Health Reform Supporter Shows Up At Protest With Revolver

[natty bumppo 297]

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

I am not threatening anyone.

You are not but they aren't showing up with guns because of you, are they?

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

So basically there should be no expectation of silence at a speech, a church service or a presentation at a corporate board of directors?

Not if the audience feels threatened, no.

That's the real problem. The audience has been told and believes their gun rights are under threat by this administration. Given the centrality of that right under our Constitution (2nd amendment, not 144th), it's no surprise they are demonstrating in this way.

What boggles the mind is how they got to be convinced of such a canard in the first place.

Well what I don't understand is how it has jack ** to do with healthcare reform. That's so idiotic it beggars belief. That some of these people are taking these weapons not because they do so as a matter of course, but because they want to make some symbolic statement about personal freedom is doubly idiotic. Its also a means of intimidation.

speaking for yourself? if a legally carried firearm intimidates you ... that's you. not others.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

It's not intimidating anyone, at least no one that matters. The Blue Dogs are still anti-reform and pro-death, the progressive caucus still wants to do what's right and the President still wants another term. Nothing has changed, guns notwithstanding.

[Peikko 1,575]

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

I am not threatening anyone.

You are not but they aren't showing up with guns because of you, are they?

mc a threat?

He confirmed that I am not a threat, not the other way around. A.J is right though, for some reason the people bringing guns out in these circumstances both feel threatened, and see that openly parading their 2nd amendment rights is somehow meaningful and will further their argument in some way. A canard indeed

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

I am not threatening anyone.

You are not but they aren't showing up with guns because of you, are they?

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

So basically there should be no expectation of silence at a speech, a church service or a presentation at a corporate board of directors?

Not if the audience feels threatened, no.

That's the real problem. The audience has been told and believes their gun rights are under threat by this administration. Given the centrality of that right under our Constitution (2nd amendment, not 144th), it's no surprise they are demonstrating in this way.

What boggles the mind is how they got to be convinced of such a canard in the first place.

Well what I don't understand is how it has jack ** to do with healthcare reform. That's so idiotic it beggars belief. That some of these people are taking these weapons not because they do so as a matter of course, but because they want to make some symbolic statement about personal freedom is doubly idiotic. Its also a means of intimidation.

speaking for yourself? if a legally carried firearm intimidates you ... that's you. not others.

Speaking generally. Whatever crackpot reasoning goes into the decision to wear a gun at a townhall meeting - it creates a certain set of perceptions. Perceptions that you do not control - regardless of your intent.

[Peikko 1,575]

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

I am not threatening anyone.

You are not but they aren't showing up with guns because of you, are they?

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

So basically there should be no expectation of silence at a speech, a church service or a presentation at a corporate board of directors?

Not if the audience feels threatened, no.

That's the real problem. The audience has been told and believes their gun rights are under threat by this administration. Given the centrality of that right under our Constitution (2nd amendment, not 144th), it's no surprise they are demonstrating in this way.

What boggles the mind is how they got to be convinced of such a canard in the first place.

Well what I don't understand is how it has jack ** to do with healthcare reform. That's so idiotic it beggars belief. That some of these people are taking these weapons not because they do so as a matter of course, but because they want to make some symbolic statement about personal freedom is doubly idiotic. Its also a means of intimidation.

speaking for yourself? if a legally carried firearm intimidates you ... that's you. not others.

Carrying a firearm is now a benign action? You can't be serious - this is as ludicrous as the 'it's only a tool' argument that you are such fans of

[NickD 203]

Our state legislators voted down carrying concealed weapons of minor destruction even though the argument was strong that other states that permitted that had a major decreased crime rate. Safer to be politically correct, whatever that means, then logical.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Totally off-topic but this kind of reminds me of a 'debate' in India when I was a teenager over Sikhs (a religious group) carrying swords to campaign rallies. The opposition claimed the images were intended to be intimidatory, the Sikhs claimed carrying the swords were a religious mandate (which is true).

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

This is what is wrong with everyone today - insisting on exercising their rights instead of exercising decorum. It's all downhill from here.

manners? the person legally carrying a firearm being rude to you and preventing you from _______ ?

Think of it like this. We're family members and I show up at Thanksgiving Dinner nude.

Rude? Yes. Am I preventing you from doing anything?

just stay away from the hot stove and mixer ... wouldn't want you to burn anything or get it caught.

I bet you'd be bothered if some weirdo were walking around a grocery store in the buff while you were there with your kids.

Hint: Public nudity isn't a criminal offence because someone is injured as a result of it...

[Peikko 1,575]

My eyes are assaulted by those fashion gurus who believe wearing their underpants above their overpants is alluring. They are so wrong

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

My eyes are assaulted by those fashion gurus who believe wearing their underpants above their overpants is alluring. They are so wrong

Superman should be locked up.

[natty bumppo 297]

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

I am not threatening anyone.

You are not but they aren't showing up with guns because of you, are they?

If you threaten peoples rights, or if they think you're threatening their rights, they will chuck their manners and demonstrate their rights. Activism 101.

So basically there should be no expectation of silence at a speech, a church service or a presentation at a corporate board of directors?

Not if the audience feels threatened, no.

That's the real problem. The audience has been told and believes their gun rights are under threat by this administration. Given the centrality of that right under our Constitution (2nd amendment, not 144th), it's no surprise they are demonstrating in this way.

What boggles the mind is how they got to be convinced of such a canard in the first place.

Well what I don't understand is how it has jack ** to do with healthcare reform. That's so idiotic it beggars belief. That some of these people are taking these weapons not because they do so as a matter of course, but because they want to make some symbolic statement about personal freedom is doubly idiotic. Its also a means of intimidation.

speaking for yourself? if a legally carried firearm intimidates you ... that's you. not others.

Carrying a firearm is now a benign action? You can't be serious - this is as ludicrous as the 'it's only a tool' argument that you are such fans of

until the firearm is brought into use ...

otherwise it's doing zero harm to anyone just for being there

(do you know how many other firearms are being carried that are not known about )

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This is what is wrong with everyone today - insisting on exercising their rights instead of exercising decorum. It's all downhill from here.

manners? the person legally carrying a firearm being rude to you and preventing you from _______ ?

Think of it like this. We're family members and I show up at Thanksgiving Dinner nude.

Rude? Yes. Am I preventing you from doing anything?

[natty bumppo 297]

My eyes are assaulted by those fashion gurus who believe wearing their underpants above their overpants is alluring. They are so wrong

then ban the clothing ...

or

close your eyes ...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You actually have to shoot the gun in order to intimidate someone with it?

I can see a few problems with that...

[My Name Is Nobody 3]

You actually have to shoot the gun in order to intimidate someone with it?

I can see a few problems with that...

PP I think you have some insecurity issues.