Interview with guy who brought gun to Obama speech

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

hsmith wrote:

So, are you on this committe that determines when it is ok to carry a firearm?

Do you know when crimes are going to be committed?

He hasn't "caused harm" to anything - gun haters will hate guns no matter what. I don't get why you think that anything will change their minds.

Activists on the left push their agenda non-stop and they move the ball forward. The longer gun owners want to sit like cowards and hope that people don't get offended, the quicker we will lose all rights.

Click to expand...

I have not determined anything. It is general common sense that many people would conclude on their own when you are in close proximity of the POTUS. We can look back in history and see all the prior attempts in causing the POTUS harm. Men armed with guns.

If you are so scared of crime.. stay home. Erect a 10 feet fence, install spot lights, and employ motion detectors.

A piss poor attempt to justify being there armed IMO... :lol:

Click to expand...

How do you determine "close proximity"? From my understanding, the man was some distance away, certainly out of pistol shot range, and with no direct line-of-sight.

Also, it seems to me that the "close proximity" excuse is perilously over the line of "some pigs is more equal than other pigs" (NOT a reference to the slang term for police!) philosophy, which I believe is a large part of this nations' current problems. The President should not trump Constitutional Rights, in fact, the moral high ground would be for him to embrace such. If a person is deemed to be a danger to the president, then they should be kept away from him/her. But the mere act of peacefully exercising Civil Rights should not be the determining factor.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

A piss poor attempt to justify being there armed IMO...

Click to expand...

The whole idea of freedom is the the citizens don't have to "justify" themselves to the state.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote

And to carry the sign he had while armed.... gives people a way of viewing him as a danger. And that is what was done successfully during the interview.

Click to expand...

I'd hazard to say that the meaning of the sign was lost on the majority of people viewing the original coverage.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Carnivore wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Thanks...this guy's balls get busted... :lol:

Bringing a gun to a health care debate with the president... geezz!!!

This guy did not do OC any justice. Sorry if he is a member here. He sounded like a nut job.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you on this one LEO 229, When I first signed on here, I thought mountain jack was flirting with disaster concerning his Pa. incident, but what made the mountain out of the mole hill was the LEO officers and secret service, Both Mountain Jack and this latest fella were participating ina peacable assembly nothing more, and nothing less. I havn't read or heard of any disturbance initiation by either of the OC proponents that made the headlines, just the Leo,andS.S. and a few sheep gasping.But I do admit that I thought Mountain Jack was pushing the threshold of taunting the inevidable, and for that I concede that I was wrong and I think the man in the video handled himself very well with that Loudmouth Chris Mathews.

Click to expand...

There is always a time and place for everything.

Going armed to an event involving the presidentmay be your right... but it does not mean it was a good decision.

The even was about health care... not the second amendment or gun rights. So his carrying a gun only caused alarm and gave ammo to the gun haters.

And to carry the sign he had while armed.... gives people a way of viewing him as a danger. And that is what was done successfully during the interview.

Granted.. the interviewer was loud and hit him with questions affording no time to think. But the interview overall made several good points.

Click to expand...

The time for protecting yourself and your family is all the time and every place.

And this was a great decision. This guy put his neck out there for the right to bear arms like you never have and likely never will.

LEO229, I tire of sticking up for you when folks bash you. You really don't have your priorities straight. Individual liberty first, being a cop and obeying your president and all that crap second, if it even deserves a ranking. You are like a robot programmed to state the party line for authority.

And that is why so many people here blow you off.

imported post

This man is my new open carry hero!!!! I can't believe this whole site isn't just jumping for joy at the instant publicity our cause just received. The interview was fantastic. Spoken better than most of us could probably do under the pressure of national tv. He even mentioned this site's slogan on rights word for word. He has lifted my courage to open carry to a new level and educated more people to OC than many of us will do in our lifetime.

imported post

astraflyr wrote:

This man is my new open carry hero!!!! I can't believe this whole site isn't just jumping for joy at the instant publicity our cause just received. The interview was fantastic. Spoken better than most of us could probably do under the pressure of national tv. He even mentioned this site's slogan on rights word for word. He has lifted my courage to open carry to a new level and educated more people to OC than many of us will do in our lifetime.

Click to expand...

No f-ing shiz. Glad you see it. It's too bad so many here would permit OC just as long as nobody notices.

Most people here, and the vast bulk of gun owners, are statists. Loyalty to the state is preeminent for such people. When it really matters, they'll run from their rights, and they'll turn on anyone who stands up for his rights.

P.S., you should see the gun owners that attacked Marchiafava for really walking the walk. That man had guns pointed at his head for our cause, and the scum dared to attack him viciously. Gun owners are among our greatest enemies.

When you look around, you'll learn that only a few gun owners support freedom, and these are opposed and reviled by most gun owners. You'd be net freer amongst Democrat anti-gunners than amidst the Dixie and buybow hateful crowd. Sadly and ironically, if Jesus returned, gun owners, the buybow belters, and Dixie couldn't put one in Jesus' head fast enough. They'd then watch the video on "Cops" and say that he needed to obey "authority."

imported post

PavePusher wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Carnivore wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Thanks...this guy's balls get busted... :lol:

Bringing a gun to a health care debate with the president... geezz!!!

This guy did not do OC any justice. Sorry if he is a member here. He sounded like a nut job.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you on this one LEO 229, When I first signed on here, I thought mountain jack was flirting with disaster concerning his Pa. incident, but what made the mountain out of the mole hill was the LEO officers and secret service, Both Mountain Jack and this latest fella were participating ina peacable assembly nothing more, and nothing less. I havn't read or heard of any disturbance initiation by either of the OC proponents that made the headlines, just the Leo,andS.S. and a few sheep gasping.But I do admit that I thought Mountain Jack was pushing the threshold of taunting the inevidable, and for that I concede that I was wrong and I think the man in the video handled himself very well with that Loudmouth Chris Mathews.

Click to expand...

There is always a time and place for everything.

Going armed to an event involving the presidentmay be your right... but it does not mean it was a good decision.

The even was about health care... not the second amendment or gun rights. So his carrying a gun only caused alarm and gave ammo to the gun haters.

And to carry the sign he had while armed.... gives people a way of viewing him as a danger. And that is what was done successfully during the interview.

Granted.. the interviewer was loud and hit him with questions affording no time to think. But the interview overall made several good points.

Click to expand...

How so? In the video I've seen to date, there was no panic, hysteria or hand-wringing done...except by the usual-suspect-media and a lot of people on Democratic Underground and Daily Kos whodon't seem to know anything about firearms law or Civil Rights.

Click to expand...

Either you are kidding or you are completely stupid.

Did you not see the news coverage and youtube video? That qualifies.

But I guess you want to see the crowd of people running and screaming "Man with a gun! OMG!!"" :lol:

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Either you are kidding or you are completely stupid.

Click to expand...

Either you hate Liberty or you want to see everyone under governmental control, at all times.

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Either you are kidding or you are completely stupid.

Click to expand...

Either you hate Liberty or you want to see everyone under governmental control, at all times.

Click to expand...

I am not kidding... you are stupid. :lol:

It is called common sense... you should learn how to use and apply it some time.

You are a wacko conspiracy theoristwho is by far.. the WORST anti-cop on the board.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

I am not kidding... you are stupid. :lol:

It is called common sense... you should learn how to use and apply it some time.

You are a wacko conspiracy theoristwho is by far.. the WORST anti-cop on the board.

Click to expand...

Now, boy, don't get in a tantrum and electrocute someone.

Curious, what conspiracy am I advocating? Why do government agents conflate the terms "dissent" and "conspiracy"? It becomes a very dangerous place when the words, themselves, have no agreed meaning.

imported post

What exactly is the big deal? The president isn't some king who we must gravel before. We're all freemen (and freewomen) who can exercise our rights at the time and place of our choosing, regardless of who may or may not be present.

If the president's security team can't keep one lone man with an openly displayed pistol from killing the president they need to turn in their MP5s, Uzis, body armor, armored SUVs, earpieces, and find a new job. And if they're really so concerned with the president being around armed citizens they should go somewhere where they aren't armed, like Egypt.

imported post

N00blet45 wrote:

What exactly is the big deal? The president isn't some king who we must gravel before. We're all freemen (and freewomen) who can exercise our rights at the time and place of our choosing, regardless of who may or may not be present.

If the president's security team can't keep one lone man with an openly displayed pistol from killing the president they need to turn in their MP5s, Uzis, body armor, armored SUVs, earpieces, and find a new job. And if they're really so concerned with the president being around armed citizens they should go somewhere where they aren't armed, like Egypt.

Click to expand...

While YOU may not view the position as president to be all that important... many other people do. Not only that.. there are actually people who desire to hurt or kill our leaders.

So, seeing a man armed with a gun at an event where the president is going to attend may cause them to recall all the past assassinations and attempts on our presidents.

If the president is assassinated.. this IS a big deal. Normal & rational people know that bringing a gun to such an event is not going to be so well accepted. It is hard enough now to walk around town armed without someonecalling 9-1-1 on you.

But think how you like.

I have seen so many foolish people on this board that it has really opened my eyes. I have never seen so many in one place that are IMO.. nuts. This is not to say that all that OC are... I have met all those that are normal. The nutty ones never come to the meetings. Go figure. :?

Maybe you should read up on the Regan assassination attempt. All that protection and one man with a gun slipped in and was able to shoot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_assassination_attempt


The Reagan assassination attempt occurred on March 30, 1981, just 69 days into the presidency of Ronald Reagan. While leaving a speaking engagement at the Washington Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C., President Reagan and three others were shot and wounded by John Hinckley, Jr.. Reagan suffered a punctured lung, but prompt medical attention allowed him to recover quickly despite his age.

imported post

Was Hinckley open carrying? Was Boothe? Was Oswald?

Nope.

Pretty easy to go down the personal attack road I guess.

imported post

I went ahead and got a riot shotgun right after the election. My gf asked "are you expecting riots?" I said "yeah, if someone makes good on a threat against the president."

Like the guy or not, there will be major civil strife if any harm comes to him. What the citizenry will likely do to each other, given the chance,scares me more than either party's political agenda.

-ljp

imported post

I should note Oswald was also a marine. Maybe they should just ban all marines from going near the president? Everyone knows they can kill a person with nothing but their pinky.

This whole "omg an open carrier/gun near the POTUS" is ridiculous. The guy is outside of the restricted area.

Hey, I know! The secret service should just stop having people shake the president's hand. Let's seal the POTUS in a bubble and place the start of the art system around the guy.

Being serious now, I'm talking about technology of today, where simply being in the presence of another is a threat.
Terrorists develop ‘suicide underwear
http://tinyurl.com/oj7ta4

Nobody searches the groin area, the simple presence of a person like I said, is dangerous.

EDIT: also to add. People who are the active shooters of today don't worry about staying alive, so you can bet people who want to hurt others today have no urge to stay alive either. There are two ways we can all handle this 1) do what we tell hoplophobes and barricade ourselves in our place of abode or 2) be prepared best as we can.

Live is for living, not for being a paranoid schizo.

imported post

That link doesn't work on my machine, alas.

-ljp

imported post

fixed my link

imported post

Legba wrote:

I went ahead and got a riot shotgun right after the election. My gf asked "are you expecting riots?" I said "yeah, if someone makes good on a threat against the president."

Like the guy or not, there will be major civil strife if any harm comes to him. What the citizenry will likely do to each other, given the chance,scares me more than either party's political agenda.

-ljp

Click to expand...

Absolutely. I wish this President a healthful term.

Unfortunately, I worry about the false flag operation and also the pro-authority hate-filled types who love to see violence employed against those with whom they disagree. Sadly, many or most of this group are gun owners.

imported post

Mountain out of a molehill. According to an interview with Mr. Kostric, he was not aware of any interaction at all with the SS.They were apparently so concerned,that they didn't even approach him. This was a non-event.


The only people wound around the axle on this, were the in-studio personality for MSNBC, and Chris Mathews. Their opinion of gun owners would be the same if this didn't happen.

Common Sense is an impediment to logical thinking. That's why the brady bunch uses the term at every opportunity.

imported post

Here is the entirety of Will's interaction with the police:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZVacfe3BDY

Right after this, the Portsmouth Chief of Police called this lieutenant and told him the priest of the Greek Orthodox church right across the street would welcome Will on church property. Will accepted, and moved all of 30 feet from where he had been standing, from school property to church property.