Can someone here clarify- are we talking about the right of the man to carry the assault rifle, or are we questioning his intent (intimindation vs. mere expression)?

Can someone here clarify- are we talking about the right of the man to carry the assault rifle, or are we questioning his intent (intimindation vs. mere expression)?

 

:popcorn:

Can someone here clarify- are we talking about the right of the man to carry the assault rifle, or are we questioning his intent (intimindation vs. mere expression)?

 

Without getting into a debate about how far the Second Amendment extends, what's the point of carrying a gun to protest health care reform if you aren't going to use it?

Without getting into a debate about how far the Second Amendment extends, what's the point of carrying a gun to protest health care reform if you aren't going to use it?

CNN reported that the entire thing was staged by Libertarian radio talk show host Ernest Hancock, who said it was about gun rights, not protesting health care reform.

 

What he was doing was either a matter of intimidation or as a matter of expressing his right to bear arms.

If you're trying to tell me that 99.9% of the gun rights fear mongers are at all concerned with anything other than individual rights, then I'm simply going to have to not discuss this with you. No one cares at all about "history"....they want their guns for themselves. They don't care if anyone else has one, as long as they have the right to have one themselves. It's not about the country, it's about the individual.

Your absolutely right. It is about the individual. An individual's right to own a gun, as provided for in the "country's" constitution.

Can someone here clarify- are we talking about the right of the man to carry the assault rifle, or are we questioning his intent (intimindation vs. mere expression)?

 

I would say intent as he obviously has the right to own the firearms and carry them under his states law. He wasn't arrested so no crime was commited.

CNN reported that the entire thing was staged by Libertarian radio talk show host Ernest Hancock, who said it was about gun rights, not protesting health care reform.

 

What he was doing was either a matter of intimidation or as a matter of expressing his right to bear arms.

 

Unless we are talking about a different guy, I read an interview where he outlined his opposition to health reform. So it seemed to me he was there to oppose health reform. Either way, plenty of guns have shown up at the health care protests, so I ask: if you are bringing weapons to protest policy, which is to represent resistance to tyranny, then what are you waiting for?

Well, if you don't want background checks or waiting periods to require purchases; I guess we will just have to ask them nicely not to buy them. :ohbrother:

Criminals don't get their weapons legally, so background checks mean nothing to them. We're already asking them nice, like. Bans on guns only disarm law abiding citizens. Criminals will still get theirs.

 

By the way, I have no problem with the waiting period.

Unless we are talking about a different guy, I read an interview where he outlined his opposition to health reform. So it seemed to me he was there to oppose health reform. Either way, plenty of guns have shown up at the health care protests, so I ask: if you are bringing weapons to protest policy, which is to represent resistance to tyranny, then what are you waiting for?

So you want a civil war.

:lol:

When I was young I could walk down the street with my .22 rifle slung over my shoulder, and did many times, without as much as a look from others. The anti-gun crowed would go nuts if they they saw this today. The way I see it, the anti-gun crowd likes to paint gun rights enthusiasts as evil and dangerous. It's ridiculous. It's not the people that are open and up front about it you have to worry about. It's not the law abiding citizen exercising their right that you have to worry about. Yet the media and the lefty fringe that are anti-gun have you scared out of your wits of them. They have successfully instilled fear in you.

 

What am I scared of? I think anyone who'll walk around with a gun slung over their shoulder that looks like they're going off to fight insurgents in suburbia is definitely unsettling. The media didn't do that. The fact that someone thinks they need/have to do that suggests to me an extreme paranoia that could lead to a lack of control or safety or regard for my well being. I know enough to stay out of trouble spots and I know how to keep myself out of situations where I'm likely to encounter someone with a gun. People like this guy, who is apparently a law abiding citizen makes my world even smaller.

 

I'll adjust. I guess your right to parade around with a fire arm is of more intrinsic importance than my right to feel safe and unthreatened while going about my normal life.

I'll adjust. I guess your right to parade around with a fire arm is of more intrinsic importance than my right to feel safe and unthreatened while going about my normal life.

Honest question- are you implying that there should be a law against unconcealed weapons?

 

(Are you also implying that RTS's life isn't normal?)

What am I scared of? I think anyone who'll walk around with a gun slung over their shoulder that looks like they're going off to fight insurgents in suburbia is definitely unsettling. The media didn't do that. The fact that someone thinks they need/have to do that suggests to me an extreme paranoia that could lead to a lack of control or safety or regard for my well being. I know enough to stay out of trouble spots and I know how to keep myself out of situations where I'm likely to encounter someone with a gun. People like this guy, who is apparently a law abiding citizen makes my world even smaller.

 

I'll adjust. I guess your right to parade around with a fire arm is of more intrinsic importance than my right to feel safe and unthreatened while going about my normal life.

More media driven image, no more, no less. Let's ask Australia how that gun control thing has worked out for them. If we can't learn from that, then God help us.

Unless we are talking about a different guy, I read an interview where he outlined his opposition to health reform. So it seemed to me he was there to oppose health reform

 

I think we are talking about different people

 

Either way, plenty of guns have shown up at the health care protests, so I ask: if you are bringing weapons to protest policy, which is to represent resistance to tyranny, then what are you waiting for?

I'm not sure what you are asking here.

 

Personally, I think that these people have every right to carry these weapons as they please. Anyone trying to commit a crime (such as assassinate the President) definitely would NOT have their gun out in the open like this, because the moment they put their gun in a threatening position, they'd be taken out.

 

On the other hand, it would be very, very strange (and a bit intimidating) to see. Bringing a gun like this to protest healthcare reform is nonsensical. Bringing it to express the importance of gun rights is fine, but it's not clear how gun rights are being threatened right now.

I think we are talking about different people

 

 

I'm not sure what you are asking here.

 

Personally, I think that these people have every right to carry these weapons as they please. Anyone trying to commit a crime (such as assassinate the President) definitely would NOT have their gun out in the open like this, because the moment they put their gun in a threatening position, they'd be taken out.

 

On the other hand, it would be very, very strange (and a bit intimidating) to see. Bringing a gun like this to protest healthcare reform is nonsensical. Bringing it to express the importance of gun rights is fine, but it's not clear how gun rights are being threatened right now.

Ammunition Accountability Act

 

We have the right to bare arms, but not the right to load them.

 

Reloading is out of the question, because it will be made illegal. This act effectively drives the cost of legal ammo out of the reach of the average law abiding gun owner. Criminals will still get theirs, though.

I think we are talking about different people

 

 

I'm not sure what you are asking here.

 

Personally, I think that these people have every right to carry these weapons as they please. Anyone trying to commit a crime (such as assassinate the President) definitely would NOT have their gun out in the open like this, because the moment they put their gun in a threatening position, they'd be taken out.

 

On the other hand, it would be very, very strange (and a bit intimidating) to see. Bringing a gun like this to protest healthcare reform is nonsensical. Bringing it to express the importance of gun rights is fine, but it's not clear how gun rights are being threatened right now.

 

Basically what I am asking is for what reason a person needs a firearm to protest health reform. I assume it is to represent violent opposition to the government. Is it a metaphor? If not when are they going to start opening up?