Armed Protesters, now on both sides

This getting out of hand.

2009 08 25 josh arizona protest gun Armed Protesters, now on both sides
I’m all for the 2nd amendment, but wearing guns to protests at Senatorial, Congressional and even Presidential Town Hall meetings is too much. This is a disaster and tragedy waiting to happen. The Secret Service must going crazy.
Does anyone really think that with these hyper-charged emotions of Left and Right, that both sides showing up armed will not go really bad…really fast?

Huffington Post

3be765f3839eb2031da28bdf07a07de2 Armed Protesters, now on both sides

45 thoughts on “Armed Protesters, now on both sides

  1. Well it is about fucking time people got the balls to exercise their second amendment rights. As far as i can figure most of the people who show up with the guns have no real intention of using them unless an actual revolution breaks out. Still the trees of liberty need to be refreshed.

    1. Bullshit. There is zero legitimate reason to bring a loaded gun to a political Town Hall. No one is taking their gun rights away. We all KNOW (God do we fucking know) that we can carry and conceal any frikken gun we want. For those interested in it, they can already do what they want with their guns. It’s not like they’ve been afraid to actually do it before now, is it? Are they cowards? How can you say they have no intention of using their guns? You don’t know that, and neither do the Secret Service. What is the real point they’re making here. Violence, they’re threatening violence, that’s what, and it is total fucking bullshit.

      1. Well i think the point is to show the government that they are prepared for a revolution or a forceful takeover. Again chances are the guy wasn’t doing it for the express purpose of inciting violence. He would have to be one huge idiot if he honestly expected for cops, secret service and other people to not take notice to the holstered gun clearly visible on his leg. Flat out diplomacy has failed and it will fail, our leaders and lawmakers have made this painfully obvious. Case and point? Marijuana legalization. Despite the mountains of hard scientific evidence proving that marijuana is a physically and psychologically “safe” ( as safe as mind altering drugs can be mind you) drug they still ignore the public opinion and refuse to listen to reason. And it doesn’t stop there; corporations do the same exact thing. The fact of the matter is that these people have written to their senators and leaders and have made their voices heard, and their senators flat out tell them to fuck off. This behavior that our government has been exhibiting for the past 30+ years is the exact reason our forefathers left england and their homelands to come here. How does a person make themselves heard to deaf ears? They have to take physical action. honestly if i were going to stage a coup d’etat i would aim for non fatal shots and put the overthrown leaders to trial. I might not agree with some of these people but i understand 100% where they are coming from and quite honestly i am as pissed off as they are. I mean for fucks sake nyokki they are making it illegal for me to use my legally purchased in a manner i see fit. If i were to make a copy of the windows operating system and if i had it just sitting on my desktop i could get arrested. You threaten their financial and political power and they laugh at you because they can use the government to protect it, you threaten their lives and then they listen. Is it barbaric? Yes, it is barbaric, but it is more sad that in this supposed age of reason and rationality that we have to resort to these measures. These people who wield these guns are in just as much danger as the people who are being threatened and they know this.

        1. yeah, except all these people have are pistols and civilian rifles. neither of which would stand up to any particular amount of resistance to fully automatic weapons, explosives or various gases that the authorities can use.

          1. I would beg to disagree with you. A well trained force could hold their own against a larger, better armed force.

            It’s just a matter of different tactics. Small guerrilla forces function in a more local theater. So you would have dozens of small groups causing problems in different part of the county. And that makes them hard to get rid of.

            We need no other example than our efforts to oust the Taliban.

        2. I’m pissed too, for many of the same reasons. Showing up armed is an incitement to violence. There are no if, and or but about it. Once you show up armed, thinking stops. I’m not gonna try to convince a man w/ a gun of anything. I’m leaving, and I’m leaving pissed. Is that what they want? Regardless of what they think they’re saying is not what what most people think about when they see men w/ loaded weapons, including an Ar-15. I don’t respect someone w/ a gun that disagrees w/ me; I’m afraid of him. If they were looking to scare me, they succeeded. I no longer care what they think.

  2. Well that proves it doesn’t it? These people with pistols are probably well aware that the authorities have said tear gases and rifles. I know in my hometown they had m-16’s and ar-15’s. Like i said tiki These people who wield these guns are in just as much danger as the people who are being threatened and they know this.

  3. Yeah, wear guns everywhere and bitch about your 2nd Amendment right that isn’t going anywhere. No wonder the rest of the world thinks America is bat shit crazy. All freedoms have restriction and gun owners deserve heavy restrictions for the safety of everyone around them. As for the fear of the government stuff, things get out of hand, but they also get blown out of proportion.

    Guns at civil town hall discussions with over emotional misinformed people on both sides is a massacre just waiting to happen. Especially considering the fact that America is not as civilized as we make ourselves out to be. Civilization is a facade for the beast that lives in the heart of man. Guns belong in safes or out in the wild hunting prey, not at places where people are supposed to have a civil democratic discussion. If anything proves guns do not belong in cities and towns, the wild west of America definitely proves this.

    1. Puuu i already covered this. There is active effort going on within our government to remove people’s second amendment rights. It starts out small with “assault weapons” bans and handgun bans but it sets precedence to ban more and more types of guns until all weapons are banned. What makes a gun more dangerous than a taser,a bow and arrow, a crossbow, a knife or sword?

      1. I honestly do not see it as a movement to take guns away 100%. Fuck man, I can still go out and buy a 50cal sniper rifle.

        Right now, here in florida, here’s my current restrictions:

        rifles: can buy on site, walk out of store with it.
        pistols: background check and usually a waiting period
        fully automatic weapons: ATFB permit required, but still available
        claymore mines: can purchase, but why the fuck would I need that?
        law rocket launcher: illegal to own by civilians.
        tank: legal to own, weapons must be disabled.

        I’m ok with fully automatic weapons being banned from next day pick up. I’m ok that my neighbor can’t own a rocket launcher.

        Guns are no different then bows and arrows, crossbows, knives or swords. This is why none of those a legal to take into federal buildings, lol

        1. Actually I think I find myself agreeing with TheLotusEater on this. Right now, yes, the regulations are as you have stated them. However I think that if Obama had his way, they would not be.

          One of his stated objectives was to reinstate the so called “assault weapon” ban. Not to institute a waiting period, or anything like that, but to simply make them flat out illegal.

          And from his various statements during and after his campaign, I get a sense that he is generally not a fan of firearms. Not to mention he is surrounding himself with people with a similar frame of mind. Just look at Sotomayors record, for instance.

          From where I’m sitting, it certainly looks like the current administration is definitely organizing things and putting people in places that will allow them to push through their desired gun control legislation with as little resistance as possible.

          1. Sure, we went over this before, but all these bans you are worrying about have not passed and will not. Due to the mass amount of gun nuts in this country, due to the amount of gun nuts in congress and mass amounts of NRA Lobbyests/ Members.

            Honestly I personally believe Assault Rifles(Semi & Automatic) do not belong in the home because they are only made for one thing only. To efficiently overkill another human being. Yes, each state has different laws regarding everything.

            Guns are completely different then tasers, bows & arrows, swords and knives. More efficient, take out multiple enemies, easier to conceal and leaves a larger hole/impact.

            And in states across America their are bizarre sex laws, Congress has many laws that deface lady liberty and have no common decency toward our fellow man. Doesn’t mean the laws will pass.

      2. What makes a gun more dangerous than a taser,a bow and arrow, a crossbow, a knife or sword?

        The range?

        I agree with Puulaahi. Too many Gun Nuts (Like me) for it to pass.

  4. It will be a long long future day when the American government bans guns. I don’t care what you own; I do care if you show up armed to a political function. I’m w/ puul on this one.
    Also, if you want to keep your guns, stop threatening us w/ them. FFS people, we are civilized thinking beings, are we not? The NRA is your biggest enemy, because they’re batshit insane. They show up in Colorado days after Columbine and speak against regulation. Has no one noticed our murder rate (from gunshots wounds) in the US over the last…uh…200 years? Is that worth zero regulation?

  5. I am personally very leery about making subjective judgment calls on what kinds of firearms do or do not belong in a home or business.

    Even if you, as an individual, do not see the need, there is generally almost aways a valid use case for any given weapon. If you are a store owner purchasing a weapon to defend your life and livelihood from a mob of angry looters, then assault weapons are no longer overkill, they may actually be necessary. So I think that making them all illegal would be an overly drastic reaction.

    Now I do agree with you, Nyokki, that people bringing firearms to town meetings simply for the purpose of intimidation is the dumbest use of their right to bear arms, and potentially short circuits any chance for rational discussion. However I think the problem there lies in the abuse of that freedom, not the freedom itself.

    I also agree that perhaps there should be additional regulation, but not necessarily on the weapons themselves, but rather to curb that kind of behavior. Going to a town hall to resolve disputes, as you point out, should be an intellectual exercise, not a test of whether you are brave enough to face down an armed protester.

    And while it is tempting to use the statistics of gunshot murders over the last 200 years as a basis for stronger regulation, in spite of the fact that I agree that there are ways the current regulation could be improved, those statistics are meaningless without proper analysis.

    I’d be willing to bet the number of knife killings, murders, robberies, etc. also exhibit proportional increasing trends over the same periods of time, and AFAIK even the statistics of the assault rifle ban did not yield any statistically relevant evidence of lower “assault weapon” related crime over the time it was in effect.

  6. I really don’t care what weapons one has in the house, business or even vehicle. I support the 2nd Amendment. I care about when someone decides to bring the gun into the open. If they’re not prepared to use it, then they shouldn’t show up w/ one and make everyone aware that they have a gun. Why should I think they have benign motives? They certainly seem to think that everyone is trying to take their gun away and are willing to fight (more than just verbally?) to keep it. No, I don’t trust politicians, but I trust these guys even less. FFS, they’re showing up to Town Hall meetings on health care/insurance to debate gun rights? Sorry, just plain wrong and stupid.
    BTW, I’m not saying it’s illegal, just moronic and narrow-minded, in the extreme.

    1. Here’s the thing. As I understand it, the second amendment was originally written with open carry in mind. There are lots of restrictions to this, and many states have imposed even harsher restrictions on it, some even have made it illegal, however so long as he has not violated the laws of his state, he is still exercising his second amendment rights.

      Openly carrying, and being prepared to use a weapon does not mean that they should or will. I do not wish to trivialize your feelings about this, as I think open carry is a bad idea for many, many reasons, however it almost sounds to me like you would feel threatened in that scenario simply because he is carrying openly.

      Obviously, given the circumstances, I fully agree that they are clearly not exercising sound judgement, but I think it would be equally erroneous to automatically assume malevolent motives on anyones part because of that.

      I think that kind of thinking, from either side, is more likely to spark an unfortunate incident than just the open carry of firearms.

      Having said that, I will also say again, that I think intimidation is one of the things that the Second Amendment was intended to prevent, and these people should be flogged for abusing their rights in that way.

      1. I’m not arguing any restriction to open carry, even at Town Halls; it’s just ridiculously callous, obtuse and dangerous to do so. If it was a Town Hall on the 2nd Amendment, I could see the point, but it’s not; whatever point they think they’re making is lost in the translation.

    1. I live in West Virginia; everyone carries…on their person, in their vehicles and in their houses. I’m not afraid of guns. I’m afraid of certain people w/ guns. You know the kind; always ready to start a fight, look at him cross-eyed and he’ll kick your ass, tells everyone he’s got a loaded gun, pulls it out to show everyone, shoots stray cats (and some that aren’t strays), AND loudly proclaims his right to do so…all…the…time!

        1. Dumbasses shooting cats just because they can…? I know the type. And I really, really, dislike them.

          I see where your frustration is coming from… LOL… THOSE people really should NOT be allowed to have guns. I also support the second amendment, BUT I also think it needs some serious additional regulation.

          Like mandatory *comprehensive* firearm training, not just where to point it and how to pull the trigger, but training and stringent testing about when and where a gun is SUPPOSED to be used, and when it is NOT appropriate to be used, or even displayed.

          And I know this might get some people up in arms, (no pun intended) but I’d even go so far as to say a mandatory psych eval might be a good way to preclude some of these jackasses from owning a firearm.

          It seems like the people who thump the second amendment bible the loudest seem to forget that the second amendment was intended to allow civilian defense against an oppressive government, self defense, and survival.

          Not bullying, intimidation, retribution, threats, and other moronic things like that.

  7. Lol, I have to keep starting fresh so my comments are don’t end up being 3 inches wide and 2 feet long.

    I don’t like the idea of a psych eval, even after the Virginia Tech massacre. I don’t trust the gov’t to get that right and I think lotus’s paranoia should be applied here. Waaaaaaay to easy for the gov’t to abuse.

    There should be some sort of class required prior to buying guns. They should teach the law (as applied in the state and federal laws as well). They should be made aware of consequences of actually using the gun. Even in the case of self defense; there will be an investigation and possibly a trial. If you talk to the people around here, you’ll get 20 different stories about what you’re allowed to do when a stranger trespasses on your property. Some will tell you he has to be in your house before you can shoot him. Others say he only has to be on your property. Some say you have to give a verbal warning, others say you don’t, etc…

    Too much talk and confusion, not enough facts and knowledge.

    1. Heh, yeah, I love the reply plugin, but it shrinks the columns waaay too fast…

      Anyway, I agree, the training should be more like drivers license training, preferably just as stringent as the European drivers license process. Heck, I wish our drivers licenses were that hard to get.

      WRT the Psych eval, yes, I suppose it could easily be abused, but I find the fact that it is easier to get a CC license than it is to get a drivers license, very disturbing.

      C’est la vie, I guess…

    2. Well believe it or not i’m very supportive of gun licenses and classes prior to purchase. As supportive as i am i am not 100% fond of the idea either. I see is as a way to inhibit my ability to protect myself, but too many idiots can walk in and buy a gun. Both my father and grandfather have a concealed carry permit and eventually i am going to get an open and concealed carry permit. As much as i despise our government i wouldn’t bring my gun to a town hall meeting over fucking healthcare reform. It gives the reasonably paranoid people like me a bad name.

      1. I can see how it would be a hassle to have to go through all of that in order to obtain a firearm, but at the same time, it does one no good to have a firearm, if they don’t know how to use it properly.

        as the old cliched adage goes: Power is nothing without control. And there are too freakin’ many firearms owners out there who are totally out of control…

Leave a Reply