It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Protesters = Patriots with Guns, Bush Protesters = Criminals with T-Shirts

page: 4
52
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   
The point that BH is making is that in both cases the protesters are trying to push buttons, or stir the pot and in both cases have every right to do so. Yet the bush protesters just wore anti-Bush t-shirts not guns and were arrested. Arrested for dissidence.

Obviously the gun brandishing/showing off/intimidating by open carry is their right. And these people are allowed their right to be dissident.

Obviously the people's rights are respected under Obama presidency and not Bush.

Now if they push their luck (ie. illegal dissidence) as they will likely do there may be another thread to talk about.

edit to add: It is a distraction from the real issue of health care reform and frankly, I think, it's childish.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by anyone]

[edit on 19-8-2009 by anyone]




posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 



So know we are okay with wiki being a reliable source for info?

Funny how that is the case when it backs up our ignorant statement.


From Encyclopaedia Britannica:



Automatic rifles (and pistols) are called autoloaders and are actually semiautomatic, since they customarily fire only one shot at each pull of the trigger.


I always forget which members here have been in the military, so I apologize if I'm assuming incorrectly, but you should know this, man!

Or are you just being purposefully disagreeable with the OP? For as long as I can remember automatic weapon simply meant that it chambers the next round automatically, not necessarily a 'repeater' or a 'full auto weapon'.

Now I'm not the biggest gun nut, but I know a thing or two. Now if you say, "assault rifle", then you're in a whole new ballgame, as that term generally refers to select-fire weapons or fully automatic weapons.

To comment on the OP, I think it's pretty funny how people are handling these fellows showing up with guns. Some are outraged, some are loving it, some just see people with a (fairly unhealthy) obsession with guns bringing them to the wrong place at the wrong time.

Yes, I fully support second amendment rights. No, I don't think you should open-carry a rifle at a crowded rally. And to open-carry a rifle to a rally the POTUS is going to attend? Well that's a whole other level of stupid.

I understand these guys are trying to make a point, but is a rally for health care really the right place to do it? To me they just seem like innocent gun lovers with innocently misguided ideals, and a little too much free time.

Then again, I live in FL (a concealed carry only state), and carrying a gun out in the open under any circumstances here is borderline retarded, as you will be arrested (if not simply shot) by the first police officer who sees you. So maybe that has affected my judgment in the matter.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by thebeet
PLenty have been arrested at Obama rallies. Here is just one example it took me 5 secs to find. If the OP would put forth more effort b4 you post more BS propaganda.

39 Arrested at Obama Rally


I think this is a bit of your own BS propaganda. They were not arrested for protesting, but for trespassing. How about following your own advice?

From the article: "Police said at least 39 people were arrested on trespassing charges, including Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff identified as "Roe" in the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, was among those arrested. She now opposes abortion."

Peace,
Daniel



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


And you also have the chance that some stranger runs up and grabs your gun and then you might as well be to blame for whatever harm comes from it.

I think it is plain irresponsible to assume you are in full control.

(Not saying you said it wasn't, drwizard, I just agree that one shouldn't bring it to a large gathering. Actually I personally don't believe in carrying a weapon at all but I believe in the constitutional right to.)

[edit on 19-8-2009 by anyone]



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Well you partisan trolls just can't stop stirring the pot, can you? We already have at least two other threads about people bringing guns to the rallies, but for you people this isn't about debate. It's about making noise, being heard, and getting your jollies off with all the virtual HIGH FIVES you're getting from the other brain dead aisle mongers that have invaded this rapidly degrading swamp of a web site.

For what it's worth, I agree. Obama not having the people with guns arrested is actually a change for the better. But that's not the *real* purpose of this thread, now is it? The real purpose is to be as sanctimonious and confrontational as you can possibly get, isn't it? Or maybe the real purpose is to just tick people off, and get them divided. Maybe the OP has an agenda. Maybe somebody makes a bit of money on the side keeping the sheeple masses divided? Just maybe?

I don't blame the OP. I don't blame the liberals, who just can't shut up and quit whining about people exercising their rights. I don't blame the conservatives, who seem to be ready and waiting to go to war. I blame the politicians who divide us up like this, and to some extent I blame ATS for not cracking down like the wrath of God on this mindless partisan bull crap. Epic fail on nearly all of you. Ya'll act like children.

And worst of all, the people I'm talking to will skim right over this post. They're too blinded by their own worthless, two-party-sucking idiocy to bother reading anything that doesn't either give them a stiffy or give them a target on the other side of the aisle to rail on.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

But show up at an Obama protest packing a loaded automatic rifle and you get respect and even your 15 minutes of fame. No arrests, no hassle, no disrespect or stepping on the Second Amendment by Obama or his Secret Service.


[edit on 19-8-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]



It was a semi-automatic rifle, not an automatic....nor was it an "assault rifle"



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





With all the talk about double standards between this administration and the last, I think it's important to be thorough and look at the whole picture. There are many stories about Bush protesters being arrested for wearing shirts with anti-Bush and anti-war messages on them. These are just a few of the many stories of innocent people exercising their First Amendment rights: West Virginia Maine Woman arrested for Unlawful Conduct (anti-war t-shirt) Women arrested and strip searched for anti-war sign Even McCain protesters were arrested: Woman arrested for McCain=Bush sign But show up at an Obama protest packing a loaded automatic rifle and you get respect and even your 15 minutes of fame. No arrests, no hassle, no disrespect or stepping on the Second Amendment by Obama or his Secret Service.


BH, I'm trying to understand how you draw the connection of arrests to a Presidential Administration. The arrests or non-arrests are the decision of an independent police force, or the Secret Service.
Here is the mission of the Secret Service, from THEIR website:


MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the United States Secret Service is to safeguard the nation's financial infrastructure and payment systems to preserve the integrity of the economy, and to protect national leaders, visiting heads of state and government, designated sites and National Special Security Events.


www.secretservice.gov...

Here is HOW they protect the President:


How does the Secret Service "protect" the president? In order to maintain a safe environment for the president and other protectees, the Secret Service calls upon other federal, state and local agencies to assist on a daily basis. The Secret Service Uniformed Division, the Metropolitan Police Department, and the U.S. Park Police patrol the streets and parks nearby the White House. The Secret Service regularly consults with experts from other agencies in utilizing the most advanced security techniques. The military supports the Secret Service through the use of Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams and communications resources. When the president travels, an advance team of Secret Service agents works with host city, state and local law enforcement, as well as public safety officials, to jointly implement the necessary security measures.

ibid

The Secret Service makes decisions based upon THEIR determination of a threat to the President, and as to whether an arrest is warranted.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 


Actually I think BH is pretty bipartisan. MO

And pretty tolerant too.


I really can only speak for myself, however, to say that I like to bring my voice to issues and debate. Not to belittle others, yet I will admit that at times I can inadvertently and sometimes passive aggressively do the opposite.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
From now on, I'm going to refer to the left or right as Americans. Left and right are all the same, each side wants to decide who gets to live or die or who gets freedom and who don't. When you get a whole nation of these people, you get really annoyed.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by anyone
 





Obviously the people's rights are respected under Obama presidency and not Bush.

Please read my response above yours. The arrest or non-arrest of protesters has nothing to do with the President.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Say what you like...it's your politicians and celebs being shot up, and even though this is a conspiracy site, sometimes it is just a lone nutbar. Never mind the fact that it sure is a distraction.



Oh, I'm not counting out the lone nutbar.

Of course it is a distraction. That is what they are trying to do.

I'm just saying that any individual intending to do so would not approach it in such a manner. It just wouldn't work. So implication that they, the ones carrying visible guns legally, intend to shoot the president is just more of the same games.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


I am sure at Presidential events the secret service cooperates with the local authority.

edit to add it is in your post



Secret Service agents works with host city, state and local law enforcement, as well as public safety officials, to jointly implement the necessary security measures.


[edit on 19-8-2009 by anyone]



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   
BenHer, there you go again.

Would emotional t-shirt wearing Bush prostestors be able to remain calm during their rallies if they also carried guns?

I doubt it.
Now we've seen many armed protestors and not a single shot has been fired!
I know ACORN hasn't gotten involved yet but what does that tell you about the civility of the Obama protestors?

You're looking way too hard at how the protestors on both sides are being described by their peers, instead you should listen to what the President and his active administration have said and done.



About 70 anti-war protesters shouted "bring the troops home" from Iraq near President Bush's ranch on Saturday, prompting two White House officials to come out to meet with mothers who lost children in combat in Iraq.

White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer on Anti-war protesters:
"I think the president welcomes the fact that we are a democracy and people in the United States"

White House Press Secretary Trent Duffy on anti-war protests:
"The American people have a right to protest, and the right of free speech is something that we're fighting for in this war on terror"

George W. Bush:
"That's fantastic. Freedom is a beautiful thing. The fact that people are willing to come and express themselves"


How does that compare with the Obama White House?

The Democratic National Committee addresses health care protests:
The Republicans and their allied groups – desperate after losing two consecutive elections and every major policy fight on Capitol Hill – are inciting angry mobs of a small number of rabid right wing extremists funded by K Street Lobbyists to disrupt thoughtful discussions about the future of health care in America taking place in Congressional Districts across the country.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on health care protests:
"I hope people will take a jaundiced eye to what is clearly the Astroturf nature of grass-roots lobbying."

Barack H. Obama: "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done"



link 1
link 2



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by anyone
 


4 weapons safety rules, required knowledge for any permit, range use, or military/police handling of firearms.

1) Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
2) Never point a weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot.
3) Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
4) Keep the weapon on safe until you intend to fire.

Are there idiots who may not follow these, and may lose their weapon to another idiot in the crowd?
Of course, just as there are drunk drivers/idiot seniors driving when they know they shouldn't/tired truckers/malicious people with anger issues behingd the wheel of the car that cause far more damage as a group than all gun owners collectively.
Please realize that there are many who know how to handle a weapon, and their reasons are not needed by the likes of anyone.

God, ain't freedom grand?

Edit to change a wordplay.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by TheTruthShallFreeYou]



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 





I just hope they aren't being too lenient and some crazy right-winger doesn't attack/shoot Obama.


I think this is what the PTB want- rankle everyone up, but yet allow guns nearby so (somehow) someone will shoot Obama.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheTruthShallFreeYou
reply to post by anyone
 


4 weapons safety rules, required knowledge for any permit, range use, or military/police handling of firearms.

1) Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
2) Never point a weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot.
3) Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
4) Keep the weapon on safe until you intend to fire.

Are there idiots who may not follow these, and may lose their weapon to another idiot in the crowd?
Of course, just as there are drunk drivers/idiot seniors driving when they know they shouldn't/tired truckers/malicious people with anger issues behingd the wheel of the car that cause far more damage as a group than all gun owners collectively.
Please realize that there are many who know how to handle a weapon, and their reasons are not needed by the likes of you.

God, ain't freedom grand?





by the likes of you.


By the likes of me? What are you inferring?



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
It is really sad how the actual topic of this thread keeps getting off track by mockery.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by anyone
 


I mean the likes of "anyone", however I was playing on your name. Sorry, I will go back and correct it.
P.S. is that all you took from that post?



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TheTruthShallFreeYou
 


I don't think that every or even most gun carriers are idiots. I do think that bad things can happen when there are guns involved. Control of a situation is never for sure.

p.s. You did reply to me didn't you?



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by anyone
 





It is really sad how the actual topic of this thread keeps getting off track by mockery.

Actually, my posts have been fully on-target, to the point that they disprove the original argument, but aside from your reply to add what I already had in my post, it is being ignored. I guess when something is dis-proven, the best way to address it is to ignore it.



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join