Guy shows up at Obama meeting with a gun

bobbyjoe

Crazy that you can be let near the President with a gun out in the open.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYUmCj4yud4

tlev

That interviewer is a jackass

Manic Moran

It's New Hampshire. The State Motto is "Live Free or Die". They take their individual liberties very seriously.

Eleanor Kjellman, who transplanted herself from California and then got into the State legislature, tried to propose a motion to prohibit people from carrying firearms into the NH State Capitol buildings. Serious misjudgement given that she seemed to think that urban New Hampshirites had the same view on firearms as urban Californians. Many people with sidearms showed up to the hearing.

Final result was that the proposal was overwhelmingly defeated, and she was also subsequently turfed out in the following election, when her own party (Democrats) refused to put her forward as a candidate to retain her seat.

On a related note, some chap who was wearing a sidearm in the vicinity of an Obama election rally during the campaign season in Pennsylvania was finally brought to trial last month. Judge turfed out all the charges, saying that he was doing nothing illegal. PA also has a very strong right to bear arms in its Constitution.

NTM

knoxor

Does the right to bear arms include any arms?

Could you walk down the street with a rocket launcher on your shoulder?

Is there also some law that its illegal to have a concealed weapon on your person?

jhegarty

knoxor wrote: »

Does the right to bear arms include any arms?

Could you walk down the street with a rocket launcher on your shoulder?

Is there also some law that its illegal to have a concealed weapon on your person?

Depends on the state.

tlev

I don't know if I agree with the part where he said if everyone had guns I'd would be even safer...

Manic Moran

knoxor wrote: »

Does the right to bear arms include any arms?

Could you walk down the street with a rocket launcher on your shoulder?

That remains to be seen, it hasn't yet been determined in court if the right goes to the extent of a rocket launcher. I don't think it will, at least on the Federal level. (State courts may have their own opinions). However, something not being a 'right' does not automatically prohibit it (eg there is no 'right' to a driver's license). Owning fully functional tanks, artillery pieces and rocket launchers is legal in the US with the appropriate permit from the ATF. I have driven down the public road in a privately owned tank which had fully functional weapons. However, it is also decidedly expensive. Due to the $200 tax per explosive round, most owners of such pieces only fire solid shot armour piercing.

Is there also some law that its illegal to have a concealed weapon on your person?

Only two States have a complete prohibition on concealed weapons. (Illinois and Wisconscin, if I recall). Others have limitations or varying degrees of permitting process. I would need to check, but I don't believe either state has a complete ban on openly wearing or carrying a firearm. Some states allow both (eg New Hampshire), some allow concealed and and ban unconcealed (eg Texas), others tend to prefer open and ban concealed (Wisconsin).

NTM

Nodin

America...ye have to love it betimes....

Kama

Don't ya? Last visit I had the humorous situation of my freinds explaining that the dumdum rounds he kept in his car were 'in case of the zombie apocalypse'.

Better safe than sorry, i guess?

Overheal

In South Carolina its manditory to bring your sidearm to church.

/shrug

I'd take that over the situation in Dublin any day.

tlev

Could you imagine if more people got guns here....

CJhaughey

tlev wrote: »

Could you imagine if more people got guns here....

What would happen?
Given that the current laws are amongst the most restrictive in the EU (along with the UK) and the criminals still use firearms with impunity here and in the UK I don't see much changing.
The Dail has just passed a law making fullbore handguns restricted, does this make anyone safer from Criminals that don't bother getting licenses and gunsafes?
The guys shooting each other are not applying at the Garda station for licenses:rolleyes:

Manic Moran

Last visit I had the humorous situation of my freinds explaining that the dumdum rounds he kept in his car were 'in case of the zombie apocalypse'.

Nothing humourous about it. When the zombies are after you, you'll find such preparations to be very handy. You will note that there is a zombie survival sub-forum on Boards. The correct weapon varies by opinion, but shotguns are a very common choice.





Still, there are some purists.

Overheal wrote: »

In South Carolina its manditory to bring your sidearm to church.

Is that still the law? Cool.

Again, preparation is everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Colorado_YWAM_and_New_Life_shootings

NTM

Nodin

CJhaughey wrote: »

What would happen?
Given that the current laws are amongst the most restrictive in the EU (along with the UK) and the criminals still use firearms with impunity here and in the UK I don't see much changing.
The Dail has just passed a law making fullbore handguns restricted, does this make anyone safer from Criminals that don't bother getting licenses and gunsafes?
The guys shooting each other are not applying at the Garda station for licenses:rolleyes:

Yep, greatest crock of shite of all time. Anyhoo, must control self and not get ranting.

Kama

The Dail has just passed a law making fullbore handguns restricted, does this make anyone safer from Criminals that don't bother getting licenses and gunsafes?

Your odds of getting shot are lower, yeah. I'm ambivalent on gun control; I like guns, I'm a not-completely-crap shot, and I think it's a valuable skill, but making them commonly available does seem to result in more people getting shot.

And proper zombie preparedness involves good co-ordination and organization, swarm control, and producing an effective kill terrain. Ammo runs out, good planning doesn't have to

Nodin

Kama wrote: »

Your odds of getting shot are lower, yeah. I'm ambivalent on gun control; I like guns, I'm a not-completely-crap shot, and I think it's a valuable skill, but making them commonly available does seem to result in more people getting shot.

Not in most of Europe. You get the odd incident, but thats the price of personal freedom, really.

Overheal

Nodin wrote: »

Not in most of Europe. You get the odd incident, but thats the price of personal freedom, really.

The Odd Incident?

America has a bad habit of media sensationalism, but dont let it distract you - it happens everywhere. And frequently.

jonsnow

Kama wrote: »

Don't ya? Last visit I had the humorous situation of my freinds explaining that the dumdum rounds he kept in his car were 'in case of the zombie apocalypse'.

Better safe than sorry, i guess?

The liberal elite in europe like to scoff at what they view as archaic and "crazy" american gun control laws.But they won,t be laughing so hard when the zombies are chewing on their smug know-it-all brains

jank

Overheal wrote: »

The Odd Incident?

America has a bad habit of media sensationalism, but dont let it distract you - it happens everywhere. And frequently.

And much much much more frequently in the states. The odds of being shot there is a hell of a lot more than canada or western europe, but less than say South africa or Columbia.

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's New Hampshire. The State Motto is "Live Free or Die". They take their individual liberties very seriously.

I'm sure that if they were still alive, Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy would agree to allowing their common citizens in close proximity to their presidents with firearms.

unwyse

And???

Manic Moran

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

I'm sure that if they were still alive, Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy would agree to allowing their common citizens in close proximity to their presidents with firearms.

That's why Americans generally are not allowed to get close to the President with a firearm any more. Ever try going to see one? Metal detectors all over the place. Even when it's an open area. Heck, we had to go through metal detectors which were set up on Nassau Street when we went to see Clinton at College Green. El Presidente was at no risk from a guy with a sidearm on the public street because he was not out in public. Next time 'The Beast' is on the TV, check out the thickness of the door. People openly wearing sidearms in NH is a non-issue. People making a big deal of it are generally people who don't live in NH.

NTM

Nodin

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

I'm sure that if they were still alive, Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy would agree to allowing their common citizens in close proximity to their presidents with firearms.

Actually nobody knew they had them as they were all concealed until use, if I recall.

Considering the amount of counter-sniper teams employed around any presidential 'event', not to mention various agents and uniformed personnell I'd be very suprised if there'd be but one hole in the gentleman had he appeared to be a threat.

Manic Moran

Well, it seems that idea's beginning to spread. A number of chaps showed up near an Obama address in Arizona carrying sidearms, one chap had a rifle.

Those damned trailer-trash rednecks...


NTM

bobbyjoe

Just because people have the right to do something doesn't mean it has to be done. Taking a gun into a heated situation is not a good idea. It has the added affect of intimidating the opposition. If loads of these guys start turning up then meetings will have to be cancelled not very good for democracy.

Manic Moran

It's also a statement in itself. The Democratic Party's Website, (And I believe the White House Website) still maintains it is the policy of the Administration to ban firearms such as the Corbon-15 carried in this instance. Womens lib people waved bras around as a symbol of their movement. Anti-war protestors burned US flags as a symbol of theirs. Every movement has a symbol which is brought to a rally to represent their cause. What better symbol to demonstrate a preference for the retained legality of a rifle than to bring it along to a political function hosted by the politician in question?

NTM

bobbyjoe

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's also a statement in itself. The Democratic Party's Website, (And I believe the White House Website) still maintains it is the policy of the Administration to ban firearms such as the Corbon-15 carried in this instance. Womens lib people waved bras around as a symbol of their movement. Anti-war protestors burned US flags as a symbol of theirs. Every movement has a symbol which is brought to a rally to represent their cause. What better symbol to demonstrate a preference for the retained legality of a rifle than to bring it along to a political function hosted by the politician in question?

NTM

Bra's and flags don't kill people. Gun ownership should include responsibility, they are not appropriate in some places.

worldrepublic

This is an extreme example/scenario -but it is the only way to get the message across given the absurdity and restrictiveness of political-correctness:

If German citizens living c. the inter-war period had the right to bear arms, would the Nazis had succeeded in taking over their country, and then Europe?

The whole point of the right to bear arms is not protection from fellow citizens, but from corrupt government, no matter how politically correct it purports to be. Maybe, just maybe, the Jews would have been better off if they had the right to bear arms, along with every other German citizen. Remember its the people, not political ideologies, and not government, that forms the foundation of civilisation.

Manic Moran

Gun ownership should include responsibility

I fully agree. Did he do anything in any way irresponsible with his rifle? Did he fail to abide by any of the fundamental rules of firearm safety? Did he point it at anyone he wasn't prepared to destroy or kill? Did he take the safety off? (Assuming the hammer was back). Did he place his finger on the trigger at any stage? Did he do anything whatsoever which was even remotely dangerous?

they are not appropriate in some places.

Like where? Not a flippant question, the decision on 'where a firearm is appropriate' varies from place to place. I mean, would you bring an assault rifle to a funfair filled with 12-16 year olds? No? It's a government-sponsored national event in Switzerland. (Guns and ferris wheels, interesting combination). Ever since the Black Panthers showed up in the Capitol Buildings in Sacramento with guns and scared the California Legislature, it's been 'inappropriate' (Actually, illegal) to bring them in. In New Hampshire, the mere suggestion that it is 'inappropriate' will (and has) result(ed) in a very strong pushback.

So here's a different question for you: Is it the presence of the firearm that concerns you, or the presence of a visible firearm that concerns you? 48 States in the Union permit people to carry a hidden firearm. If you've ever gone on holiday in the US, as long as you didn't say exclusively in Wisconsin or Illinois, there was a fair chance that the person sitting opposite you in McDonald's while all the kids tucked into their Happy Meals was packing a .45 Colt (or clone, very popular choice). Appropriate?

NTM

norbert64

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's also a statement in itself. The Democratic Party's Website, (And I believe the White House Website) still maintains it is the policy of the Administration to ban firearms such as the Corbon-15 carried in this instance. Womens lib people waved bras around as a symbol of their movement. Anti-war protestors burned US flags as a symbol of theirs. Every movement has a symbol which is brought to a rally to represent their cause. What better symbol to demonstrate a preference for the retained legality of a rifle than to bring it along to a political function hosted by the politician in question?

rather tenuous correlation TBH.
These are supposed to be healthcare townhalls after all.

Anywho, the truth is trickling out now about the gun guy in the pic. Things aren't looking good.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34475_The_Freaks_Behind_the_Arizona_Gun_Stunt

worldrepublic

norbert64 wrote: »

rather tenuous correlation TBH.
These are supposed to be healthcare townhalls after all.

Anywho, the truth is trickling out now about the gun guy in the pic. Things aren't looking good.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34475_The_Freaks_Behind_the_Arizona_Gun_Stunt

So why don't the police just round them up... and uh, arrest them? Last I checked they don't round up and arrest people based on a hit-piece article by "littlegreenfootballs" whatever that is.

Either way this debate is becoming irrelevant to the matter of Obama's falling popularity. The unemployment rate is in double digits -that's a real reason for his lack of popularity! You can't keep blaming the conspiracy theorists for everything -it is nothing more than a strategic diversion from the hard issues.