an innocent gesture or sudden movement could set off
a firefight between rival factions,
pretty soon America starts to look like Gaza city or Beirut or Mogadishu
where men lounge on streets corners with AKs and RPGs strewn about.

[dfar]

funny how we may well become what we detest so bitterly, Ying and Yang

[firerat]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

say a bunch of young black men from ACORN show up
slinging ARs and AKs in support of obama.
i doubt the white redneck crowd would be supportive.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

Guy in the picture looks pretty black to me. (Doubt he supports Obama though)And it looks like a slung AR on his shoulder as well as a pistol in the holster.

[Hippie3]

the point wasn't just his blackness, i said 'from acorn in support of obama'-
did you miss that part ?

[Beastmaster]

Wow, he even brought an extra mag in his back pocket, lol.

[billiegirlfoote]

Originally Posted by usagolden

who wants to try and kick the shit out of someone with a gun?

someone with a gun, badge and a napoleon complex

[firerat]

I just found it funny you said black man with AR slung and I just saw the picture a few minutes prior. More of a humorous point than anything.

ACORN with guns.

No white rednecks probably wouldn't support ACORN, black, white, armed or otherwise. But they really don't support a whole lot of people that aren't them do they. (personally I'd never support ACORN either, and I'm not even a redneck)

But I would support the right to lawfully open carry even if I diagree with their cause.

[dead_diver]

Right or wrong, this is the type of behavior that gives ammunition to the anti-gun people. pun intended

[Hippie3]

not just the anti-gun people-
i'm pro-gun but i'm still against
this kind of abuse of the right
and i bet i'm not the only
pro-gun person against it.
being pro-gun doesn't equal pro-stupid.

[billiegirlfoote]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

i just wonder how it'd feel
with the shoe on the other foot-
say a bunch of young black men from ACORN show up
slinging ARs and AKs in support of obama.
i doubt the white redneck crowd would be supportive.

pretty soon that's what we'll see-
angry groups of armed men shouting at each other.
how long before gunfire erupts ?
that's why this needs to be taboo, condemned and forbidden.
hell an innocent gesture or sudden movement could set off
a firefight between rival factions,
pretty soon America starts to look like Gaza city or Beirut or Mogadishu
where men lounge on streets corners with AKs and RPGs strewn about.

I'm sure you just summed up the unrealized dream of every extream Muslim group and terrorist cell in the known universe. It is for this reason we do need stricter gun laws (SCARY SHIT). If this guys actions are an act of Freedom of expression, HIS ACTIONS ARE THE EQUIVALENT OF HATESPEECH, and is broadly forbidden by the First Amendment of the Constitution.

BTW I'MA REDNEK with many guns and I support ACORN(not by making others feel unsafe at peaceful public functions and debates)

[firerat]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

not just the anti-gun people-
i'm pro-gun but i'm still against
this kind of abuse of the right
and i bet i'm not the only
pro-gun person against it.
being pro-gun doesn't equal pro-stupid.

No Hip, you're not.

I frequent a few pro 2nd amendment sites and it seems you are on the side of majority.

[Hippie3]

that's because it's just common sense and consequences-
open-carry as an 'ideal' is like free speech-
in the real world there must be limits.
free speech doesn't allow death threats,
and open-carry should not include political rallies.

[MycoDani]

I am a social Liberal I know I'm in the minority but I am 2nd amendment all the way!

I agree with Hip it bothered me at a presidential event you bring an Ar-15 it does not help the NRA or anyone else who is pro gun, it just makes you look overzealous.

If I was in that crowd even as comfortable as I am with guns. I don't know that man I don't know what kind of gun owner he is?

I have been around really nice ppl that do really stupid things with guns,hence they never shoot with me again!

Obama hasn't even bothered with the assault ban. Yet, if people act stupid he has a plethora of Dems who would love to vote to reinstate the assault ban on certain rifles. I don't want that! I want people to be able bear arms just not in an intimidating or stupid fashion.

[firerat]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

that's because it's just common sense and consequences-
open-carry as an 'ideal' is like free speech-
in the real world there must be limits.
free speech doesn't allow death threats,

Hip come on, you are equating death threats with someone legally carrying a rifle?

If he was pointing it at people and threatening them then ok.

Open carry is not an ideal. It is a right in Arizona. Unlike free speech, not every state allows it.

And there are limits.

That is why he carried outside of where the prez actually was. He was not carrying where the prez was speaking. That becomes federal land and supercedes state law. Carrying there open or otherwise is illegal.

This man knew the limits, and made sure not to cross them. Otherwise he'd be in jail or dead.

And you say limits. Whose limits? Apparently not his.

Common sense? Common sense is relative. There are a lot of people who would tell you it's common sense not to post on a site about illegal grows and activities and yet....

[Doctor D]

Originally Posted by MycoDani

Obama hasn't even bothered with the assault ban. Yet, if people act stupid he has a plethora of Dems who would love to vote to reinstate the assault ban on certain rifles.

Obama won't bother with any assault weapons ban - he doesn't have the political capital at this moment to spend on something unpopular like that. He's having a tough enough time selling health care reform.

[billiegirlfoote]

Originally Posted by Doctor D

Obama won't bother with any assault weapons ban - he doesn't have the political capital at this moment to spend on something unpopular like that. He's having a tough enough time selling health care reform.

lets see someone take a pop at him with an AR-15, and you'll see how FAST all three of those statements change 180 degrees.

[LotRev]

I still fail to see where the law matters here.
We (this community) obviously do not respect the law much
when it comes to hobbies, so I don't see how referencing it
for selected use is a fair argument.

The law is wrong on many occasions.

Doing something irrational or stupid because it is within the law
is absurd. It IS common sense that you don't go walking around
with assault rifles. Protesting, or even just standing outside of any
function/group meeting you don't agree with holding a gun is
intimidating, that's the point of bringing the gun. Was the meeting
about guns? What purpose did the guns serve? And the extra rounds?
He wanted to cause a frenzy over it, and he succeeded.

There are all kinds of things you can do to incite riots and violence, within the law,
that doesn't make those things right or ok. No, he didn't cause riots and violence,
but easily could have. People react in crazy ways to all kinds of things.
Fights break out all over the place already, and a heated political venue
is no exception. Adding guns to that mix does not register as common sense to me.

[catdaddy]

What he did may have been legal, but it was not smart, and it was damaging, not helpful, to support of the 2nd.

You can sit and play with dildoes in church too, but that ain't smart either.

The danger is very real when you have opposing factions at a rally that somebody will get hot and do something stupid- and if it's the guy with the gun.... fill in the blanks.

His judgement was, IMO, defective when he chose to be there armed.

What other stupid shit is he capable of?

Maybe getting in a fight with someone and using that thing?

"Don't take yer guns to town, son, leave yer guns at home, Bill"

Don't take yer guns to town.

[Hippie3]

you are equating death threats with someone legally carrying a rifle?

you're damn right i am-
because a rifle is a deadly weapon
and it only takes a split second to
aim it and fire, killing someone
faster than anyone could react.
if a man walked onto my land with a rifle
i'd view it as a hostile act.
if a man came into my house
carrying a rifle
without my invitation
i'd view it as a hostile act.
and if i saw a man with a rifle
going into a school or a church or a restaurant
i might even kill him myself
and i'd get away with it...

[dead_diver]

For all anybody knows the guy could have been an "agent provocateur" sent by the very people who would like to see a total gun ban in the US. The infiltrator is always the first to incite violence. There is just no telling what the guys reason could have been but no matter how you look at it, it's in poor taste.

[Hippie3]

And you say limits. Whose limits?

society's, that's who.
majority rule over individual whim.

his 'right' stops where it encroaches on me-
or anyone else, for that matter.

i think people should file lawsuits under federal law,
specifically the voting rights act
and sue the dog shit out of anyone taking a gun to a political event
and sue the state that allows it too.
cost 'em a few million $$ and they'll amend that law pdq.


being legal under arizona law will not shield anyone
from being held accountable for intimidating voters.