"Evil assault rifle" at one of Obama's town hall meetings

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by bcj1755, Aug 18, 2009.

  1. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090817/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_protesters_guns

    Oh no! Not an evil SEMI-AUTOMATIC ASSAULT RIFLE:eek::eek::eek: I love the responces from the AZ LEOs and even from the Secret Service:D:D:D I'm shocked that a "political scientist" from a major university would seem so...liberal:rolleyes::rolleyes: Why is it the antis make "semi-automatic" to be "evil"? Do they not realize that a revolver is semi-auto? Oh no, they don't. Mos tof them are brainwashed sheep anyhow. And the antis that know the difference willfully lie to the ones that don't.:rolleyes::rolleyes:
  2. 45nut

    45nut Well-Known Member

    Jul 19, 2006
    Dallas, TX
    It's the 50 BMG @ 2,000 yards one needs to worry about, not one dude with an AR :eek: :D

    What a bunch of hoplophobes! :D :D

  3. Bingo! And to the credit of the Secret Service, the comments in the article from their spokesman indicate that they realize that.
  4. cycloneman

    cycloneman Well-Known Member

    Dec 16, 2008
    "When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance," Solop said. "It actually becomes quite scary for many people.

    Didn't the black panthers bring guns to political rallys in the past? So what was good for the negros is good enough for me.:D:D:D:D

    joke them if they cant take a f***.
  5. mrkirker

    mrkirker New Member

    Jul 13, 2007
    When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance

  6. Bubblehead

    Bubblehead New Member

    Mar 7, 2008
    Pioneer, CA
    In this day and age of "gun control nuts", I really don't think we need that kind of publicity. It will fan the flames of the opposition much in the same way that Obama-Care is fanning the flames of conservative opposition.

    Just my opinion.

  7. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Nov 30, 2005
    I agree. I understand that he was within his rights and within the law, but I don't really see what he was hoping to accomplish and what point he was trying to make. This kind of publicity doesn't show firearms owners in a positive light.
  8. I have to disagree with this one. Why should law abiding citizens not exercise one of their rights in the presence of The Great One? So we should agree to not do something that we are prefectly legal in doing just so we don't "send the wrong message"? What's next, not speaking out in disagreement with Barry so we "don't send the wrong message"? Don't fan the flames of opposition? Isn't that the liberals do every night on the TV "news"? We're already forbidden to exercise our God-given right of self defense when we enter a gov't office building or a courthouse. So in order to "not send the wrong message" we should voluntarily give up that right whenever King-Emperor Barack I His Great Awesomeness and All-Knowing Teleprompter comes to town? In order to "not send the message" we shouldn't take firearms to political rallies? What's next, don't speak out against the Great Kenyan Master in order to "not send the wrong message"? Conservatives have been trying to be polite and respectful and have tried to "not send the wrong message" and, quite frankly, that has resulted in us losing our country. People have been voluntarily giving up their rights to be polite and not rock the boat and not send the wrong message and what has happened? The liberals have taken the opportunity to run rampant! "not sending the wrong message" is one of the reasons that the liberals and closet-commies are in control now. "Not sending the wrong message" will not lead to us getting these jackbooted thugs and jerkwads out of Washington, DC. "Not sending the wrong message" will tell the liberals that we will bend over, take it up the cornhole, then lie down and obey. "Not sending the wrong message" will lead us to being slaves to a totalitarian socialist globalist government.
  9. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    And it never will when MSM is involved.
    Problem is....
    It SHOULD be reported/viewed as positive.

    Where else in the world can you do this?

    The 1st amendment makes this possible.
    The 2nd makes sure to keep it so.

    How can sheeple be so Stoopid?:(
  10. JohnTheCalifornian

    JohnTheCalifornian Member

    Jun 12, 2009
    It just goes to proove that law abiding citizens with guns are NOT a threat to the public. The people with guns that ARE a threat are the criminals, which of course they would be HIDING their gun on themselves so that it could not be seen.
  11. kingchip

    kingchip New Member

    Jul 2, 2009
    Marble Falls, Texas
    Third paragraph says it all.
  12. ponycar17

    ponycar17 Active Member

    Feb 17, 2005
    South Carolina
    Those guys got to show their opposition to gun control and have a free photo taken at the same time. :eek:

    Has anyone else noticed that the White House's Urban Policy statement has been revised since the 'ascension of the messiah' to omit the previous statement about reinstating the so-called 'assault weapons ban'? I checked this the other night and I think it's telling of the outrage gun owners have been voicing through purchases and word of mouth. :)

    I might have totally missed the statement but I believe that it has been removed... Correct me if I'm wrong.
  13. LurpyGeek

    LurpyGeek Active Member

    Nov 30, 2005
    So you think we should behave the exact same way that the left does? I don't think that "fanning the flames" is always the best way to forward ones cause. It generally alienates people and draws the opposition to raise their volume while no one is listening to the other party.

    Don't get me wrong, I understand what you're saying and I agree with other posters that it should be viewed in a positive light, but it never will as long as the common media is involved.

    Most people's only exposure to firearms is limited to movies and the news, both of which portray firearms as elements of evil and destruction and nothing else. This gentleman was exercising his rights peacefully and within the law, but once again it will be shown to the mindless masses through the lens of the media and people will not understand. Most people have no idea that you can legally carry a firearm in the open or that there is such a thing as a concealed firearm permit. These same people will see this man as another "right-wing extremist" or whatever label you prefer.

    I think if you were to walk down the street past a kindergarten with a Kalashnikov slung over your back, though you may be perfectly within your rights and the law, you won't make a very good impression of yourself or other gun owners however right or wrong that may be. You might make the evening news and feel that your voice was heard, but your intent will not be painted in the light that you intended. Being disruptive isn't the way to "win hearts and minds". That is done by being a good person, neighbor, citizen, and using positive influence and reason to affect the points of view of other people.

    Yes, I know that reason isn't always effective when other parties are involved.

    Look at Pelosi for another example. She claims that people are bringing swastikas and armbands to these events, which they are not but she can point to a "gun nut" as the type of thing she is talking about.
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2009
  14. obxned

    obxned Active Member

    Mar 4, 2007
    The government in Washington from the pesron who is acting as if he iwere the President and all our representative and supreme court justices need to be reminded that they serve only with the permision of 'we, the people'. I was not born in a socialist/communiost country, and the only way I will die in one is if the bastards have supirior firepower.
  15. ponycar17

    ponycar17 Active Member

    Feb 17, 2005
    South Carolina
    While I would generally agree with your position from an ethical and logical standpoint, I would remind you that the left is neither ethical nor logical. Stooping to their level of protest at the recent health care town halls has had an overall positive effect. It's about damn time Conservatives stop quietly opposing the issues among ourselves and stand up to be vocal about our cause. It started with the Tea Parties and has culminated in a positive opposition at the health care rallies. Let's not forget the message sent as firearms started flying off of shelves on November 5th, 2008 (see my above comment about the WH Urban Policy retration concerning the 'assault weapons ban'). I think the Conservative message is finally being sent and its being received loud and clear.

    Sometimes the end justifies the means. Conservatives have been too 'conservative' in their opposition in the past. It's time to turn some heads in a peaceful but vocal manner! ;)
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2009
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum The Devil is in the details Jan 17, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Clinton and so-called assault weapons Oct 13, 2016
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum "Washington attorney general proposes assault-weapons ban " Sep 9, 2016
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum MD "Assault weapon" ban May 13, 2016
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Bill to seize all "assault weapons" & " high capacity magazines" in GA Jan 14, 2016