[ASLplease]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Does he carry that weapon to work? Does he carry that weapon to the grocery store? I know he can but does he? No he doesn't, so could we please stop this childish game of "He brought the weapon because it's his right"?

They're bringing and brandishing weapons as a threat nothing less. Any pretence to something else is just that: pretense. It might make sense if it was a rally to protest changes to the gun laws but it ain't. Nothing remotely close to that.

I take my penis everywhere.

[BartSimpson]

Robair Robair:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

They're bringing and brandishing weapons as a threat nothing less.

So sez you.

I attended a Bill Clinton presentation once and was armed to the teeth. Are you going to tell me that I was doing that as nothing less than a threat to the man?

A presentation, not a protest. If you were among a group of protestors and you had a rifle on your back, yes, I'm pretty sure that would be the intent.
Unless you were protesting firearm restrictions, then a rifle makes sense.

At the time I had my .45, a Remington 700, four fragmentation grenades, two knives, a wire garrote, and three loaded extra clips for the .45 and 100 rounds of ammo for the 700.

[ASLplease]

OMG! thats a lot of evil tempting you, how did you manage to stay a law abiding citizen?

[Praxius]

ASLplease ASLplease:

paranoid imagined threats coming from a law abiding person that happens to have a rifle slung to his shoulder. you guys are pathetic.

What's pathetic is people who don't see the obvious problems this is going to create, already have created in the past, and forever will do so in the future.

We have idiots in their schools going around shooting their peers up and then killing themselves, leaving a video or letter for the US media to suck up and make them famous for, which makes more idiots like them decide to do it too.

And in the aftermath, everybody's all crying and sobbing at the dead loved ones and asking why.

Then the police break it down to the reporters, and then someone mentions gun regulation and the police or whatever politician snaps "This isn't a time to politicize this tragedy, it's a time for mourning."

Then like dumb ass sheep, they all do so, never bring it back up, glorify the killer for weeks and forget all about it until the next time someone shoots a bunch of people and then off's themselves...... and then the cycle repeats.... police explain the situation, people bring up how to prevent this from happening again, they're told to shut up and mourn..... and then it's forgotten about until the next time.

And so on.... and so forth.

And with the long list of presidential assasinations in US history and how many want a shot or two at Obama..... it's all just paranoid imagined threats?

It's reality believe it or not and history is full of prime examples.

And then eventually Obama will be gunned down and people will cry "WHY!?" and sob..... people will try and think of a solution to prevent it from happening in the future, but will be told to shut up and mourn..... and repeat.

It's so predicatble.... in fact, that's what's so damn pathetic.

[BartSimpson]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

At the Clinton rally -- were you holding those weapons out in the open so everyone could see you were armed?

No, the .45 was holstered, the grenades were in a satchel, and the 700 was slung. I was not 'holding' them.

[Scape]

People had the same rights before but encouraging and drawing attention to this at a political event is an act of intimidation that will encourage mobs which will be used as a cover of opportunity by others who use violence as a means to an end.

Perhaps you should also encourage packing exploding vests and RPG's as well so all the troops coming back from Iraq feel more at home.

[ridenrain]

One of the pundits pointed out that no one, including the president should have a constitutional exempt zone.

[BeaverFever]

$1:

Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in the USA. If it is as bad as you think then why is it so safe there?

Because its not very urban. Maybe also because it is so liberal

[Praxius]

ASLplease ASLplease:

Praxius, are you now painting law abiding citizens as lunatics that commit mass murder merely by allowing them to pack firearms? what is it about these firearms, are they possessed with evil spirits that corrupt the good?

Funny, I don't remember generalizing all as lunatics, only those who act and think like those who have already commited mass murder using firearms in my examples.

Did I ever call for an all out ban?

Nope..... try and stick to what is said.

[BartSimpson]

ASLplease ASLplease:

OMG! thats a lot of evil tempting you, how did you manage to stay a law abiding citizen?

Impressive, isn't it?

Frankly, the people who say that they can't trust anyone with a firearm...well, that usually tells me that they can't trust themselves with a firearm so I guess we're all better off when anti-gunners don't own guns.

[Praxius]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Actually so sez a whole blogosphere of people who approve of bringing rifles to rallys to show the president "We'll fight fer our rightz"....rights that aren't being threatened.

At the Clinton rally -- were you holding those weapons out in the open so everyone could see you were armed?

It's pretty sad that those people feel they need to threaten violent action at their president to "Fight fer our Rightz".... I would have figured in a so-called civilized, democratic nation, people would be beyond this and know that they can fight for their rights without having to resort to using weapons or the threat of using them.

And I'd also think that their own president of their own nation would know a thing or two about their constitutional rights that they wouldn't have to remind him by walking around like a lynch mob

[BartSimpson]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

$1:

Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in the USA. If it is as bad as you think then why is it so safe there?

Because its not very urban. Maybe also because it is so liberal

Montpelier is quite urban and their gun rights persist in that city.

Again, if the mere presence of firearms is causality then explain what is (not) happening in Vermont?

[Robair]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Arming yourself is the highest and purest form of political protest. Americans established a tradition of just this kind of thing in 1775. Used to be the English carried some very beautiful daggers quite publicly to distinguish themselves as free men. I'd say the charming young fellow at the rally in Arizona carried his properly safed AR-15 as a similar demonstration.

Free people are free to responsibly bear arms and as and where they see fit.

Anyone who is not free to do the same is not quite as free, are they?

None of that explains the motivation for using a gun to protest health care reform. His freedom is not being threatened.

Using a gun to protest something like the patriot act could be explained by your post.

The only logical reason is intimidation.

[BeaverFever]

ridenrain ridenrain:

One of the pundits pointed out that no one, including the president should have a constitutional exempt zone.

Well the already jam cell phone signals so what's the dif? I can't make a phone call infront of the prez because I might detonate a bomb, but I can carry an assault riffle? Besides, shouldn't bombs be covered under the right to bear arms? Should I be able to wear a suicide vest as a display of my "rights"?

[ASLplease]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Arming yourself is the highest and purest form of political protest. Americans established a tradition of just this kind of thing in 1775. Used to be the English carried some very beautiful daggers quite publicly to distinguish themselves as free men. I'd say the charming young fellow at the rally in Arizona carried his properly safed AR-15 as a similar demonstration.

Free people are free to responsibly bear arms and as and where they see fit.

Anyone who is not free to do the same is not quite as free, are they?

Well written, Bart. I wish that more Canadians could apreciate this idea.