assault rifle at Obama rally.

[vurbano]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/18/obama.protest.rifle/index.html?iref=mpstoryview


PHOENIX, Arizona (CNN) -- A man toting an assault rifle was among a dozen protesters carrying weapons while demonstrating outside President Obama's speech to veterans on Monday, but no laws were broken. It was the second instance in recent days in which weapons have been seen near presidential events.

[Skyhi]

I'm surprised this is legal. You can't make verbal threats against the president without the SS getting involved, but you can flaunt weapons a few hundred yards away from him? Seems a bit inconsistent.

[fallout2600]

Ski, you're assuming everyone who owns a gun is a murderer....which we are finding out by these protests is simply NOT TRUE.

[Skyhi]

Ski, you're assuming everyone who owns a gun is a murderer....which we are finding out by these protests is simply NOT TRUE.

Not at all. It just seems odd that the SS, whose intent is to be overly cautious/zealous, is allowed to investigate verbal threats but cannot do anything about actually weapons in the presence of the POTUS.

[msmith198025]

They have open carry laws, if it is in plain view, you do not even need a permit. You just have to be legally able to own one to begin with.

[Bear Paws]

Not at all. It just seems odd that the SS, whose intent is to be overly cautious/zealous, is allowed to investigate verbal threats but cannot do anything about actually weapons in the presence of the POTUS. Maybe they really don't care?:Shh:

Really, you need to get a grip. The presence of a fire arm, concealed or open carry, is not considered a threat to safety by the Constitution anymore than free speech and religion.

I think its telling that Americans citizens fear our Government so much and are angry enough that they are willing to openly flaunt their constitutional rights daring the government to try to take those rights away from them in plain view of the world, risk be damned.. That is the America I talk about you kids never saw. I'm telling. This is a revolution. We want our country back..

[Skyhi]

Maybe they really don't care?:Shh:

Really, you need to get a grip. The presence of a fire arm, concealed or open carry, is not considered a threat to safety by the Constitution anymore than free speech and religion.

I think its telling that Americans citizens fear our Government so much and are angry enough that they are willing to openly flaunt their constitutional rights daring the government to try to take those rights away from them in plain view of the world, risk be damned.. That is the America I talk about you kids never saw. I'm telling. This is a revolution. We want our country back..

?? I need to get a grip? Nowhere have I made a judgment on whether or not I believe these people can flaunt their weapons....

I just find it odd the an individual can get in trouble for saying he intends to harm the president, but the same individual can seemingly show up outside an event carrying a weapon where the president is speaking.....

[Bear Paws]

?? I need to get a grip? Nowhere have I made a judgment on whether or not I believe these people can flaunt their weapons....

I just find it odd the an individual can get in trouble for saying he intends to harm the president, but the same individual can seemingly show up outside an event carrying a weapon where the president is speaking..... Your opinion seemed condemning of the apparent conflicting law.

I just can't wait for someone to show up in a http://defense-update.com/images_new/caiman_cat1.jpg With a turret mounted 50.:D

[vurbano]

I think more people should show up armed.

[HD MM]

I think more people should show up armed.

What possible good could come with the mixing of heated disagreements, angry protesters, politics and guns?

[fallout2600]

What possible good could come with the mixing of heated disagreements, angry protesters, politics and guns?

Once again, you lefties believe that people who own gun don't understand and practice gun control.

The truth is you lefties don't know and understand real gun control.

I wouldn't be surprised most the guns were seeing aren't even loaded...People are just expressing their right.

[HD MM]

Once again, you lefties believe that people who own gun don't understand and practice gun control.

The truth is you lefties don't know and understand real gun control.

I wouldn't be surprised most the guns were seeing aren't even loaded...People are just expressing their right.

Kind of like a beautiful looking woman has the right to walk though a rough section of the city in the middle of the night while scantily dressed? Sure it's your "right", but what good can come of it?

[fallout2600]

Kind of like a beautiful looking woman has the right to walk though a rough section of the city in the middle of the night while scantily dressed? Sure it's your "right", but what good can come of it?

I guess I must repeat myself, as you ignored this and cherry picked my words:

Once again, you lefties believe that people who own gun don't understand and practice gun control.

The truth is you lefties don't know and understand real gun control.

[HD MM]

I guess I must repeat myself, as you ignored this and cherry picked my words:

Once again, you lefties believe that people who own gun don't understand and practice gun control.

The truth is you lefties don't know and understand real gun control.


Since you're acting like a 2 year old by repeating yourself, I'll play along:

WHAT GOOD CAN COME OF IT?!

[HDRoberts]

Since you're acting like a 2 year old by repeating yourself, I'll play along:

WHAT GOOD CAN COME OF IT?!

I wouldn't call it good, but intimidation of people that do show up to express an opposing viewpoint. Fallout might think that is good. But you can't make me believe they are showing up because they are worried about defending themselves from an attacker.

[msmith198025]

no laws were broken


"I'm exercising my rights as an American in Arizona," the man, who refused to give his name, told KNXV.


Phoenix police said authorities monitored about a dozen people carrying weapons while peacefully demonstrating.



"It was a group interested in exercising the right to bear arms," police spokesman Sgt. Andy Hill said.


Seems to me they were simply exercising their constitutional rights. I do not see the problem.
I saw nothing that leads me to think they were trying to intimidate anyone.

[msmith198025]

Also, they were not even close to the Pres.



U.S. Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan acknowledged the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona, but said he was not aware of any other recent events where protesters attended with open weapons. He said there was no indication that anyone had organized the incidents.

Asked whether the individuals carrying weapons jeopardized the safety of the president, Donovan said, "Of course not."

The individuals would never have gotten close to the president, regardless of any state laws on openly carrying weapons, he said. A venue is considered a federal site when the Secret Service is protecting the president, and weapons are not allowed on a federal site, he said.

In both instances, the men carrying weapons were outside the venues where Obama was speaking.

[fallout2600]

Since you're acting like a 2 year old by repeating yourself, I'll play along:

WHAT GOOD CAN COME OF IT?!

The GOOD that would come from it would be you Orwellians realizing that guns cannot be violent in themselves. Violence comes from people who use guns and a variety of other weapons, including fists, to commit violence.

[vurbano]

What possible good could come with the mixing of heated disagreements, angry protesters, politics and guns?

What indication is there that the armed protestors were "angry" or acted inappropriately?

Frankly this shouldnt be news but it is because we have a liberal government run press trying to turn these citizens into "dangerous" people with bologna like this:


The individuals would never have gotten close to the president, regardless of any state laws on openly carrying weapons, he said.

As if they were doing something wrong or would have if security wasnt there. Don't tread on my rights Commie

[stevenl]

What indication is there that the armed protestors were "angry" or acted inappropriately?

Frankly this shouldnt be news but it is because we have a liberal government run press trying to turn these citizens into "dangerous" people with bologna like this:



As if they were doing something wrong or would have if security wasnt there. Don't tread on my rights Commie

Where did you see that spin at in the media? Seems to me they only reported the facts of the issues. Someone took a picture of a protester at an Obama meeting holding his (What appears to be M16 style Assault rifle) so the news gatherd the information in regards to this picture that was floating around the web. The "Liberal Media" seemed to of done their job.

[msmith198025]

As if they were doing something wrong or would have if security wasnt there. Don't tread on my rights Commie

You missed the point of the statement it seems. With the weapons they would not be allowed that close simply because federal law in that case would be above the state law.
He did not mean anything else by it from what I could tell.

[vurbano]

Where did you see that spin at in the media? Seems to me they only reported the facts of the issues. Someone took a picture of a protester at an Obama meeting holding his (What appears to be M16 style Assault rifle) so the news gatherd the information in regards to this picture that was floating around the web. The "Liberal Media" seemed to of done their job.

I see it in the article. Why address the fact at all? The article was written purely to incite protest against having a gun near the president. I dont see a mention of how many people wore red shirts or blue ones? Carrying a weapon is their right just as picking out their own clothes.:augentreher:

[vurbano]

Giving a shot of the "watering tree of liberty" sign there CNN. Nice touch you liberal propoganda assholes! trying to stir up some fear eh?

[stevenl]

No what would be propoganda would be if CNN put the sign their. All the did was show what was thier. I know your not used to a news channel being factual and just telling the story how it is without opinion, but in this story that is the case.


and yes Carrying the guns are their right.. and CNN mentioned that it was. CNN made no opinion on if they believe it should be legal or not, they simply told the facts of the story. Try watching something other then FOXNEWS and you will see thats how real news agencies do things.