Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Phoenix: Dozens of armed citizens attend todays Obama Speech

page: 13
64
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
These people didn't carry guns to an Obama meeting.

They always carry guns and they went to an Obama meeting.

We were carrying when Bush was in office too and didn't like him either. Obama does not have the singular pleasure of being the only president folks have carried guns around.

It seems the 2a is not totally dead as the politicians are perhaps giving thought to the fact that they are "representatives" and when they stop representing "We the People" then they are subject to a series of checks and balances laid out in the Constitution to keep them in line. The final check on that system is the 2a.

We the People phoned, faxed, emailed and demonstrated against the bailouts. Some polls showed 98% of Americans were against it. Did TPTB listen? Nope, they just cranked up the printing press and put us further in debt to pay off their criminal bankster friends.

Perhaps now that they are seeing our liberty teeth they will start to listen a little more?

Please, (open)carry-on.




posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by merkaba93
 


Bravo! Well said.

Let us all hope these idiots in government listen to the people before it escalates further. However as most everyone else I fear escalation is what they want.

[edit on 18-8-2009 by Anonymous Avatar]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
It is nice to see more and more of us standing up for our rights. The funniest part about the whole thing is that law enforcement can do nothing about it as long as no one was harmed and the peace was kept. may there be many more of us to stand up and declare we are Americans and no one has the power to take our right to bear arms. just like the man in the last speech on health care who had a gun, so many more have followed suit. Bravo my friends, bravo!!!! S&F


[edit on 18-8-2009 by mucroorator18]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by grover
 



I know exactly what you said.

Do tell us grover...when is a good time to have a legally owned firearm with you? After you were robbed? After you were killed for $20? After your wife, daughter, son is killed?... Hope none of the above ever happens to you.



[edit on 18-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]


Jeez if you live in a place where your life and your family's life is under that much threat maybe you should move..... id be a nervous wreck!

And if that's the whole of the USA the rest of the world is screwed.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
After reading most of this thread I see many references that have no relevance to the issue.
1. Race – The race of the individual or individuals that were exercising their right to bear arms is irrelevant. The last time I checked the Constitution of the United States was intended to guarantee the rights of all men and women. We are all created equal. Although our history has not always demonstrated this idea, we are starting to see those ideas put into practice more and more. Maybe one day we will truly be equal. Till then we must continue to put forth the effort to reach that goal.
2. Intimidation – Several posts have argued that carrying weapons to the rally was intended to be some form of intimidation. I believe that any form of vocal protest is itself a form of intimidation. Protesting is an attempt by one group to coerce another group into acting or behaving differently.
3. Comments from other countries – I appreciate that every member on ATS has a right to their own opinion, as does every person in the world and I support the right of free speech. However, I have to ask why anyone outside the United States would choose to voice opposition to people in this country exercising their rights. To put it bluntly, “It is none of your business”. While I may question why you have allowed your rights to be destroyed in your country, I do not try to make it my business by insisting that you revolt to get them back. If you wish to live under such a system, you are entitled to do so. If you believe that free speech, freedom of religion, the right to bear arms is wrong, that is within your right, but to insist that others, especially people in another country should adhere to the standards of your country is wrong.
4. The President is going to be there – First it should be noted that these protestors were not in the “town hall meeting”. They were protesting outside. I can assure you that everyone who entered the building where the President was going to speak was cleared of having any weapons. Furthermore, they were carrying small arms that would have zero chance of causing harm to the President as he arrived in his armored limo. The presence of any elected official should not be cause to suspend people’s rights.
5. That those carrying weapons need a “reason” - Obviously anyone that insists that there has to be a reason to justify exercising one’s rights does not understand the concept of “Rights”. The right is the justification, there does not have to be a need. If that were the case it could be said that people did not have a need to protest and therefore could not do so.

I admire those who attended and had the courage to exercise not only the right of free speech but also the right to bear arms in a responsible and safe manner. I would caution anyone that may choose to try this form of protest to make sure you do so in accordance with all state and local laws regarding open carry. Also make sure that you address questions or comments about your choice to open carry in a respectful and intelligent manner much like the gentleman in the video did.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Could someone do this in California?



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by jafo1984
After reading most of this thread I see many references that have no relevance to the issue.
1. Race – The race of the individual or individuals that were exercising their right to bear arms is irrelevant. The last time I checked the Constitution of the United States was intended to guarantee the rights of all men and women. We are all created equal. Although our history has not always demonstrated this idea, we are starting to see those ideas put into practice more and more. Maybe one day we will truly be equal. Till then we must continue to put forth the effort to reach that goal.
2. Intimidation – Several posts have argued that carrying weapons to the rally was intended to be some form of intimidation. I believe that any form of vocal protest is itself a form of intimidation. Protesting is an attempt by one group to coerce another group into acting or behaving differently.
3. Comments from other countries – I appreciate that every member on ATS has a right to their own opinion, as does every person in the world and I support the right of free speech. However, I have to ask why anyone outside the United States would choose to voice opposition to people in this country exercising their rights. To put it bluntly, “It is none of your business”. While I may question why you have allowed your rights to be destroyed in your country, I do not try to make it my business by insisting that you revolt to get them back. If you wish to live under such a system, you are entitled to do so. If you believe that free speech, freedom of religion, the right to bear arms is wrong, that is within your right, but to insist that others, especially people in another country should adhere to the standards of your country is wrong.
4. The President is going to be there – First it should be noted that these protestors were not in the “town hall meeting”. They were protesting outside. I can assure you that everyone who entered the building where the President was going to speak was cleared of having any weapons. Furthermore, they were carrying small arms that would have zero chance of causing harm to the President as he arrived in his armored limo. The presence of any elected official should not be cause to suspend people’s rights.
5. That those carrying weapons need a “reason” - Obviously anyone that insists that there has to be a reason to justify exercising one’s rights does not understand the concept of “Rights”. The right is the justification, there does not have to be a need. If that were the case it could be said that people did not have a need to protest and therefore could not do so.

I admire those who attended and had the courage to exercise not only the right of free speech but also the right to bear arms in a responsible and safe manner. I would caution anyone that may choose to try this form of protest to make sure you do so in accordance with all state and local laws regarding open carry. Also make sure that you address questions or comments about your choice to open carry in a respectful and intelligent manner much like the gentleman in the video did.


1. Agreed

2. Called Verbal Abuse, in which case what do you call verbal Intimidation while carrying a Gun?

3. You answered your own point whilst making it everybody's business by posting it on a Global Forum. Not to mention the last time a checked USA was the world's Super Power of Civilisation and what most country's should aspire to, perhaps that is not the case as you seem to put across.

4. Erm why is a handgun less dangerous? Is it because it only fires one bullet every squeeze of the trigger therefore more people can get out the way, compared to one squeeze on an Automatic that can mow people down in seconds?

5. You just assured me no one was carrying any weapons inside the building but now in point 5 you tell me it is against there rights? You are disagreeing with yourself lol.

And dont forget to brush your teeth b4 bed.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
This is ridiculous. There is a time and place to show support for the 2nd amendment, a Presidential Rally is not one of them. A gun as a purpose. It fires a projectile that can maim or kill. What if one of these gun happy "patriots" decided to cross the line and attempted to shoot the president? Much more likely, what if an argument broke out? Haters and Supporters can both be passionate. If they bumped heads, how many could have died? No one can argue that all gun owners are intelligent. No one can argue that all gun owners have self control. It would only take one person who feels especially passionate about their cause to get carried away.

If you must have a gun, use it to protect yourself and the people you care about.

Only a fool would try to use it to scare the President of the United States. I guarantee you this, he had more fire power at the rally than the supporters OR haters. Hell, one false move and an anxious law enforcement officer might have opened fire. There is just TOO much risk involved. Even if nothing bad happens, don't let that cloud your knowledge that it IS very possible that a lot of bad stuff can happen.

If more people carried guns to public events, I have no doubt that it won't take long before the body count sky rockets.You wave a gun at a police officer at a protest for ANY cause, he'll do what he feels necessary to protect himself and those around him (fellow officers or even people in the crowd). On top of that, that person with a gun has no certificate of perfect mental health. If they open fire on the police in an attempt to start a problem, they get their way.

I say again, if you insist on having a gun, use it the right way. A tool to protect people that are precious to you. Not as a tool to get your way because you can't win your argument with words.

Edit: To clarify something really quick before I get attacked for it. I'm not saying anyone who has a gun is crazy. But what are the emotional and mental requirements for someone to bring a gun to an event they KNOW can get heated? To an event where a lot of anger gets let out? To an event where you could find the person you think might be the anti-christ or your own personal messiah? Not everyone is going to be doing it for the sole purpose of supporting the 2nd amendment. A gun gives a person a significant advantage over an unarmed person. If one person decided to exercise that advantage, out of hundreds of people in the crowd, just one person. What happens?

[edit on 18-8-2009 by DemonicAngelZero]


Ram

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


HAHAHA I CANT BELIEVE YOU! this guy stole a line from a CNN anchor "so what people can bring gasoline and matches to a building with the president becuase its their right?"

i wouldnt have called you on it if i hadnt just seen the repeat of it 20 minutes ago... dude get your own catch phrases and maybe your own opinions....



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 04:28 PM
link   
The Only valid reason that keeps being repeated in here for WHY these men shouldn't bare arms as protected and allowed by the constitution is that...

"The powers that be are looking for an excuse to take more rights away and by bringing Guns you might give them that excuse"

This argument has no weight

IF they are genuinely looking for an excuse to take away the right, they will find one, if they can not find one they will invent one...

So if n action against you is inevitable what exactly changes by starting the protest now? If the want this "excuse" they wont find a Lee Harvey Oswald to blame?

This is the equivalent of "just do what they want and maybe they wont hurt us" if your being robbed...

In that scenario if an opportunity to stand up for yourself presents itself you must take the opportunity, the other road is simply giving your life away to fate.

Somebody, One day will again shoot the President

This is just reality, if that will be an excuse to take our guns then we have little time left anyway...

It is their job to protect the President, frankly the President does not need to shake hands... he does not need to ride in a convertible.

There will always be threats...

More so than any of us, when you chose to be president, you chose to give up many things, your anonymity, your safety, your privacy and many of your freedoms in life.

The President belongs in the White house behind the anti aircraft guns...

NOT at town hall meetings like he's still in Chicago...

There are national security matters to think about not Obama's desire to be popular and stage rigged media events

IF Obama were to go t shot there would be one genuine blame

His EGO and desire to mingle... he's the President not a celbrity

If this is the "excuse" they would use to take gun rights away, you'd have to be an imbecile to buy it and not say "hey, he's the president, why the heck is he walking around the town square like he's Pam Anderson at Nazcar race" "doesn't this guy have actual work to do that doesn't involve being a celebrity"

and most important...

Particularly 40 + years after Kennedy

IF they have him out parading around the public....

Who's idea was this? And why did that person want the President to die?

Because this goes against any common sense what so ever... that Obama spends his time in this situation and climate, running about willy nilly like a Donkey that had a star role in a movie...

It would be a SCORE for any of DOZENS of nations or organizations to put a hole in THIS PARTICULAR President and cause riots in America...

it's not a possibility, it's a wet dream for many foreign antagonists ot to be blunt, many of those we have screwed with over the years...

let alone any of us...

So WHY... is he out parading around like a Clown at the circus in the greatest day of modern telecommunications

For his Ego

Or is this what they want... his death... someone, someones...

and no one is stupid enough to actually take the bait like they expected?


But all that just brings the original point...

IF they want to kill the President and use it as an excuse to disarm us...

These men are not the cause, they are the guys standing up against the inevitable... if "they" are looking for an excuse "they" will get one...

These men, bearing arms simply are not Cowards



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by djusdjus
 


Hahaha have fun with that bud ... go copy and paste another liberal blog website... it amazes me how someone can be so long winded about someone elses thoughts have fun crusading against the GOP... last time i checked blaming other people for your problems doesnt solve anything



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by wraith001
 

I think you may have misread or misunderstood my comments.

On point 2 I think you missed what I meant. Protesting is a form of intimidation in that a group is attempting to influece another group (politicians) to change views or actions by showing that they are not happy with how things are being run. In these protests I did not see anyone being threatened or verbally abused by those who were armed. The armed protestors were no more guilty of intimidation than any other person there with a sign. If you feel threatened by the simple act of viewing a weapon that is a fault of your own fear and insecurity not the fault of the person who is armed.

On point 3 I did not intend to imply that persons from other countries are not entitled to an opinion on our politics or policies. I meant that while they are entitled to disagree with our laws it is not their place to insist that we change them to meet the standards of the country they are from. I fully realize that our government has been guilty of trying to impose our standards on other countries for years and that too is wrong. Sometimes it is ok to agree to disagree. That is true tolerance. If more countries / religions would be as tolerant of our differing views we would all live in a better world.

On point 4 Iam really not sure what you are trying to say. My point was that the President travels in a limo that is heavily protected from all but the heaviest of weapons. People seemd to be concerned that these protestors were a danger to the President. They were never a serious threat. If they had been, the Sercret Service would have removed them.
Any weapon when misused is dangerous. I saw no misuse of the weapons there.

On point 5 I never disagreed with myself. I never claimed that their rights were being violated. Many have questioned these peoples need to have a gun there. My point is that in Arizona it is their right to open carry, need has nothing to do with it. They were exercising a right not responding to a need.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by conspiracyrus
 


It is your Right actually

What IS illegal would be ARSON... the act of lighting the gasoline on fire...

And until you commit a crime you are innocent.

We are NOT to be subjected to being "Guilty before being proven innocent" in this country...

There is every minute of every day the opportunity for any of us to do harm...


And there is a system that will imprison you if you do or even end your life in a chair...

And it IS your RIGHT to chose to commit crimes and the peoples right to punish you for having committed a crime...

But it is NO ONES RIGHT to decide you are going to commit a crime simply because you can... or might.

That is not a free country

Every day I use one of the best weapon any of us have at our disposal...

My Car... a Car can kill dozens of people,

A Car, can be loaded with explosives and plow right through the secret service and take out a whole building....

Yet to date... I have not driven down the sidewalk sending pedestrians flying through the air... nor will I ever...

Likewise these men, carried guns, they do not like Obama one could assume, and they did not use those guns to commit a crime with them...

That is AMERICA at it's best

Yes that allows for the occasional nut to abuse his right's that's called Freedom, that person will be punished, severely if they do...

Elimination of guns will not stop anything...

The same nut that might try and kill the President with a gun might break into a Nuclear reactor with a machete instead... or drive a truck into a train hauling chemicals...

There is no stopping madness, only dealing with it when it happens...

We can accomplish nothing beyond living in a world with no Freedoms if we allow Fear of what COULD be done to motivate and dictate how we live...









[edit on 18-8-2009 by mopusvindictus]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
reply to post by john124
 


I can see that your testicles have been removed. Was that done under public health care? When some punk wants to sex up your wife or children you will just hand them over and walk away because you do not want a confrontation. Somebody might get hurt. And it would probably be you. Guns cannot help you. You would only give it away the minute somebody tried to scare you.



Sort things out like a man for a change instead of a coward, you #ing testicle licker. Anybody can use a gun, be a man and smack the twat you complete moron.

You have 44 million people in the US without healthcare because they cannot afford it, and they have to rely on voluntary doctors. In the UK there's 61 million people who "all" have NHS healthcare. There's not much comparison I'm afraid, except yours is crap unless you can afford to pay.

[edit on 18-8-2009 by john124]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Merkaba,

you contradict yourself in your post and frankly are being hypocritical. Look:


Originally posted by merkaba93
These people didn't carry guns to an Obama meeting.
They always carry guns and they went to an Obama meeting.


...snip...


Perhaps now that they are seeing our liberty teeth they will start to listen a little more?


So after all it not about just strapping as usual, it was about showing teeth, i.e. a threat? Also, do people normally lug a AR-15 around town when they are going to grab a bite or a nice cup of ice cream? Puh-leeze.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
This situation brings to mind something I read on a patriots blog some time back. It read;


A people’s petition to their government for a redress of grievances is taken far more seriously when delivered on the end of a bayonet.


I thought those words are a very salient point in the context of these armed citizens at this protest.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
fascinating. American society becomes more polarized every day. Do you sometimes wonder if we are approaching a 2nd civil war?



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


I have lived in Arizona. The last thing I want is a bunch of arizonians defending and protecting me in an attack.

Remember, you can open carry with a license. There is NO TRAINING involved.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


When I took martial arts they actually told us not to tell anyone our capabilities, because if someone whould happened to get hurt, even by accident or self defense, they can sue you since your hands and feet are considered lethal weapons.





new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join