Conservative America

Bman wrote:I call BULLSHIT Pez

Call it whatever you want. Pez, like myself, believes in the right to protest. If you don't like the fact that carrying a loaded rifle is legal, go write to your Arizona Congressman.

Bman wrote:... you don't take LOADED weapons to events where hundreds of people will be and the President of the United States as a show of your constitutional rights. You take a LOADED gun to use it ... Bullshit.

Prove it was loaded (the article I read said he had the clip in his back pocket) and prove he intended to use it to harm someone instead of carry it as a personal protection device during the peaceful demonstration. Then solve the problem whereby he was stopped, checked, and allowed to do that while being monitored by secret service and local police. The building in which Obama gave his Town Hall meeting actually fell under the jurisdiction of the Federal government while he was in the building and probably beforehand to prepare for his arrival. Outside, it's state, and local. That's like a trifecta of okay-ness.

He was not arrested for creating a public nuisance.

Markwes wrote:

Bman wrote:Glad 4,500 dead Americans due to a war based upon lies and falsehoods (Iraq War) vs. Healthcare ... yea, appples to apples????

2 people legally carry firearms outside of an event where Obama was speaking versus comparing Bush to Hitler and suggesting he should be shot. Yea, compare apples to apples is right.

And by the way, did you notice one of the guys carrying a rifle is an African American? Your typical extreme right winger there huh?

There have been 8 guns over the past week at Obama events, not two.

meta4 wrote:

Bman wrote:... you don't take LOADED weapons to events where hundreds of people will be and the President of the United States as a show of your constitutional rights. You take a LOADED gun to use it ... Bullshit.

Prove it was loaded (the article I read said he had the clip in his back pocket) and prove he intended to use it to harm someone instead of carry it as a personal protection device during the peaceful demonstration. Then solve the problem whereby he was stopped, checked, and allowed to do that while being monitored by secret service and local police. The building in which Obama gave his Town Hall meeting actually fell under the jurisdiction of the Federal government while he was in the building and probably beforehand to prepare for his arrival. Outside, it's state, and local. That's like a trifecta of okay-ness.

He was not arrested for creating a public nuisance.

The second admendment right supporter on Hardball last night admitted the guns at the NH and the Arizon rallies WERE loaded, he said that was a mistake for the gun rights movement, he wished they had been unloaded, then it would have been a statement about carrying guns. Open your eyes Meta, you are not that dumb ... the guns were loaded and were meant to try to send a message to Obama and those that support him. I have money that says the idiots doing are the same ones who scream they want their country back and chant USA USA USA at Obama events .... Obama has not taken the country away from these fools, but I wish he would.


By the way it will only take one time for a loaded gun to be used at a rally and then you will be dumb founded and say oops that was a mistake.

Bman wrote:

Markwes wrote:

Bman wrote:Glad 4,500 dead Americans due to a war based upon lies and falsehoods (Iraq War) vs. Healthcare ... yea, appples to apples????

2 people legally carry firearms outside of an event where Obama was speaking versus comparing Bush to Hitler and suggesting he should be shot. Yea, compare apples to apples is right.

And by the way, did you notice one of the guys carrying a rifle is an African American? Your typical extreme right winger there huh?

There have been 8 guns over the past week at Obama events, not two.

I bet they won't let more than a few people carry guns to these events, a few is a sign of freedom of speech a few more is an infantry unit. There's got to be a reasonable limit so that they don't have an militia forming...

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/142031/12_bring_guns_to_obama_event_in_arizona_--_including_at_least_one_assault_rifle/

Last week, some random crazy guy named William Kostric was lavished with media attention after he appeared across the street from Obama's New Hampshire town hall with a gun strapped to his leg. Asked by Chris Matthews if the gun was loaded, Kostric scornfully replied, "Uh .. wow. Who would be silly enough to carry an unloaded firearm?" Indeed.

Another question Bman, I don't know who the "hardball" guest was but how the hell would he know if a gun in Arizona was loaded or not? I would hope his answer was similar to the quote from the article above, that he'd be smart enough to assume it would be loaded. I thought I read or heard a report on NPR that the black guy in Az. dressed in the suit with the assault rifle said at least the clip for the pistol on his hip was in his back pocket. Not sure why I would pick "back pocket" unless I had seen that somewhere but I can't recall the source verbatim. Here's one of the few times I feel It's safe to assume... but someone said "back pocket". Just sayin...

Markwes wrote:

floridafun wrote:as barney frank told a teabagger who asked him why he supports the nazi agenda obama wants..frank said simply "arguing with you would be like arguing with a dining room table"

Well then I guess Barney knows how LTRT and I feel when arguing with the left-leaners on this board.

right when what you are armed with is your bible and rush/eck/faux/worldnutdaily lies intinded to inflame..it would be hard to argue with actual facts.

There you go LTRT. We won't be taken seriously until we stop quoting the Bible, Rush, and Beck.

Markwes wrote:There you go LTRT. We won't be taken seriously until we stop quoting the Bible, Rush, and Beck.

LOL, probably copied those words from one of her campaign posts, same stuff, different day.

Humm, 2600 posts and I don't recall ever quoting those sources, maybe she thinks I post on the Huff Post blogs.

you boys play nice, ya' hear?!

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:you boys play nice, ya' hear?!

Oh oh. The moderator has spoken. Obviously has been listening to too much country music.

Markwes wrote:

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:you boys play nice, ya' hear?!

Oh oh. The moderator has spoken. Obviously has been listening to too much country music.

I sobered up, and I got to thinkin'...you ain't much fun since I quit drinkin'...

Meta and Pez ... Chris Matthews asked a great question tonight, do you guys also support allowing an armed man to sit in the crowded gym at Wayne HS when a President speaks there? What about allowing a man with a concealed handgun to sit in the crowd at a Presidential debate? Do you also support allowing armed people to board planes? Why do you want your planes safe but not the President?

Bman wrote:Meta and Pez ... Chris Matthews asked a great question tonight, do you guys also support allowing an armed man to sit in the crowded gym at Wayne HS when a President speaks there? What about allowing a man with a concealed handgun to sit in the crowd at a Presidential debate? Do you also support allowing armed people to board planes? Why do you want your planes safe but not the President?

Bman, did you not read the article you posted?

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

The individuals would never have gotten in close proximity 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 added.

You have completely lost it. But it's not too late to get help. Please get therapy.

Markwes wrote:

Bman wrote:Meta and Pez ... Chris Matthews asked a great question tonight, do you guys also support allowing an armed man to sit in the crowded gym at Wayne HS when a President speaks there? What about allowing a man with a concealed handgun to sit in the crowd at a Presidential debate? Do you also support allowing armed people to board planes? Why do you want your planes safe but not the President?

Bman, did you not read the article you posted?

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

The individuals would never have gotten in close proximity 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 added.

You have completely lost it. But it's not too late to get help. Please get therapy.

Maybe he should turn to the Bible for help.

Get help...call Charter Beacon today.

floridafun wrote:it would be hard to argue with actual facts.

Right because all the sources you post huffington post, moveon.org, codepink and every moonbat you can find on youtube are such reliable sources.

So I am assuming you guys from your lack of comment think concealed guns should be allowed on plane too ....

Bman wrote:So I am assuming you guys from your lack of comment think concealed guns should be allowed on plane too ....

From what we've heard from you and your leftist cohorts, what we think doesn't matter anyway.

LTRT wrote:

Bman wrote:So I am assuming you guys from your lack of comment think concealed guns should be allowed on plane too ....

From what we've heard from you and your leftist cohorts, what we think doesn't matter anyway.

So from that comment I will assume you are a hypocrit ... no guns on a plane so that you and your family are safe and protected but let the guns fly at Obama.

Bman wrote:

LTRT wrote:

Bman wrote:So I am assuming you guys from your lack of comment think concealed guns should be allowed on plane too ....

From what we've heard from you and your leftist cohorts, what we think doesn't matter anyway.

So from that comment I will assume you are a hypocrit ... no guns on a plane so that you and your family are safe and protected but let the guns fly at Obama.

What is the topic of discussion?

I defer my answer to uniformed or undercover police officers in Wayne HS, to Federal Air Marshalls on planes, and to the Secret Service in the audience of the President.

Ed Dionne's column today posed a great question... would the NRA or any other conservative pro-gun group have defended liberals that protested at a bush rally by carrying assault rifles? I have to suspect that the cons would have been up in 'arms' about it.

I realized that my stance has been somewhat contradictory to my more liberal views... I feel that it's important to clarify that I choose to be very strict about my interpretation of the consitutution, which guarantees the rights these individuals are exercising.

However, that is not to say that their activity is not a thin attempt at indtimidation. The guns really have no place at any large gathering, the presence of the president aside. However there is no law against it, and indeed these rights are constitutionally protected.

I think these guys that brought the guns are being tools. But I cant pick and choose which portions of the constitution I choose to support...

Pez wrote:Ed Dionne's column today posed a great question... would the NRA or any other conservative pro-gun group have defended liberals that protested at a bush rally by carrying assault rifles? I have to suspect that the cons would have been up in 'arms' about it.

I realized that my stance has been somewhat contradictory to my more liberal views... I feel that it's important to clarify that I choose to be very strict about my interpretation of the consitutution, which guarantees the rights these individuals are exercising.

However, that is not to say that their activity is not a thin attempt at indtimidation. The guns really have no place at any large gathering, the presence of the president aside. However there is no law against it, and indeed these rights are constitutionally protected.

I think these guys that brought the guns are being tools. But I cant pick and choose which portions of the constitution I choose to support...

I hope this stupid shit they are pulling pisses America off and it backfires on them and there is a movement to restrict guns even further, I would laugh all day!

Bman wrote:I hope this stupid shit they are pulling pisses America off and it backfires on them and there is a movement to restrict guns even further, I would laugh all day!

If anyone produces more restrictive legislation at the federal level it will be shot down before the ink is dry.

Although, I could see a martyr doing something stupid, I doubt it will happen. In any case, a singular event most likely will not be able to fuel a full "movement".

meta4 wrote:

Bman wrote:I hope this stupid shit they are pulling pisses America off and it backfires on them and there is a movement to restrict guns even further, I would laugh all day!

If anyone produces more restrictive legislation at the federal level it will be shot down before the ink is dry.

Although, I could see a martyr doing something stupid, I doubt it will happen. In any case, a singular event most likely will not be able to fuel a full "movement".

I call bullshit .... one time one of these second admendment birthers tries something the people of this country will DEMAND stricter gun laws and all of the work of the NRA over the years will be lost .... and we liberals will gloat! We will beat the NRA without us ever firing a shot.