Men tote assault rifles at Obama event

Status
Not open for further replies.
theGringo said:
Some information on the Arizona guy from ArizonaShooting.com:

http://www.arizonashooting.com/v3/viewtopic.php?p=595650#p595650

ETA: Looks like this was organized by a Ron Paul group called RonPaul4409. Can't find much about them, but they have a lot of stuff on YouTube.
Click to expand...

Great inside look. The funny thing is his buddies think he didn't get arrested because he was black! How's that for some irony. [laugh]

They also unloaded the AR in case some loopy idiot tried to grab it. Smart move.
 
mikem317 said:
OMG! Best quote ever.

Sheep: Your gun makes me nervous.

Patriot: At one point in time, my skin made other people nervous.

I want to buy this man a beer!
Click to expand...

If you watch the whole thing, you will see that she engages him in generally sane dialogue. She focuses on her feelings and hears him out. She asks questions and doesn't dismiss him. He keeps it civil and addresses her issues with facts and grace. Can I buy both of them a beer?

She is like much of the population. They are willing to find common ground. That exchange won't ever make the evening news however.

The people who cut that video clearly don't particularly care for partisanship. The statement at the very end is golden.
 
terraformer said:
If you watch the whole thing, you will see that she engages him in generally sane dialogue. She focuses on her feelings and hears him out. She asks questions and doesn't dismiss him. He keeps it civil and addresses her issues with facts and grace. Can I buy both of them a beer?

She is like much of the population. They are willing to find common ground. That exchange won't ever make the evening news however.

The people who cut that video clearly don't particularly care for partisanship. The statement at the very end is golden.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I noticed she had her kid on a leash. [hmmm]

I could tell she was duped. Predictably by the government indoctrin-, er, I mean, "school" system.

I guess she might be a future convert. And of course we need to get more people to think "liberty" when they go to the ballot box and one way not to do this is by belittling them. Thanks for the cyber dope slap. [wink]
 
There was no threat, period. Not only did the police at both NH and AZ events recognize this, but so did the Secret Service (you know, the ones that bring assault rifles to Presidential events):
Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said armed demonstrators in open-carry states such as Arizona and New Hampshire have little impact on security plans for the president.

"In both cases, the subject was not entering our site or otherwise attempting to," Donovan said. "They were in a designated public viewing area. The main thing to know is that they would not have been allowed inside with a weapon."
Click to expand...
 
VARCHAR2 said:
There was no threat, period. Not only did the police at both NH and AZ events recognize this, but so did the Secret Service (you know, the ones that bring assault rifles to Presidential events):
Click to expand...

To the point where the agent babysitting these guys was not wired for sound. Either that or ear whigs have gotten small enough to not require a wire and separate receiver.
 
Timber said:
yep. and smart enough to keep a loaded mag in his back pocket. i was wondering about the whole "locked and loaded" on his back in a crowd scenario. would've been really easy for a moonbat to pull the trigger and make things ugly really fast.
Click to expand...

Chances are that was an empty mag in the gun.

That's what you're saying right? I'm on slow mode tonight. [wink]
 
Revolver said:
Here's a link to the New York Post article...

http://www.nypost.com/seven/0818200...ter_busts_out_the_big_gun_for_obam_185147.htm
Click to expand...

If you look at the top of your browser when you click that link, the TITLE of the article calls the AR an "AUTOMATIC RIFLE"

How about we make a gentlemen's agreement with all liberal douchefaces? They are allowed to call semi-automatic rifles automatic rifles if we are allowed to buy automatic rifles and call the semi-automatic. Since they don't care to differentiate between the two, they shouldn't mind if we don't either.

I am so sick of assclowns.
 
terraformer said:
To the point where the agent babysitting these guys was not wired for sound. Either that or ear whigs have gotten small enough to not require a wire and separate receiver.
Click to expand...

It is entirely possible to build a short range transiever into an ear-bud, however it is more likely that the SS is using a very short range transiever, such as a bluetooth ear-piece connected to a larger short-range transiever worn on the hip or in a pocket.

Visible Agents still wear the ear piece with a white coil and a hand-held mic unit because their primary job is to be out there and highly visible. They WANT people to see the gear and know they're being watched by the SS. The low-profile agents want to blend as best as possible.
 
JohnM said:
If you look at the top of your browser when you click that link, the TITLE of the article calls the AR an "AUTOMATIC RIFLE"

How about we make a gentlemen's agreement with all liberal douchefaces? They are allowed to call semi-automatic rifles automatic rifles if we are allowed to buy automatic rifles and call the semi-automatic. Since they don't care to differentiate between the two, they shouldn't mind if we don't either.

I am so sick of assclowns.
Click to expand...
There's the problem with your suggestion right there...
 
ShadeWPI said:
It is entirely possible to build a short range transiever into an ear-bud, however it is more likely that the SS is using a very short range transiever, such as a bluetooth ear-piece connected to a larger short-range transiever worn on the hip or in a pocket.

Visible Agents still wear the ear piece with a white coil and a hand-held mic unit because their primary job is to be out there and highly visible. They WANT people to see the gear and know they're being watched by the SS. The low-profile agents want to blend as best as possible.
Click to expand...

The word on the street is that the SS brings SHF band repeaters for operation to the site. Supposedly they are scrambled. They might have a relay link to other locations, too.
 
ShadeWPI said:
It is entirely possible to build a short range transiever into an ear-bud, however it is more likely that the SS is using a very short range transiever, such as a bluetooth ear-piece connected to a larger short-range transiever worn on the hip or in a pocket.

Visible Agents still wear the ear piece with a white coil and a hand-held mic unit because their primary job is to be out there and highly visible. They WANT people to see the gear and know they're being watched by the SS. The low-profile agents want to blend as best as possible.
Click to expand...

It is not terribly low profile to wear the lapel pin of the day on his sport coat. In fact, in a crowd of protesters in AZ Aug heat, wearing a sport coat isn't terribly low profile. I think this guy was out to be seen.
 
Timber said:
Where? and of whom? US Presidents? On US soil? By US citizens legally and openly exercising their rights? Put your money where your mouth is and start citing examples.
Click to expand...
JFK
RFK
Ford (unsuccessful)
Reagan (unsuccessful)
George Wallace - while running for President (crippled for life).

That's just U.S. politicians on U.S. soil who were either President or running for President. Include U.S. political figures who were not running for President and you can add MLK, Jr. and Malcolm X. If we include celebrities, or political figures from foreign countries, the list expands considerably - i.e. John Lennon, Pope John Paul, Anwar Sadat. This is just off the top of my head. If you don't think this has been a problem over the last forty years you must not get a lot of news.

As to whether the assassins were carrying legally, that's irrelevant because this isn't a debate about whether people should be able to own guns, or even whether they should be able to carry in certain circumstances, but whether open carry at political rallies makes sense. The problem of course is that you can't distinguish those carrying legally from those carrying illegally just by looking at them.

Also, simply because someone is carrying legally doesn't insure that they are not a threat.

It really boggles my mind that some of the same people who were insisting that continuing to fight a war in Iraq, and abridging out civil liberties at home were vitally necessary to our national security and to keep us safe here at home are now suggesting that when we have a democrat in the White House its perfectly ok for people to bring their AR15's, high power rifle, etc. to Presidential rallies.

Finally, to put this in historical perspective, in the late 60's members of the Black Panther Party began openly (and legally) carrying guns in the street. I wonder how many of those that are defending this practice when its being done by conservatives who oppose Obama would have felt the same way about the Black Panther party. Or suppose large groups of from Farrakhan's Nation of Islam start showing up at Republican political rallies?
 
Last edited:
John C. said:
Finally, it really boggles my mind that some of the same people who were insisting that continuing to fight a war in Iraq, and abridging out civil liberties at home were vitally necessary to our national security and to keep us safe here at home are now suggesting that when we have a democrat in the White House its perfectly ok for people to bring their AR15's, high power rifle, etc. to Presidential rallies.
Click to expand...

It's always been OK. It was OK when the Black Panthers carried AK-47s at a Bush event in 2000, and it's OK now.
 
John C. said:
JFK RFK Ford (unsuccessful) Reagan (unsuccessful) George Wallace - while running for President (crippled for life) That's just U.S. politicians on U.S. soil who were either President or running for President. Include U.S. political figures who were not running for President and you can add MLK, Jr. and Malcolm X. If we include celebrities, or political figures from foreign countries, the list expands considerably - i.e. John Lennon, Pope John Paul, Anwar Sadat. This is just off the top of my head. If you don't think this has been a problem over the last forty years you must not get a lot of news. As to whether the assassins were carrying legally, that's irrelevant because this isn't a debate about whether people should be able to own guns, or even whether they should be able to carry in certain circumstances, but whether open carry at political rallies makes sense. The problem of course is that you can't distinguish those carrying legally from those carrying illegally just by looking at them. Also, simply because someone is carrying legally doesn't insure that they are not a threat. Finally, it really boggles my mind that some of the same people who were insisting that continuing to fight a war in Iraq, and abridging out civil liberties at home were vitally necessary to our national security and to keep us safe here at home are now suggesting that when we have a democrat in the White House its perfectly ok for people to bring their AR15's, high power rifle, etc. to Presidential rallies.
Click to expand...

Seems to be perfectly OK with the Obama administration:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/18/AR2009081803416.html?hpid=topnews
 
John C. said:

JFK
RFK
Ford (unsuccessful)
Reagan (unsuccessful)
George Wallace - while running for President (crippled for life).

That's just U.S. politicians on U.S. soil who were either President or running for President. Include U.S. political figures who were not running for President and you can add MLK, Jr. and Malcolm X. If we include celebrities, or political figures from foreign countries, the list expands considerably - i.e. John Lennon, Pope John Paul, Anwar Sadat. This is just off the top of my head. If you don't think this has been a problem over the last forty years you must not get a lot of news.

As to whether the assassins were carrying legally, that's irrelevant because this isn't a debate about whether people should be able to own guns, or even whether they should be able to carry in certain circumstances, but whether open carry at political rallies makes sense. The problem of course is that you can't distinguish those carrying legally from those carrying illegally just by looking at them.

Also, simply because someone is carrying legally doesn't insure that they are not a threat.

It really boggles my mind that some of the same people who were insisting that continuing to fight a war in Iraq, and abridging out civil liberties at home were vitally necessary to our national security and to keep us safe here at home are now suggesting that when we have a democrat in the White House its perfectly ok for people to bring their AR15's, high power rifle, etc. to Presidential rallies.

Finally, to put this in historical perspective, in the late 60's members of the Black Panther Party began openly (and legally) carrying guns in the street. I wonder how many of those that are defending this practice when its being done by conservatives who oppose Obama would have felt the same way about the Black Panther party. Or suppose large groups of from Farrakhan's Nation of Islam start showing up at Republican political rallies?
Click to expand...

John, it's you that needs to look at history or maybe your didn't read Timber's question in your haste to spout off.

A. None of the people you mentioned were shot/killed by legally open carrying U.S. Citizens. And depending on what you want to believe, JFK may not have been killed by LHO but that's a topic for a different day.
B. MLK, many say he was shot by .gov, but that is also an argument for a different day and another example of where your argument is wrong.

Nice try, come back and play when you have real facts to back up your argument.
 
Last edited:
gene said:
Would a Saiga or Mossberg be Okay? Any problem with carrying a sharp stick? Can one bring the swiss army knife if we disable the blade at home or are the screw drive, scissors and nail file banned? How many rounds should a gun be capable holding? How many people have been killed with a pistol grip, flash suppressor, bayonet lug or magazine lately? Home many of the millions of law abiding citizens and millions of guns didn't break a law today while the criminals did?
Click to expand...
 So to use your logic, is it also ok for me to show up with a flame thrower? 20 sticks of dynamite? A bazooka? How about using some common sense to make distinction based on ... common sense? So, no you can't show up with a Saiga or a Mossberg or any other gun because guns can kill people from far away. Swiss army knife, scissors and nail file, sure because in although in theory you can kill someone with these as well (hell in skilled hand you can kill someone with a Bic pen) you don't present a serious security risk. Again, this isn't a debate about whether you can own a gun, or even whether you can carry it in most circumstances its about security and keeping the President (or other public figures) safe. Its also a debate about whether doing this is going to increase the likelihood that our rights as gun owners won't be further limited or decreases that likelihood. IMHO this kind of behavior is at best childish and deliberately provocative. It significantly increases the chances that new laws will be passed that further limit our rights as gun owners. So I hope the guys doing this today are having fun, because I fear those of us who own guns are going to be paying for their lack of judgment down the road.
 
John C. said:
So to use your logic, is it also ok for me to show up with a flame thrower? 20 sticks of dynamite? A bazooka? How about using some common sense to make distinction based on ... common sense? So, no you can't show up with a Saiga or a Mossberg or any other gun because guns can kill people from far away. Swiss army knife, scissors and nail file, sure because in although in theory you can kill someone with these as well (hell in skilled hand you can kill someone with a Bic pen) you don't present a serious security risk. Again, this isn't a debate about whether you can own a gun, or even whether you can carry it in most circumstances its about security and keeping the President (or other public figures) safe. Its also a debate about whether doing this is going to increase the likelihood that our rights as gun owners won't be further limited or decreases that likelihood. IMHO this kind of behavior is at best childish and deliberately provocative. It significantly increases the chances that new laws will be passed that further limit our rights as gun owners. So I hope the guys doing this today are having fun, because I fear those of us who own guns are going to be paying for their lack of judgment down the road.
Click to expand...

1. It's sometimes appropriate to be "deliberately provocative".

2. You sound like a Fudd. Fear not. Joe Biden has stated plainly that he won't take your hunting rifle away.

Good luck in the future.
 
John, you think like a liberal.

You see citizens carrying weapons as posing a threat or being provocative.

Did you know that the citizens that were out in AZ had contacted the local PD prior to coming out, informing them of their intentions?

You have a license to carry dynamite and a flame thrower? Cool.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M-16 Era Ends: Army's 101st Airborne Division Receives Next-Gen Assault Rifles
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
2K
Picton
Picton
Maine Lawmakers Urge Cabela’s to Stop Selling ‘Assault Rifles’ After Attacker Bought Handgun There
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
Varmint
Varmint
Gov. Youngkin Vetoes Virginia Democrats’ ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban
Replies
21
Views
650
rudiewhitebwoy
rudiewhitebwoy
Philadelphia end of Ramadan event shooting: Police say 3 injured, 5 arrested
Replies
1
Views
80
LakeTrout
L
Buying ammo at BassPro at Foxboro
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
inerlogic
inerlogic
Back
Top Bottom