- Home
- Business & Marketing (829)
- Editorials (658)
- Entertainment (2032)
- Fashion (1030)
- Highbrid (189)
- Honeys (2873)
- Humor (946)
- Music (5215)
- Need to Know (2207)
- News (2048)
- Podcasts (4)
- ARCHIVE
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 | 9:37am
SOUND OFF: Should Guns Be Legal At Protests? 1st vs. 2nd Amendment. Who wins?
Has health care reform exposed perhaps a loophole in our constitution
As the recent health care debate rages on (or perhaps simmers in some minds) a new battle has spawned. By now you’ve seen video and pictures of the man simply identified as “Chris” carrying an assault rifle outside the Phoenix Convention Center where President Barack Obama was speaking on Monday.
While gun enthusiasts might argue he was just demonstrating his Second Amendment right (right to bear arms), it was clearly an attempt to intimidate protesters who were exercising their FIRST Amendment rights (right to free speech, lawful assembly.)
While it was clearly alarming that the still yet fully identified man was carrying that kind of weapon so close the the President, he broke no laws. Arizona is an “open-carry” state and anyone legally owning a firearm can carry it in public as long as it’s in plain sight.
When confronted by protesters about why he brought the firearms to the rally the neatly dressed man responded “Because I can do it. In Arizona, I still have some freedoms left.” Throughout the event he engaged in heated debates with the less frightened supporters of Obama’s heath-care reform plan.
One positive thing to note is that for once this debate isn’t about race. Chris is a black man in start opposition to the President’s proposal so surprisingly the debate is about the issues. My question to you is what do you think about protesters being allowed to carry guns? Does it pose too great a security concern or have we seen an unprecedented clash of Constitutional Amendments unlike we’ve ever seen or was ever anticipated by the framers of this country.
FILED IN Editorials, News
As someone who owns 6 weapons (3 assault rifles and 3 pistols), I am one who takes both the rights and responsibilities of gun ownership seriously.
.
My weapons are under lock and key; and remain locked until I am on the firing line. The keys to the locks are held in a separate safe with the ammo. I would no more wave a gun around as a knife.
.
And yet – I am a firm believer in the second amendment. I believe that it is an individual right, cannot be superseded by anything short of a constitutional amendment, and will support gun rights with both my vote and my money.
.
All that being said – I think it’s a dumb-a*s move to bring a weapon to a public gathering; especially to one where the President will be present; and doing so borders on certifiable insanity.
.
Just because you HAVE a right doesn’t mean that you SHOULD exercise that right under any circumstances.
.
As a gun owner, I find nothing unreasonable about a rule that would ban unlocked weapons within ½ a mile of a president. The job of the Secret Service is tough enough already.
.
And FYI: despite what CNN said, the AR-15 you see is NOT loaded.
.
And, for those interested in what I have in my collection, here’s a photo of 5 out of the 6 http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=r7vjol&s=3
Your commentary is always so refreshing. Makes me smile and happy to read it. I think you’re right it was dumb. Although I’m sure Chris was responsible and trained in how to use the weapons whose to say he couldn’t be overpowered by a mob and things could get ugly. Its just not a good idea.
.
Just because you have the right to jump off a bridge doesn’t mean you should.
Yes. We have, for example, the right to freely assemble, but that doesn’t mean we should assemble at the bottom of a septic tank.
.
In this case, I think it was stupid for 3 main reasons:
.
1. He makes other gun owners look like nuts.
.
2. He draws Secret Service manpower away from looking for the real nuts (who mean harm).
.
3. Like you said, someone could take the gun from him and use it in anger.
all three…great points.
I’m glad a committee got together and concluded that this situation isn’t racist.
.
It’s great that he feels comfortable in exercising his rights, but its an unnecessary exercise.
.
Malcolm: Why do you have so many guns?
I love the committee. I agree it was unnecessary. I guess he felt the need to remind people though.
Yes, but to be fair… When was the last time a black guy was able to get that close to a President with an open weapon… I guess that’s progress of a sort
Yeah I agree. I think his shirt and tie was also necessary but don’t think for a second that he and the several others that weren’t pictured but were seen carrying weren’t in the crosshairs of at least 3 snipers at any given moment.
Urban Thought:
.
I have them for target shooting, collector value, and investment value. (in addition to the usual “just in case” reason )
.
The pistol on the bottom right is a 1942 Walther P38. A famous weapon, and of some collector value.
.
The (SIG) rifle on the bottom left is pure investment. I haven’t fired it, and probably won’t. If we work on the assumption that the Dem’s are going to bring back the assault weapons ban, I will be able to sell it for about $1000 more than I paid for it.
.
For general shooting pleasure, the one on the top (a Bushmaster XM-15) is my weapon of choice. It’s a great gun to shoot, and very accurate.
.
I have the Glock pistol (right second from bottom) for home defense. Even though (as I said) the Bushmaster if my favorite gun to shoot, it’s too powerful for home defense. If I were to shoot that one in the house, the round would go through the target, through the wall, through my neighbors wall, and who knows where else.
.
The HK (second from the top) is a mistake. I bought it because I thought I would enjoy shooting it (it’s a 45 cal), but it feels so sloppy shooting it that I haven’t fired it in a year. I’ll eventually sell it; but I’m waiting for the assault weapon ban to come back to get more money for it.
A gun as an investment. I hear that.
Thx for the info.
“If I were to shoot that one in the house, the round would go through the target, through the wall, through my neighbors wall, and who knows where else.”
– Still laughing.
I guess being from New York City you only equate guns with cops and criminals not law abiding private citizens. Then again cops = criminals sometimes.
Hey, you have to think of these things
.
There’s one rifle out there that will go through 1.5 inches of steel at HALF A MILE.
.
That’s not the sort of thing you want to shoot in the air on new years eve, or leave lying around the house.
Forget about Chris and his right to carry a weapon in an “Open Carry” state. You all really need to be worried about the Saltines who practice errr day with the intent to snipe, in case shit don’t go there way in Amerikkka.
Lol.. and you can tell the nuts because they spell America with a K.
.
In all seriousness, I agree with you. I would also add that for these people, everything that happens is just “evidence” that they are right in their crazy beliefs.
.
You eventually have a situation where they feed off each other and create the very crisis they fear.
.
For example: A guy in Ruby Ridge has a standoff after they try to arrest him on gun charges, and several people are killed.
.
The nut-bag in Waco sees this, and uses that as his excuse to have a standoff were 76 people die.
.
In the crowd watching this Waco mess is another nutbag, who sees that (and ruby ridge) as evidence of his crazy beliefs, so he blows up the federal center in Oklahoma (on the anniversary of Ruby Ridge).
.
I suppose that it could be argued that sane gun ownership is necessary to protect against the crazy gun owners
The emphasis is on “k” because of the
Ku Klux Klan
wow… if that were a bear it would have bit me in the a*s