zach,

take my post however you will.

i have not injected my opinion.

I only pointed out the growing section of society which is dissatisfied with congress.

i didnt say "armed revolution"

i just said revolution...

in a democracy such as our own, revolution comes in the form of ballots... not "crappy muzzle loaders".

I'm not delusional. i said nothing about fighting anyone... nor did i once mention tanks, or guns.

i dropped the "R" word - and your psyche ran to thoughts of fighting against tanks.

viva la revolution! vote in 2010

I have always liked this quote:


This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.


Care to guess who said it?

Lincoln. Which was loosely ironic.

This is a local story for me, living in the phoenix metro area so I've got a different perspective on this.

1) He was not the only armed person at this meeting. He was the one the media focused on, but there were dozens others also armed (although not quite as explicitly as he was). The person mentioned in particular I believe was the only one with a rifle (the others mostly just had pistols).

2) His weapons were in plain sight and not held in any kind of threatening manner. In Arizona law that is legal. You are allowed to carry a weapon in plain sight as you wish (with a couple of minor exceptions) as long as it is in plain sight.

3) They were there to protest against obama and to take up their message of 2nd amendment gun rights. Perhaps not the best way of doing it, but I applaud them for having the balls to do so. I also think that by doing so and there not having been an incident shows just what gun rights advocates have been saying all along, that you are in no more danger by allowing guns then you are if they are banned.

Trust me if there was someone there who planned to harm the pres it would be the person you didn't know was armed. If you go back in history to all of assassination attempts do you really think if guns had been banned that they would have been stopped/caught? Do you think a gun ban would have stopped lee harvey oswald? Would it have prevented booth from shooting lincoln? Or even if you want to talk about something a bit more modern, how about the assassination attempt on Reagan's life?

The common thread through all of these is that the shooter concealed his weapon prior to the attack. No gun ban is going to stop that.

That is not the issue here. The issue is the attention is on HIM and not the potential one for harm.

As for balls. If you have to come packing that much heat you've got little tiny ones in my view. And seeing as even a basic understanding of the states gun laws and the second amendment meant he could not be touched. What makes that "brave"?

He was not brave he was a media whore in my opinion. Saw the brewhaha over the pistol packing protester and wanted to oneup him in front of the cameras.

None of those armed citizens were in any way threatening or aggressive. If simple lawful possession is enough to cause hysteria then they're gonna do what they're gonna do anyways whether people carry firearms in the vicinity of public officials or not. Better to let them get hysterical and maybe overplay their hand than slowly squeeze the RKBA out of us.

Which again is the most likely reason for him being there in the first place. To avert attention away from the subject at hand.

It worked wonderfully.

What was the reason for the protest again?

The thugs diddn't "overplay" their hand when they rammed through the Patriot Act at record speed through congress.

Never NEVER underestimate what hysteria can do to a populace. Failure to understand that ended up with insane laws and insane policies enacted before. (And no not just in the Bush years)

Of course hopefully the worst that will come of this is every little balled copycat will want to come packing to show what a so called badass second amendment defender he/she is.

Youve got my head spinning on this one.

Did he take attention away from healthcare or did he create controversy to stir up 2nd amendment talk?

Both actually thats why its so brilliant.

By "thugs" you must mean the majority of Congressional Democrats who voted for the act right?

My two sheckles on this whole thing: the rifle is being used as a "sign." Nothing more nothing less. Kind of like PETA with their enlarged photos depicting an act of cattle slaughter. Wont faze some but may shock others. He wasn't breaking any municipal, state or federal laws that I am aware of. As to what his message was, not sure, but I have a hard time of interpreting "modern" art too.

I'm still waiting for an American to cite an instance where the Patriot Act directly affected them and violated their civil rights.

The Patriot Act has turned into the biggest leftist straw man argument in history.

I'll play devil's advocate; so you don't see him as a potential threat? (I'm curious of your opinion since you're a po-lice officer):D

Not illegal, doesn't make it a great idea though. It just doesn't send a peaceful message.
So in short, bring all the guns you like, but expect to be asked why.

By Golly I agree with Tchocky on something... except I would say "Please leave the guns at home or at least in the car. It just sends the wrong message."

Aye, SteamWake, I just say bring them anyway in order to avoid the tiresome "this ain't illegal, I know the law, you don't!" argument sure to follow :DL

Bringing a gun to protest does exactly the opposite to what's intended - I take the protester a lot less seriously.

Maybe you do, but guess what - that protester got tons of more coverage than someone who's just holding a sign ... considering that the idea of protest is to start a dialogue, his tactic has worked.

Most people aren't foolish enough to equate the lunatic fringe with the merits of any argument - meaning, we're all talking about how nutty this guy is while at the same time, we are all in some way thinking (and talking even) about gun rights.

Do not deny Steamwakes instincts... proven correct again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_262559.html

:woot:Bumpity cause its relevant