City Council Member Despot Gets Owned! - Tries Throwing Out War Vet With CCW Permit, page 2


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 176 times


reply posted on 25-1-2013 @ 08:32 AM by merkins
reply to post by TrueAmerican



S&F my friend.

A rare win for law and common sense. I wish that even a small percentage of UK citizens had such a reasonable and mature attitude on this subject.

I think the guy who walked should be disciplined for leaving his post. I can see an awful future where the anti gun crowd begin stating guns are against their religious beliefs, and therefore people in the same room as them must be disarmed.

There's often fighting and bitching between US and UK members (including myself), but I still view every American as a brother/sister and when TSHTF as far as I'm concerned we're in it together and we'll be rooting for you as much as I hope you'll be rooting for us.


reply posted on 25-1-2013 @ 09:01 AM by Chance321
reply to post by TrueAmerican



Man I so want to cheer for that Mayor and the council members that voted in favore of the gun owner. Also loved the little dig from the Mayor about the oath they have to take. Good job. Everyone of them should be re-elected.


reply posted on 25-1-2013 @ 09:18 AM by xedocodex
reply to post by TrueAmerican



I don't see how he got "owned" or why people are upset that he left.

He has an opinion and he stood up for what he believes in. He doesn't believe a council meeting should be a place where people are armed, I agree with him.

He didn't make a scene, he didn't do anything illegal or improper. He made a motion, it failed, so he removed himself from the situation to stand up for his beliefs.

I love how pro gun people are trying to vilify this man for standing up for what he believes...isn't that what you guys say you are doing?


reply posted on 25-1-2013 @ 09:22 AM by Grimmley
reply to post by TrueAmerican



Ok that was just awesome... its surprising that this took place in WA, the past couple of decades they have been leaning to stricter and stricter gun comtrol laws. But that mayor and the rest of the was just awesome...

Grim


reply posted on 25-1-2013 @ 09:46 AM by xedocodex
reply to post by Golf66



He got "owned" because the motion was soundly defeated on the basis of the law.

I for one am mad that he left because he is being paid by the taxpayers to be present at the proceedings. He didn't like the result of the motion so he chose to ignore his responsibilities and leave


And apparently a lot of the taxpayers at the meeting left right along with him...seems like more people agreed with him than you are trying to pass off. Another member counted, 22 people at the meeting at the start of the video, 5 people after the councilman walked out after the armed man refused to leave.

Then he should resign so the citizens don't have to pay him for missing meetings because he didn't like the outcome of his motion.

Does he leave every time he doesn't get his way?

Sounds like a wussy to me...shouldn't be a leader of anything IMO.


If you look at the people that left when he did, I would say he is a pretty damn good leader. The fact that the majority of people attending the meeting left with him suggests to me that it is those that voted against the motion that aren't doing the will of the people.

Seems like this thread is backfiring on you guys.



And btw, Another member posted this video in a different thread as an example to why guns shouldn't be allowed in council meetings.



edit on 25-1-2013 by xedocodex because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 25-1-2013 @ 11:30 AM by Taliesien333
reply to post by xedocodex





And apparently a lot of the taxpayers at the meeting left right along with him...seems like more people agreed with him than you are trying to pass off. Another member counted, 22 people at the meeting at the start of the video, 5 people after the councilman walked out after the armed man refused to leave.


Two points.
Point one, while it is obviously true that many of the people there left during the course of the video. You have know way of knowing why they left. I could argue that they all left not with him, but because of him. That they disagreed with his attempt to strip this man of his rights and left in disgust. I'm not arguing that, because I don't know why they left, it seems pretty obvious in the video that the event was winding down and maybe they just left as they were finished or had other plans. Their leaving doesn't enforce any point for or against.

Point two, the "armed man" as you refer to him didn't refuse to leave, he was never asked to leave, so his continued presence doesn't constitute refusal to leave.


reply posted on 25-1-2013 @ 11:40 AM by Neocrusader
reply to post by lernmore



True, true
You at no point hear any folding chairs being packed away and people leaving
But none the less interesting to see how many stayed to the conclusion of this event
You assume my comment was directed in the direction of look how many leave upon discovery of a concealed carrier
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



UN Proposes Tax On Americans for 3rd world countries
  Posted 18 days ago with 28 member flags
Armed bystander stops stabbing outside school
  Posted 12 days ago with 27 member flags
" Climate Change Is Not A Hoax", says Obama!!??
  Posted 4 days ago with 21 member flags
Former Arizona Sheriff Mack, ‘Gun Control Against the Law’
  Posted 13 days ago with 12 member flags
Limiting Freedom & It\'s Effects On Society
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags