A dozen protesters carry rifles to Obama speech
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 28 Next
ridenrain @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:33 am
Again.. the visable presence of a gun didn't send people on a mad rampage.
BeaverFever @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:34 am
$1:
Like everything else, rights need exercise.
Except for immigrants and minorities, in which case its "take that shit off your head or get out of MY country," right?
ridenrain @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:40 am
BeaverFever BeaverFever:
$1:
Like everything else, rights need exercise.
Except for immigrants and minorities, in which case its "take that shit off your head or get out of MY country," right?
Exercising your straw man?
Scape @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:42 am
ridenrain ridenrain:
Again.. the visable presence of a gun didn't send people on a mad rampage.
It kept people away undermining democratic rights that were sacrosanct. It makes the likelihood of a violent attack that much more likely. Assassination only has to happen once. Bin Laden would be proud to kill a US president and this gives him a bridge.
Praxius @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:44 am
ridenrain ridenrain:
It's clear that seeing a gun didn't cause mass hysteria, except within the loony left media. 
......
I'm guessing MSNBC won't be interviewing this guy and trying to smear him as a racist. There were a number of folks who were packing at this event and it was all perfectly legal.
......
I'm guessing MSNBC won't be interviewing this guy and trying to smear him as a racist. There were a number of folks who were packing at this event and it was all perfectly legal.
Regardless of what is legal and what's not, this isn't going to end well if more and more people start doing this.
Everybody always loves to say that restricting firearms only hurts the law-abiding.... yet everybody is law-abiding, until they actually break the law.
The guy at V-Tech purchased his weapons legally... and didn't that guy who shot up the church also purchase his weapons legally?
How about the guy who went into the Holocaust Museum not too long ago?
The greater majority of these people obtained their guns legally and were practicing their constitutional rights that allowed them to eventually break the law and go on a massive shooting spree in the first place.
Whether their constitution says it's ok, or whether their laws say it's ok..... it's still wrong and common sense should show this.
And to allow more and more people to show up at a political rally loaded to the teeth with guns.... come on.... that sounds like a Taliban rally, not a Democratic Rally.
The extremists in the US are shining through.
BartSimpson @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:47 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
Unless every one of those people had a licence to carry, it was an illegal act plain and simple.
WRONG. Arizona has no license requirement for open carry nor do forty-six other states. Vermont also has no permit requirement for concealed carry.
BartSimpson @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:49 am
ridenrain ridenrain:
Again.. the visable presence of a gun didn't send people on a mad rampage.
I disagree. It obviously sent a number of anti-gunners on this site on a 'mad rampage'.
Praxius @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:51 am
ridenrain ridenrain:
Like the well armed blackguy said in an interview.. it's a dangerous world and I can't carry around a cop.
Yeah, it's a dangerous world.... do you need to carry a gun everywhere you go to feel safe?
Do you need to lug a cop around in a baby harness everywhere you go to feel safe?
I don't..... and if I did feel that I needed to, that'd be the moment I move to another country that's not so damn screwed up.
ridenrain @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:51 am
Scape Scape:
ridenrain ridenrain:
Again.. the visable presence of a gun didn't send people on a mad rampage.
It kept people away undermining democratic rights that were sacrosanct. It makes the likelihood of a violent attack that much more likely. Assassination only has to happen once. Bin Laden would be proud to kill a US president and this gives him a bridge.
Who did it keep away? It obviously didn't stop the bussed in union supporters, did it?
So do these gun-bearers now all work for Osamma Bin Lauden?
(not the other Osamma
)
Proculation @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:51 am
Praxius Praxius:
ridenrain ridenrain:
It's clear that seeing a gun didn't cause mass hysteria, except within the loony left media.
......
I'm guessing MSNBC won't be interviewing this guy and trying to smear him as a racist. There were a number of folks who were packing at this event and it was all perfectly legal.
......
I'm guessing MSNBC won't be interviewing this guy and trying to smear him as a racist. There were a number of folks who were packing at this event and it was all perfectly legal.
Regardless of what is legal and what's not, this isn't going to end well if more and more people start doing this.
Everybody always loves to say that restricting firearms only hurts the law-abiding.... yet everybody is law-abiding, until they actually break the law.
The guy at V-Tech purchased his weapons legally... and didn't that guy who shot up the church also purchase his weapons legally?
How about the guy who went into the Holocaust Museum not too long ago?
The greater majority of these people obtained their guns legally and were practicing their constitutional rights that allowed them to eventually break the law and go on a massive shooting spree in the first place.
Whether their constitution says it's ok, or whether their laws say it's ok..... it's still wrong and common sense should show this.
And to allow more and more people to show up at a political rally loaded to the teeth with guns.... come on.... that sounds like a Taliban rally, not a Democratic Rally.
The extremists in the US are shining through.
Your argument do not stand... I can buy a knife designed to kill legally and not kill anyone but I can also buy a power tool legally and kill someone with.
Like it or not, guns are a basic thing in American history.
PublicAnimalNo9 @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:52 am
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
Unless every one of those people had a licence to carry, it was an illegal act plain and simple.
WRONG. Arizona has no license requirement for open carry nor do forty-six other states. Vermont also has no permit requirement for concealed carry.
Like I said, I stand corrected.
And what you said just scared the shit out of me. Seriously, that's some fucked up shit right there
Proculation @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:53 am
Scape Scape:
ridenrain ridenrain:
Again.. the visable presence of a gun didn't send people on a mad rampage.
It kept people away undermining democratic rights that were sacrosanct. It makes the likelihood of a violent attack that much more likely. Assassination only has to happen once. Bin Laden would be proud to kill a US president and this gives him a bridge.
He was no where near the President. He was outside at a protest.
ASLplease @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:53 am
xerxes xerxes:
What right? Their right to act like fascist thugs?
If I show up to protest a womens rights speech with my penis, does that mean that I'm acting like a rapist thug?
BeaverFever @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:55 am
It could if you're displaying it publicly.
BartSimpson @ Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:57 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
Like I said, I stand corrected.
And what you said just scared the shit out of me. Seriously, that's some fucked up shit right there
And what you said just scared the shit out of me. Seriously, that's some fucked up shit right there
Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in the USA. If it is as bad as you think then why is it so safe there?
Ironically, Vermont is decidedly politically liberal and the most pro-gun of all the states. There's something for you to chew on.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 28 Next