As an American, I must respect the laws in this country until such time as I can affect their change(i.e. Voting). I have no argument with the statement that both sides of the political spectrum have amassed copious amounts of freedom-hindering laws in an effort to protect the people from their own stupidity.
Well then, so long as we are respecting laws, surely you must disagree with the federal prohibition on drugs?
The federal prohibition on drugs is unconstitutional. When alcohol was originally regulated, it was done through a constitutional amendment (and also repealed through one) because the federal government knew that they couldn't legally regulate it. When cannabis was originally regulated, it was done by taxing it and then refusing to issue tax stamps, because the government realized they couldn't legally regulate it directly. The constitution hasn't changed to allow this behavior; the federal government has simply grown bolder in it's disregard for the document.
My point is that one's peaceful judgment must be impaired
...if they believed that it was a good idea to carry firearms in public parks with kids around? Sounds just like something an "rabbid liberal" would say.
Oh wait, there's more here...
if they would try to make an honest comparison of carrying a firearm in public (legal) to smoking a joint in public (illegal).
You're wrong. The two situations (firearm prohibition and drug prohibition) are highly analogous, right down their roots in racism. Both are about individual choices about how to live one's life, and
my point is that the "right" can hardly expect the "evil left" to learn some tolerance for their choices if the "right" won't learn some tolerance for the choices of the people on the "evil left." Further, the left votes too, and if we want them to keep their hands off of our guns, we'd better not go around referring to them as "rabid" all the time, as if they are animals out to get us or something.
I think the OP did fine in this situation, but the resulting left-bashing is just disgusting, particularly when it was a gay lefty that got this whole crazy open carry movement going in Washington. For all you know, the woman could have been a die-hard republican that just thought weapons should be kept in the home or concealed and not touted around in the park. (A lot of "right-wingers" do feel this way and disagree with our movement.) We really ought not be bashing on anyone, but if we must, it at least ought to be
everyone who is out for tyranny and violence, not just a subset you disagree with, and it ought be a pro-freedom, peaceful message. Not a feeble attempt at characterizing one set of life choices as being correct because "it's the larw, son!"