The AWB is stupid

But carrying a rifle, no matter what it looks like, to a protest is just dumb.

8/18/2009 6:05:17 PM

Quote :

"no one needs an assault weapon, unless youre in the armed services on duty"

THOSE ZOMBIES AREN'T GONNA TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES, SON!

http://www.zombiehunters.org/

8/18/2009 6:07:14 PM

Just sayin...

There's nothing you can do with an AR-15 that can be considered "sensible", and you probably don't put much stock in law enforcement.

8/18/2009 6:41:27 PM

RE: The original topic

Gun carrying protesters are about as effective as sign carrying protesters. They make a lot of noise, and make for good CNN BREAKING SCARY THINGS HAPPENING! headlines, but the politicians don't give a damn.

Gun shooting protesters might get their notice, but a) it wouldn't do much to help their (the protester's) cause, and b) we are hardly anywhere close to such an event politically, too many people still believe in the system, even the gun toting ones.

RE: TKEshultz

Luckily, US Code states that the militia consists of "of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States"

And I would imagine that we would, as a civilized country, extend such privileges to our women as well.

RE: Lumex

Target Shooting

8/18/2009 7:01:10 PM

^^sure there is. hunting, target shooting, self defense. you still don't know what an AR is, do you?

Quote :

"no one needs an assault weapon, unless youre in the armed services on duty"

no one is arguing that, though ^ is very much so valid. the problem is, is that you and ^^ and our government, and other similar morons, don't know what the hell an assault weapon is. watch the video posted on the first page (the first video).

8/18/2009 7:10:19 PM

i don't care how out of touch I am.

carrying one of these around is reeeeeeeeeeeeetarded and unnecessary.

Its like wearing one of those "Big Johnson" shirts .

8/18/2009 7:16:06 PM

Quote :

"no one needs an assault weapon, unless youre in the armed services on duty"

was TKEshultz being sarcastic?

8/18/2009 7:23:04 PM

Shooting deer with an AR-15.

Keeping an AR-15 for self-protection.

This is "sensible" behavior?

It's perfectly within your right to spread butter with a meat cleaver, but don't pretend it's not wacky.

8/18/2009 7:33:14 PM

If I lived about a mile southwest of where I am right now you better damn well bet I'd have an assault rifle and some mother fucking steel bars on my doors.

Hell, I'd have landmines integrated into my security system if it were possible.

8/18/2009 7:37:22 PM

^^ do you walk around campus with a meat cleaver?

I dont care if you keep one clenched between your butt cheeks when your at home.

8/18/2009 7:40:29 PM

^^^ Actually, many people would suggest that hunting deer with an AR-15 (at least of the type most people think of when you say AR-15) is not sensible because the gun isn't powerful enough. However, it makes a fine varmint gun: http://www.gunblast.com/AR15_HBARs.htm

As for self protection, given that the gun was designed for use in close quarters combat, and the fact that most self defense shooting happen within 15 feet, I would say its not your worst choice. A shotgun would be better, but not all people are up to shooting a shotgun.

8/18/2009 7:57:55 PM

I could maybe understand people saying that an AR-15 isn't powerful enough for those huge mule deer they have up in the northeast and Ohio, but it should be fine for the whitetail around here. One of the avid deer hunters in my office has decided that he's only going to use his AR-15 to hunt this year, because it would be fine for no further away than he typically takes a shot from.

8/18/2009 9:08:38 PM

Quote :

"Shooting deer with an AR-15. Keeping an AR-15 for self-protection. This is "sensible" behavior? It's perfectly within your right to spread butter with a meat cleaver, but don't pretend it's not wacky. "

Hunting with it is wacky in most instances because, with maybe a few exceptions, there are significantly better tools for the job. Even a moderately sized whitetail deer really ought to be taken with a more powerful rifle (though 5.56 will suffice--minimally--with good bullets). Varmints generally would be better hunted with something more accurate (although there are a handful of highly accurized ARs out there...but most of them compromise the real strong points of the AR15, in my opinion).


As much of a "gun guy" as I am, I have to admit that I had never even HEARD of a "lightning link". Admittedly, I've historically been more into handguns and bolt-action rifles, but still...if I haven't heard of them, they're not common.

Of course, I was thinking seriously about buying/building an AR15 (I have no use for it...I just want one). Now I'm going to give some real thought towards getting my Class III license and (legally) building a select-fire AR.

________________________________________________________________

...and yeah, while I hate the demonization of "evil black rifles" or any other guns, and think that open carry protests are all well and good...showing up to see the President with an AR15 slung might be counterproductive, and it isn't really called for, in my opinion (it's not the President was touring around to promote a gungrabbing agenda or anything).

[Edited on August 18, 2009 at 10:43 PM. Reason : ]

8/18/2009 10:38:52 PM

Quote :

"I could maybe understand people saying that an AR-15 isn't powerful enough for those huge mule deer they have up in the northeast and Ohio, but it should be fine for the whitetail around here. One of the avid deer hunters in my office has decided that he's only going to use his AR-15 to hunt this year, because it would be fine for no further away than he typically takes a shot from."

mule deer are in the west. Ohio, the north east and west of the Rockies are all White Tail Deer.

And AR-15 is too small, even for White Tails.

8/18/2009 11:03:29 PM

HEY WHEN IS OBAMA GONNA COME STEAL OUR GUNS FROM US

8/18/2009 11:04:50 PM

Quote :

"And AR-15 is too small, even for White Tails. "

I had a neighbor that used to hunt deer with a 10/22. He was baiting them and not taking shots from more than about 30 yards, but he didn't have a problem with it. If a 22LR will take down a deer, a 223 will.

8/18/2009 11:20:12 PM

oh, it'll certainly do it. it just isn't a very good idea.

8/18/2009 11:25:48 PM

Another reason why I am generally of the opinion of: civilians carry concealed, LEO/MIL carry open. The point of carrying a gun is to protect yourself, not be an attention whore. I'm sorry but this guy is basically a grown up mall ninja. I would be all for allowing concealed (licensed) carry at these events, but I believe it would be illegal to CCW in NC if there is a 'public demonstration' going on.

8/19/2009 12:09:29 AM

^the point of OCing is to show that it is legal and that people with firearms are not all criminals. besides, what is so wrong with OCing? it may act as a crime deterrent.

8/19/2009 1:15:01 AM

1. An AR-15 is not an assault weapon, the M16 select fire is.
2. Duke, you cannot manufacture an automatic or select fire weapon unless you have a registered fire control group or lower receiver that was manufactured before 1986.
3. He was carrying an AR. So...., there were a bunch of people there carrying.
4. He, and the others, were nowhere near any elected officials. They are outside the secure area. They are breaking no laws.
5. No one is going to try and start any shit unless they are extremely stupid. Yes, some people are that stupid, but as a responsible gun owner, the AR would probably be the last thing utilized.
6. The people OCing are getting attention on a national level that would be impossible to by informing one person at a time. Unfortunately, the idiotic news is making it sound like it is terrible, while barely acknowledging that the POLICE and SS say it is legal and the people are doing nothing wrong.

8/19/2009 3:55:58 AM

just because something is legal doesn't mean it prevents you from looking like an attention whore.

Also if you think you have to openly carry a gun like this is a crime deterrent then you have mental problems. This is a problem starter just as if I walked around with a Swastika on my face. Only people who want to start problems with others and "stir up shit" would ever do something like this. Which is what happened.

I have no problem with his pistol because it is holstered.

8/19/2009 8:08:08 AM

there's obviously nothing illegal about this. but i wonder if it is just as much about showing that gun owners aren't criminals as it is to intimidate the opposition. why did these folks just start cropping up at town halls with large guns when there is a proposed social program that they don't like?

8/19/2009 8:17:29 AM

Quote :

"Also if you think you have to openly carry a gun like this is a crime deterrent then you have mental problems. This is a problem starter just as if I walked around with a Swastika on my face. Only people who want to start problems with others and "stir up shit" would ever do something like this."

In terms of the average citizen open carrying, I respect their right to, however if you are going to carry for defense it makes much more sense to carry concealed. I dont know if open carry invites trouble per say, but I definitely think open carrying requires a LOT more vigilance on the part of the carrier. When blatantly wearing a gun in the open, you need to absolutely be concerned with weapon retention, and I think the average person does not think about that or have the situational awareness required. For example, open carrying at lets say the grocery store, the carrier may be preoccupied for a moment at the counter, not paying attention to the bad guy behind him, who can easily disarm him while he is distracted. Im willing to bet with certainty that the average open carrier person most likely does not have a level 3 retention holster, the knowledge, skill and training in weapon retention, the training to always keep his "gun hand" free and protecting of the weapon, and the situational awareness to always think about people behind him or on his strong side.

Now I am all for honest citizens being allowed to carry, I just think concealed carry for the average person is more prudent and safe, so long as they are proficient with the weapon as well as how to draw and present from concealment. The only instance i can think of where open carry would be smart would be for a store owner in his store. It could act as a visible deterrent, and at least he is in a somewhat controlled environment as opposed to being among a crowd in various situations. Of course open carry in ones own home is also a good idea as well.



[Edited on August 19, 2009 at 8:26 AM. Reason : .]

8/19/2009 8:24:38 AM

Let's be clear: Obama is no friend to gun owners:

Gun Rights Groups Are Wary Of Sotomayor

Quote :

"In a 2004 criminal case, U.S. v. Sanchez-Villar, a three-judge panel that included Sotomayor wrote that 'the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.'"

Quote :

"Souter rejected the idea of the Second Amendment protecting an individual right; in her 2004 joint opinion, so did Sotomayor."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/27/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5044428.shtml

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=6960824&page=1

On Gun Control: Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok

Quote :

"Q: You said recently, 'I have no intention of taking away folks' guns.' But you support the D.C. handgun ban, and you've said that it's constitutional. How do you reconcile those two positions? [Obama] A: Because I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country. I think it's important for us to recognize that we've got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people's traditions."

http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/2008_Politico_Barack_Obama.htm

8/19/2009 8:40:51 AM

^^I can agree with all of that.

Carrying a weapon on your back like the man in the photo is dangerous for a number of reasons and is irresponsible.

[Edited on August 19, 2009 at 8:45 AM. Reason : not hooksaw.......]

8/19/2009 8:44:57 AM

Republican18 made some excellent points. But the guy in question had a police escort, for God's sake!

I'm not saying what the guy at issue did was good for gun rights' proponents. I'm simply saying he had the right--by law--to do what he did whether anybody liked it or agreed with it or not.



[Edited on August 19, 2009 at 8:51 AM. Reason : And I reiterate that Obama is no friend to gun owners. This is quite clear.]

8/19/2009 8:50:25 AM

Hooksaw, show us where anyone in the thread is suggesting that he broke the law and that it's not his right.

8/19/2009 9:10:51 AM

Quote :

"Ernest Hancock, who organized the whole thing. And Hancock, who was also on the scene with a holstered handgun, turns out to have had very close ties to a 90s-era Arizona militia group called the 'Viper Militia' most of whose members were eventually sent to federal prison on various weapons and explosives charges tied to plans to bomb federal buildings."

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/ernest_hancock_viper_militia_gun_obama_event.php

8/19/2009 9:22:36 AM

^^ I posted nothing of the sort.

8/19/2009 9:23:41 AM

then what does your post about Obama's and Sotomayor's gun policies have anything to do with this thread.....

8/19/2009 9:26:56 AM

^ Have you even bothered to read the thread? Please stop trolling.

Quote :

"i'm all for open carry events, but something like this is just going to hurt their cause"

pooljobs

Quote :

"you gun people are, metaphorically, shooting yourselves in the foot."

joe_schmoe

Quote :

"carrying one of these around is reeeeeeeeeeeeetarded and unnecessary."

Quote :

"just because something is legal doesn't mean it prevents you from looking like an attention whore."

Dentaldamn

Quote :

"HEY WHEN IS OBAMA GONNA COME STEAL OUR GUNS FROM US"

WillemJoel

Can we not make the fucking thread about me?

[Edited on August 19, 2009 at 10:00 AM. Reason : For once? ]

8/19/2009 9:59:46 AM

Quote :

"I had a neighbor that used to hunt deer with a 10/22. He was baiting them and not taking shots from more than about 30 yards, but he didn't have a problem with it. If a 22LR will take down a deer, a 223 will."

It still doesn't make him a responsible hunter. It's just too small.

8/19/2009 10:05:20 AM

Quote :

"disco_stu: Hooksaw, show us where anyone in the thread is suggesting that he broke the law and that it's not his right."

Quote :

"hooksaw: I'm not saying what the guy at issue did was good for gun rights' proponents. I'm simply saying he had the right--by law--to do what he did whether anybody liked it or agreed with it or not. "

Quote :

"hooksaw: ^^ I posted nothing of the sort."

Senility setting in old man?

[Edited on August 19, 2009 at 10:08 AM. Reason : .]

8/19/2009 10:08:05 AM

^He never said that anyone in this thread said it wasn't a right. He was simply stating that it was, whether or not anyone said otherwise.

8/19/2009 10:54:04 AM

I guess what I should have asked then was:

What is the fucking point of saying the same thing that everyone else is saying already?

8/19/2009 11:02:21 AM

And also ask, why the massive emphasis on By Law.

8/19/2009 11:12:27 AM

*Sigh*

I was addressing the fact that even though the gun bearer at issue has Second Amendment rights, he is within Arizona law:

From the OP link:

Quote :

"Arizona is an 'open-carry' state, which means anyone legally allowed to have a firearm can carry it in public as long as it's visible. Only someone carrying a concealed weapon is required to have a permit."

The problem is that many of you shitheads don't read. And then you're all, like, "I fail to see what that has to do with blah, blah, blah"--or you're just trolling. Either way--STFU.

8/19/2009 11:36:29 AM

No. You are trolling. Quit getting worked up about people questioning why this guy, even though it was perfectly legal, would bring a loaded gun to a health care protest.

8/19/2009 11:43:06 AM

^ You didn't ask that in the last post--you asked this:

Quote :

"And also ask, why the massive emphasis on By Law."

And I answered. When you stated earlier the gun bearer's move "makes no sense," I answered:

Quote :

"It doesn't have to make sense to you or anybody else. It's the guy's right to do so."

If you're not trolling, are you just stupid?

8/19/2009 11:48:01 AM

Whats more scary/dangerous/etc: A protester legally carrying an "unnecessary and deadly" AR-15 "assault rifle" during a rally or a lunatic who just walked into Wal-Mart and bought a 700 Remington "hunting rifle" with a "hunting scope" sitting in the woods "observing" the protesters from 500 yards?

8/19/2009 12:39:50 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...s=rss_politics
White House Backs Right to Arms Outside Obama Events
But Some Fear Health Talks Will Spark Violence

By Alexi Mostrous
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Armed men seen mixing with protesters outside recent events held by President Obama acted within the law, the White House said Tuesday, attempting to allay fears of a security threat.

Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said people are entitled to carry weapons outside such events if local laws allow it. "There are laws that govern firearms that are done state or locally," he said. "Those laws don't change when the president comes to your state or locality."

Anti-gun campaigners disagreed with Gibbs's comments, voicing fears that volatile debates over health-care reform are more likely to turn violent if gun control is not enforced.

"What Gibbs said is wrong," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "Individuals carrying loaded weapons at these events require constant attention from police and Secret Service officers. It's crazy to bring a gun to these events. It endangers everybody."

The past week has seen a spate of men carrying firearms while milling outside meetings Obama has held to defend his health-care reform effort. On Monday, a man with an AR-15 semiautomatic assault rifle strapped to his shoulder was outside a veterans' event in Phoenix. He was one of a dozen men who reportedly had guns outside the forum.

Phoenix police made no arrests, saying Arizona law allows weapons to be carried in the open.

Last week, a man with a gun strapped to his leg held a sign outside an Obama town hall meeting in Portsmouth, N.H., that read: "It's time to water the tree of liberty."

Before the same meeting, Richard Terry Young, a New Hampshire resident, was arrested by the Secret Service for allegedly having a loaded, unlicensed gun in his car. Young was stopped inside the school where Obama held the forum, having reportedly sneaked past a security perimeter.

Ed Donovan, a spokesman for the Secret Service, said incidents of firearms being carried outside presidential events are a "relatively new phenomenon." But he said the president's safety is not being jeopardized.

"We're well aware of the subjects that are showing up at these events with firearms," he said. "We work closely with local law enforcement to make sure that their very strict laws on gun permits are administered. These people weren't ticketed for events and wouldn't have been allowed inside and weren't in a position outside to offer a threat." The immediate area occupied by Obama on such trips is considered a federal site where weapons are not permitted, Donovan said.

Lawmakers holding tense town hall debates about health-care reform also have seen armed constituents. The staff of some, including Rep. Stephen I. Cohen (D-Tenn.), have taken precautions to guard against guns being brought into gatherings.

"We asked everyone with firearms to check them with the sheriff before we began the meeting," said Marilyn Dillihay, Cohen's chief of staff, describing an Aug. 8 town hall debate in Memphis. "We've never done that before." The decision was made because the number of people at the event and the subject of the debate created a "potentially a volatile situation," she said.

"Obviously there's a lot of emotion with health care," Dillihay said. "Feelings are very tense, and we were just trying to make sure that things were safe."

One man at the meeting disclosed that he had a firearm and complied with a request to put it in his vehicle, she said.

Other lawmakers said they intended to take no precautions in future town hall meetings or to ask the advice of local law enforcement. C.J. Karamargin, a spokesman for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), said the congresswoman will "balance rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment and providing her constituents with a safe forum to share their views."

Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University at San Bernardino, said concern about whether Obama will enact new gun restrictions may also be contributing to the tense political climate.

"There's a lot of anger out there," Levin said.

"A key thing that's been bubbling under the surface is what's going on with President Obama and guns," he said. "There is a real question mark not only for extremists but for gun rights advocates in the mainstream."

Staff writer Carrie Johnson contributed to this report.

8/19/2009 12:51:14 PM

Hooksaw has been tilting at Strawmen for awhile now.

8/19/2009 1:27:50 PM

^ Eat shit.

From the White House:

Quote :

"Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said people are entitled to carry weapons outside such events if local laws allow it. 'There are laws that govern firearms that are done state or locally,' he said. 'Those laws don't change when the president comes to your state or locality.'"

And this is exactly my position. Suck eggs, motherfuckers.

8/19/2009 1:34:58 PM

Who are you arguing against?

8/19/2009 1:36:53 PM

Quote :

"Who are you arguing against?"

8/19/2009 1:41:30 PM

I don't understand why these people want to draw attention to guns right now, when the administration had been largely ignoring them. It's like going into the forest, seeing a bear that doesn't notice you, and shouting, "Hey! Hey, bear! I'm over here! Pay attention to me!"

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Obama and most of his crew would love to ramp up restrictions on guns. Fortunately for those of us who like the 2nd Amendment, they're busy right now with things like health care. But these asshats are going out of their way to not only bring guns back into the public consciousness, but also to link them strongly with the number one topic of discussion right now.

Quote :

"it was a perfectly legal and legitimate form of protest."

It may have been legal but I don't think it was legitimate. I don't like the idea of setting a precedent where people use guns to increase their visibility in public debate. "Pay attention to me, I've got a gun!" has a distinctly undemocratic ring to it.

8/19/2009 3:31:49 PM

Quote :

"It may have been legal but I don't think it was legitimate. I don't like the idea of setting a precedent where people use guns to increase their visibility in public debate. "Pay attention to me, I've got a gun!" has a distinctly undemocratic ring to it."

Grumpy, lately I've been really digging your style. It rings of sanity.

8/19/2009 4:45:56 PM

^ I read that paragraph and was gonna say the same thing.

This comes down to just because you can carry guns where ever you want doesn't mean you should.

8/19/2009 4:58:09 PM

These gun carrying protestors do not reflect well upon the GOP, NRA, and other conservative organizations. It definitely takes away from the credibility and legitimacy of their stances, but it is perfectly legal. Obama isn't going to take away your guns, and you don't need to bring your guns to a healthcare protest. Most people think these incidents will help to incite a mob mentality. What is the end goal, overthrowing the government?

8/19/2009 5:02:03 PM

Quote :

"What is the end goal, overthrowing the government?"

that is exactly what a lot of the gun-toting people will claim. They will be quick to remind you that is what the original intent of "right to bear arms" was.

8/19/2009 5:19:34 PM