TEA Party--With Guns

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by pinecone70, Oct 9, 2009.

  1. pinecone70

    pinecone70 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,729
    Location:
    Minnesota Gal!
    I discovered this story this morning and was fortunate enough to get the first comment in. Surprisingly, there have been gun-positive comments, which I did not expect to find. Just wanted to share.

    Hudson TEA Party to feature hot drinks -- and guns
    By Alex Ebert
    aebert@pioneerpress.com
    The planners of a party in Hudson, Wis., are looking forward to a well-mannered picnic filled with political speeches, hot beverages — and guns.

    Response has been mixed to the Hudson Open Carry Taxed Enough Already (or TEA) Party scheduled for Oct. 17 in Lakefront Park. While organizers tout it as a picnic to celebrate their rights to demonstrate and carry arms, some in town worry about the image and perceived dangers of so many weapons in the city's downtown playground.

    "Comments have ranged from dead set against it to a sentiment that it's a demonstration of political rights," Hudson Alderman Scot O'Malley said.

    At least one store owner plans to put up a sign banning the guns inside her shop. Yet city organizers say the party is simply the latest in a string of such events across Wisconsin that have all been peaceful.

    Since an April statement by the Wisconsin attorney general stressing that openly carrying a firearm is legal, events aimed at exercising the First and Second amendments have sprung up across Wisconsin. David Olson, organizer of the upcoming Hudson gathering, said it will be similar to one he recently held in Glenwood City: calm and political.

    It's a potluck of sorts, where people can air their grievances on a number of issues, speak freely and revel in the right to openly carry guns, Olson said.

    "We decided to put the open-carry picnic along with the TEA Party to dispel some of the hysteria of the drive-by media covering people coming to meetings with firearms," he said.

    The blending of conservative causes works well for Hudson because of the large number of hunters and guns owners in the area, said Jesse Garza, chairman of the St. Croix County Republican Party.

    "They're really frustrated and nervous with the spending going on in Washington," he said. "And they want to make sure their rights to own firearms are not infringed upon, and since Wisconsin doesn't have any laws against open carry, this is their right to do that."

    Whatever the politics, Hudson shop owner Barbara Dahl said she is completely against the demonstration. Her home furniture store is about two blocks from where the speeches will take place.

    "I'll have to put up a sign that says, 'I ban guns,' " she said. "I really don't like the idea of someone walking by being crabby and having a gun. That's not about protection, it's about fear."

    Hudson Police Chief Marty Jensen said the city does not plan to increase police patrols for the event.

    "I've got e-mails from (other) chiefs saying it was a good, quiet event," Jensen said. "That's what we're hoping for here."

    La Crosse County Sheriff Steve Helgeson said the demonstration in his county "didn't have any problems," partly because of extensive media buildup before the event.

    "Once (the community) realized it was legal, they accepted it," he said.

    The recent string of open-carry parties started after a controversial disorderly conduct charge against a Milwaukee resident was dismissed in February. Police had given the resident a ticket for having a holstered gun on while doing yard work.

    After the dismissal, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen issued an advisory to the state's district attorneys noting that openly carrying a firearm is legal in Wisconsin.

    Although Dahl knows the right to bear arms is in the Constitution, she still feels uncomfortable with the public display of firearms. But she said that in the end, her opinion is worth as much as anyone else's.

    "I don't live in the Old West," she said. "But I'm one in billions, and that's how much (my voice) counts."
    ______________
    __________________________________________________
    It's easy to see the Pioneer Press' opinion on the matter, they certainly don't like guns. I don't take them all that seriously though. Here is my comment:

    "I think furniture store woman is unreasonably paranoid about guns. It's not the responsible gun owners/carriers that are going to burst into her furniture store, crabby or not, and start waving a gun in her face, or whatever her scenario might be.

    America needs education on gun owners, especially the ones that are licensed to carry firearms in this country. Thugs and thieves generally do not go to the trouble of becoming licensed carriers. Here in my state, we have to pass a proficiency course and background check, and receive the county sheriff's approval if we want to carry a gun. Anyone with a criminal background will not get through. Period. Citizens carrying guns are protectors, whether furniture store woman believes it or not.

    Oh, and I carry a gun because I was sexually assaulted. That will not happen to me again. Above all, I avoid situations such as the attack occurred, I do not brandish my gun when I am crabby; no one knows I have it with me."

    Unfortunately, it seems that only the pro-gun citizens read stories beneath these headlines, not the people that desperately need educating.
  2. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    And I don't like the idea of going into a store that won't let me carry. I really don't like the idea of being unarmed and running into some "crabby" criminal with a gun that's trying to rob the "gun free" store. This woman's store would NOT get my business. Period. I avoid, if at all possible, any places that tell me I can't carry. It's their right, under NC state law, to tell me I can't enter their store armed. But it's also my right to NOT spend my money in their place of business.
  3. pinecone70

    pinecone70 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,729
    Location:
    Minnesota Gal!
    I agree, I rarely shop anywhere that does ban guns, as the signs have gone out of style around here. One commenter on the story above said he doubted anybody would steal furniture lady's sofas anyway. LOL!

    There was one liberal comment, but the others pretty much squashed him and called him names. It's kind of funny.
  4. 45Auto

    45Auto Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,275
    Assuming it’s all legal and constitutional, brandishing of firearms at political gatherings is at best rude and inconsiderate. Events like this will do nothing but confirm the opinion of anti-gun people that gun owners are dangerous and crazy. Lots of ordinary people will feel frightened.

    Guns have not been much of an issue with the new administration. Now the radicals want to stir things up. Events like this are gasoline on the flames of politics, burning and dividing the electorate.

    The only winners will be the radical lobbyists and politicians.
  5. pinecone70

    pinecone70 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,729
    Location:
    Minnesota Gal!
    I agree, 45, that's going to get bad press for sure. I just couldn't resist the opportunity to point out the "Bans Guns" sign part of the story, that really ticks me off. One commenter says the furniture store woman may as well put a "Bans Free Speech" sign on the front of her store....
  6. Hardballer

    Hardballer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Smack dab in da middle
    Are you guys serious or is your quote a bit of sarcasm?


    If you're being serious, and I'm not sure you are, but if you are, do I take your meaning to be that when we open carry, you consider that to be brandishing a firearm??!

    Just trying to be clear here. So now, from a conservative view point, the "legal" carrying and bearing of a firearm, in your mind is an incincerary device for disenfranchisement and can be used against the 2A? Not for empowerment? "The act of conferring legality or sanction to an activity".

    So the very act of the 2A, in fact, according to you, will be used against the 2A. This is very circular logic. Not sure I can get on-board with this one. Kind of scary actually.

    My response may be a bit bias as I open carry in and around my home, in my own city and neighboring cities as well. Including one that has a ban on all open carry within city limits.

    Folks have asked me; on different occasions, "Is that thing loaded?" to which I respond, "Yup." and "Have you killed anything today with that gun?" to Which I responded, "Nope." and "Is that legal" to which I responded, "Yup, I carry this with the full warrant of the law, the state Constitution and the federal government, Our US Constitution. He said, "Oh. . . Cool." A returned vet from Iraq said, "Cool, a cocked and locked .45" "I wish I could carry what I had over there." I thanked him for his service. And this last one. "Daddy, I've got a gun too" (Little kid with a smile on his face.") dad with a look of embarrassment on his face. I said, "Cool". the kid hid behind dads leg and smiled.

    No one ran screaming, The checkout lady smiled at me and thanked me for my business. The more we carry, the more it appears to be the norm. Guns are not scary. Nor are they dangerous. They are an inanimate object. Not until the reside in the hand of a person, do they take on a whole new persona.

    People are scary. Ban people not guns. (enforce laws on the books. put bad guys in jail.)

    '
  7. pinecone70

    pinecone70 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,729
    Location:
    Minnesota Gal!
    Um, no. I didn't catch the word "brandishing" at first. Brandishing, to me, means waving a gun around, showing off, like the media thinks we all do. I'm not on board with that.

    It is true, however, that anyone that sees guns in Wisconsin (or here in MN) whether they are just riding on somebody's hip or whatever, the general public is going to freak out. That's why these people in WI are doing these things, to prove to the public that guns are not going to cause problems just by being on somebody's hip, right? Well, we all know the media jackals love that, they want problems to happen, and they will sniff around for incidents. These events get bad press, that's just the press.

    I have the weird laws here in MN, it is an open carry state, but if anyone sees a gun, they call the cops. The cops don't like having to respond to someone legally carrying, so they tell us to conceal. Around here, people would have medical problems if they encountered a picnic full of firearms-carrying individuals.
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2009
  8. Hardballer

    Hardballer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Smack dab in da middle
    I am just trying to wrap my head around this. So, we "infringe" our rights, the very rights we are espousing, actually, the one we want to practice, so that they don't try to infringe them. Ok, Ok, I get it.
  9. pinecone70

    pinecone70 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,729
    Location:
    Minnesota Gal!
    Yeah, I guess so. It ticks me off to no end that I can't just wear my gun without worrying that somebody will actually catch a glimpse of it and start screaming at me. I didn't write these crummy laws, but I am bound by the laws if I want the meager privileges that I do have. Feh.
  10. 45Auto

    45Auto Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,275
    Carrying a holstered pistol in a rural area where such things are normal is not the issue. The political wisdom of displaying weapons at a political rally, that is the question.

    The purpose of politics is not to impress all of the gun owners who already agree with you. The purpose of politics is to convince undecided voters that private possession of firearms is good, rational, and acceptable.

    Showing up at political events with guns in plain sight is free propaganda for the anti-gun lobby. It makes gun owners look politically reckless with total disregard for the negative impact of their actions. This is not the image to win over undecided voters to the wisdom of the 2nd Amendment. But it is the sort of thing to do if you want to make the anti-gun lobbyists extremely happy.
  11. Hardballer

    Hardballer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Smack dab in da middle
    I think if we keep worrying about the poor liberals; that can be characterized as compromise, we will not have to worry about the 2A. Boldness and courage trump fear every time. Appeasement is not a plan. It is a fearful reaction.
  12. Southern Boy

    Southern Boy New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    110
    10-4 Hardballer, the time for velvet gloves is over. We aint playin with our rights. we are exercising them.
  13. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,719
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    Here's one concern I have. Knowing the left will go to about any extreme to get what they want, what's to prevent a few imbeciles from showing up armed to commit some form of misconduct to disparage either the tea party or gun rights movements?

    I know it sounds far fetched but a number of these people are not exactly rational. How many incidences would it take to get legislation passed on a federal, state, or local level to further restrict our right to keep and bear arms?
  14. army mp

    army mp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Messages:
    484
    Location:
    western Pa,
    I have to agree with hardballer. You will never appease the anti gunners anyway. Ted Nugent said it best. Stop apologizing for who you are. Hunting and guns are not evil. I have open carried on a couple occasions, but primarily carry concealed. My choice, However I think the more it is done. The more it will be excepted as a norm. I am a firm believer. A right that doesn’t gain acceptance and ignored. Will quietly go away.
  15. pinecone70

    pinecone70 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,729
    Location:
    Minnesota Gal!
    I just follow the rules according to the state laws, lest I jeopardize my privilege to carry and own firearms. I carry my gun, concealed, and nobody is the wiser; having it with me is enough, I have it for self-protection, I have nothing to prove.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum tranfering guns across state lines Dec 1, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Australias Confiscation of Guns - Fact or Fiction? Aug 25, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Did You Know Felons Can Own Guns? Aug 8, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Serious Argument At Home? Well The Senate Wants Cops To Seize Your Guns While They're There Jul 30, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Had My Required Yearly Physical, Yep Guns Were On The Questioner, No More Jul 29, 2014

Share This Page