Man carrying assault weapon attends Obama protest

[C-dub]

Some people are offended by rifles carried openly. Some people are offended by an interracial couple holding hands openly. Some people are offended by women displaying their faces openly. But in a free country, we don't have to hide just because some people are bigoted.

Well said.

[Liberty]

One thing that bothers me about these incidents is, I wonder how difficult open carriers make it for the secret service to do their job. It seems like everytime someone tries to shoot a president We lose our gun rights.

[Lodge2004]

I am still studying the whole "Chris" factor, and will hold out final judgment on this for a while longer...Something else is going on here, and I haven't quite put the finger on it yet...The fact that in one of those clips he states he comes from another state, is revealing...So far he articulates well the position and statement he makes by doing this...Yet everyone that talks to him (Chris), and William (from the other event) are dumber than a bag of hammers...

Here is a video that sheds a lot of light on him. His carrying at the event was pre-planned and coordinated with the Phoenix PD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_duSmoZKHhU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mr.72]

One thing that bothers me about these incidents is, I wonder how difficult open carriers make it for the secret service to do their job. It seems like everytime someone tries to shoot a president We lose our gun rights.

You are right about the losing our rights part, but I think the difficulty of the job of the secret service is irrelevant. The secret service must have more nuanced training than "if the guy is open-carrying a gun, he is a threat".

There will always be a throng of nut cases wanting to shoot the President, no matter who the President is. This has nothing to do with gun rights.

My problem with this whole debate is the idea that by carrying a gun, you are identifying yourself as a threat. The assumption by the media and maybe the regular general public is that if you have a gun, you must be planning to shoot somebody. So if you have a gun near the President, then you must be planning to shoot the President. The problem with this argument is the same old legal gun carrying argument, and that is that the bad guys, by definition, break the law. So just because you don't see the gun that the guy intent to shoot the President might have, does not mean there is no threat.

The presence of these guns is not any indicator whatsoever of a risk to the President. The President is at risk because he is a President conveying a controversial set of policies and presenting himself to the public for interaction, and this is the very nature of being the President in the first place. He's not at risk because some regular folks are carrying guns, any more than police open-carrying guns would put him at risk.

I would suggest there is just as much of a chance that a cop is going to flip out and shoot the President at one of these meetings as there is that one of these OC proponents is going to do the same.

[boomerang]

Ed Donovan, a spokesman for the Secret Service, said incidents of firearms being carried outside presidential events are a "relatively new phenomenon." But he said the president's safety is not being jeopardized.

"We're well aware of the subjects that are showing up at these events with firearms," he said. "We work closely with local law enforcement to make sure that their very strict laws on gun permits are administered. These people weren't ticketed for events and wouldn't have been allowed inside and weren't in a position outside to offer a threat."

[geoelectro]

My take is this; carrying a rifle because you're going hunting is normal. Somebody says, "Hey, where you going with that rifle"? Hunting. "Oh, figured". But if you say, I'm going to the town hall meeting where the President is speaking... "Er, uh, what"?
I wouldn't bring a power saw to a town hall meeting either. But if I was going to a construction site... well, no problem. I think taking a gun "just because" isn't necessarily a good reason. However, if the town hall meeting was about gun control, that would be different. Those who believe there is too much control would certainly want to show their concern by exercising their rights to the fullest.

I see the political statement being made here but I think it's the wrong forum. Health care. Those who would want us to fail would certainly use images against us. Such as THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!

Geoelectro

[bdickens]

Imagine if Rosa Parks had said to herself, "I better just get up and move. If I don't it might disturb some people." Imagine if Dr. King had said "don't march through the streets, it might disturb people and hurt our cause." Imagine if the Sons of Liberty had said "we better not dump that tea in the harbor, it might disturb people and hurt our cause."

[mr.72]

Imagine if the Sons of Liberty had said "we better not dump that tea in the harbor, it might disturb people and hurt our cause."

Yeah but in this case, it would be a similar thing if the guys taking guns to the rallies were:

1. breaking the law, openly
and
2. disguised as a known criminal element such as street gang members in order to avoid identification and prosecution

I agree with the civil rights arguments! I kind of think that if we really want to press the pro-gun-rights agenda, then we should be openly-carrying loaded long guns everywhere we go, and in fact submit to arrest in order to demonstrate the hypocrisy and corruption of the government. Maybe if enough people saw some regular folks innocuously carrying an SKS to a political event being arrested and put in jail when they broke no law on national TV then enough of the passive gun-rights advocates might wake up and become a little more active.

[casingpoint]

Imagine if the Sons of Liberty had said "we better not dump that tea in the harbor, it might disturb people and hurt our cause."

Today, it is recognized that tannins in the tea might kill off some endangered species of fish. Consequently, a takings permit would have to be obtained in advance from the EPA prior to the raid. But first, a dockside round of lattes at Starbucks for all stakeholders.

[stevie_d_64]

I am still studying the whole "Chris" factor, and will hold out final judgment on this for a while longer...Something else is going on here, and I haven't quite put the finger on it yet...The fact that in one of those clips he states he comes from another state, is revealing...So far he articulates well the position and statement he makes by doing this...Yet everyone that talks to him (Chris), and William (from the other event) are dumber than a bag of hammers...

Here is a video that sheds a lot of light on him. His carrying at the event was pre-planned and coordinated with the Phoenix PD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_duSmoZKHhU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Then we have this...

http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/ ... t-20th.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Try to get through about the first 8 minutes of Alex Jones talking about himself and how great he is in uncovering "things"...

As much as I truly believe that Alex Jones is a fruit loop from here to Christmas on a great many things...He somehow said something that resonated about the real reason some people are making statements by slinging arms and attending political events around the country...

He basically said, as he was talking to this (still unidentified) Chris B. (at least we have a last initial) about the concept (statement) that the government had better start paying attention to those of us stepping up to the counter, that they had better start serving us, instead of ignoring us...(I believe this is extremely important)

I totally agree with that concept...

Alex Jones is still a fruit loop though...Everyone eventually hits a home run as well...

[stevie_d_64]

Imagine if Rosa Parks had said to herself, "I better just get up and move. If I don't it might disturb some people." Imagine if Dr. King had said "don't march through the streets, it might disturb people and hurt our cause." Imagine if the Sons of Liberty had said "we better not dump that tea in the harbor, it might disturb people and hurt our cause."

Excellent point!!!

If the attention, however poorly it is perceived and reported by the media...It sure has been effective...

If it is perceived to be a threat to anyone attending these events, well, then thats their problem...

What amazes me is that there are a great many people (even those in our camp) that do not understand that the item that is getting their attention is just that...The message and opportunity it presents is what is more important...

Come next November, there may very well be a change that some are not going to like...And it will not be done at the point of a gun...No one on either side of that will be happy with that outcome...Thats why, ironically, those of us with the means to do so, will be the first to NOT go that way...And we should be very supportive of preventing that from getting that far...

I am so glad you made that statement above!!!

[Street2Peschel]

A buddy of mine lives in AZ and open carries all the time (when he decides he doesnt want to conceal carry) and no one bats an eye. In Texas (and I am still amazed that we dont have open carry), if we had open carry, after the initial media blitz of blood in the streets nonsense wore down, it would become a non issue.

I am surprised too. I was on a trip to Greece a few months back. I took a taxi from the airport and the driver, who was an older gentleman, asked me where I was from. "Texas," I said with a grin. His face lit up and he extended his index finger out and thumb up like a gun and made shooting sounds. I had to laugh because there was some truth in his impression, but I doubt seriously if I'd have gotten the same response had I claimed any other state or just the U.S. itself.

Classic.

[stevie_d_64]

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/phoen ... oAm7w.cspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's been ID'd, and as far as I can see his story checks out...

Sure, he slung arms to get the attention of the media, and his message (and others) in my opinion has been pretty much on the mark...Hopefully this has made an impact...

As much as the media tried to squew the message and keep focused on the rifle...He and his folks have done their best to make sure that most heard what they had to say about the issue at hand...And it wasn't about guns...

[Captain Matt]

Nearly five years have passed since this incident but the overt carry arguments pro & con haven't changed much.

Maybe I should change my user name to Rip Van Winkle and take a longer break next time.

[jmra]

Nearly five years have passed since this incident but the overt carry arguments pro & con haven't changed much.

Maybe I should change my user name to Rip Van Winkle and take a longer break next time.

You have been gone for awhile. Welcome back.