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

page: 8
176
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
Funny how it comes back to race with you. I'm sorry that you are scared of black people...that is an issue with you. Someone being black doesn't give them the potential to kill you very easily, carrying a gun does


Please show me where I stated or implied that I was afraid of black people?




posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 



BBBBZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!! Wrong! You could not be more wrong if you tried. People have a right to carry a weapon wherever they please, according to the Constitution.


There are many places you can't carry a gun. The Constitution never discusses on where you can carry your gun, only that you can own one.

Go ahead, try to carry your gun on an airplane, in a courthouse, into the whitehouse, into most schools...let me know how that works out for you. If they stop you...just tell them "BBBBZZZZZZZZZ, your wrong".



You and people like that councilman do not get to dictate the rights of others, simply because you don't agree that they should have said rights.


Well, we kind of do. Because we currently outnumber you and are organizing welll to petition our legislatures to make some sensible laws to regulate your "rights"...just how the 2nd amendment tells us to be well "regulated".



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 



Oh, the irony. You are "better armed" in the debate? What interesting word choice!


You would almost think I meant to use that phrase....yep....I did.

And if you are denying that many people on these boards, or on other forums on the internet, are not suggesting they "use their 2nd amendment rights" to prevent gun control...then you are just being willfully ignorant.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by xedocodex
Funny how it comes back to race with you. I'm sorry that you are scared of black people...that is an issue with you. Someone being black doesn't give them the potential to kill you very easily, carrying a gun does


Please show me where I stated or implied that I was afraid of black people?



You were the one that brought race into the discussion as an example of you being uncomfortable around them to compare them to gun owners.

Slip much?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
No you do not outnumber us. The media is simply aspinnig it that way. if you did outnumber us, Obama would have a chance at passing these draconian laws, but we all know congress will not allow it. Have a nice day you elitist scumbag living in your rainbow and shunshine dwelling with a nicely controlled community. Some of us do live in cities or parts of the cities which are like the wild west, full of drug addiceted scum bags with mental issue trying to stick a blade in you over 6$ to add for his daily crack intake. That is in fact where the population densities are highest in the cities. Matter of fact, its also the cities with the strictes gun laws that have the highes murder rates by firearms, and those cities which allow people to own and carry have actually lower victimization rates by firearms. DC being I believe the highest murder rate by firearm in the country. Because DC also happens to be filled with drug addicted mentally ill homeless and the illegally armed gangbangers that sell to them in the higher density population areas of town. What happens if you take the wrong exit on a family trip? If you are armed from out of town and did not know the gun laws but are able to stop your family from being robbed, raped and murdered, then you will be rewarded with jail time and revocation of your rights.

If you followed that law or did not know it, but were unarmed anyways, then your family will probably be raped, robbed and murdered, but it will be ok because someone somewhere someday will not be killing babies with an assault rifle.

xedocodex

your just an elitist who believes only the well off citizens with well funded schools and fire departments should be protected by police with guns while the poor or unfortunate living in the hell of some of these urban environments that others cannot escape should be condemed to be victims of violent crime with no logical means of protecting ourselves. tell me how a single knife or a phone call to police up to 15 mintues away is going to save you from a gang of juvenile delinquents with bats and knives trying to rob you and violate your woman because you accidently took a wrong turn from the freeway and got out to ask for directions?

Forgive my vulgarity or not, but you are a #ING moron who has never had to be in a situation where a gun has kept your family from being torn apart. Go live on the West side of chicago or the part of DC that is not nice pretty marble and limestone monuments or most of NYC olutside of manhatten and staten island.

See exactly how #ing scary it can actually be for law abiding citizens who just want to raise their kids safely. And no, we do not all have the money to just up and leave.

Get real, you have not died and gone to haven yet, the bulk of the world is in fact still scary and dangerous. It is just the nature of living.
edit on 1/26/2013 by DYepes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   
No? No takers?


Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
Okay, two things:

1) left the room, fuming? He calmly dismissed himself and walked out - this was a non-event. Good on the Mayor for saying what he did. And, good on the young vet for being honest (when he didn't have to) and hell, the guy made ME feel safer, but...

2) anyone *else* notice the REST of the room cleared out, too?! At the beginning of the video there are at least 20 citizens sitting in front of the council members - zoom to 6:05... There are 5 (FIVE) - where'd everyone go so fast?! Was there a cutaway we missed?

edit on 1/26/2013 by SquirrelNutz because: (no reason given)



Where was the 'gets owned' part? Where was the 'storms off fuming part'?

How come no one is laying into the OP for falsely misrepresenting a situation? This was the most civil exchange between people who disagree with one another that I have ever seen.

THAT's why it should be forwarded! To show that people with differences can trade differences of opinion and act accordingly - to there own wishes - when either outcome is presented.

Oh, and where DID all the people go at the 6min mark who there there at the 0:00 / beginning?!



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by xedocodex
Funny how it comes back to race with you. I'm sorry that you are scared of black people...that is an issue with you. Someone being black doesn't give them the potential to kill you very easily, carrying a gun does


Please show me where I stated or implied that I was afraid of black people?



You were the one that brought race into the discussion as an example of you being uncomfortable around them to compare them to gun owners.

Slip much?


No my analogy was that irrational fear of a person or group of persons because of one's prejudice is similar enough to one's irrational fear of an inanimate object or persons who chose to carry that inanimate object based on prejudice to make a comparison.

It is not a slip of any kind. It was wholly intentional on my part to point out that irrational fear doesn't entitle a group of citizens to make someone leave an event, meeting, or location based on a majority vote as a result of that fear.

Now if you are the sole proprietor you can ask someone to leave of course - it is your property after all. I support that regardless of the reason. You should be able to ask someone to leave your establishment based on nothing at all or even irrational fear if you so choose. It is your property.

I know you think it makes you seem superior in some way to make me appear a racist, I assure you that is not the case.

I do admit I am a bit prejudiced in my initial opinions of people (based on my past interactions) based on the way they act, dress and speak but I don't go so far as racial prejudice.

I think this is just human nature - I am often pleasantly surprised when I react in this manner and when I see that the person is not as I assumed or pre-judged it helps keep me grounded in the fact that people are simply people and individuals.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
How come no one is laying into the OP for falsely misrepresenting a situation?
Because we all realize that despite the man's composure, he was indeed mad about it. He "owned" himself when he got up and walked out.

The Mayor essentially pointed out that those who walked out forgot the contents of the oath they took, and the guy with the gun stayed right where he was.

I doubt the council member was sincerely concerned about his safety.
If you believe he was, you probably also believe guns kill people and that banning them would lead to less murders.

He was taking a stand, a stand that says, "You are armed, this I cannot control, and I don't like it!"
Everyone else that left had to go turn on the MSM, they were late on their latest dose of gun control propaganda.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 



BBBBZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!! Wrong! You could not be more wrong if you tried. People have a right to carry a weapon wherever they please, according to the Constitution.


There are many places you can't carry a gun. The Constitution never discusses on where you can carry your gun, only that you can own one.

Go ahead, try to carry your gun on an airplane, in a courthouse, into the whitehouse, into most schools...let me know how that works out for you. If they stop you...just tell them "BBBBZZZZZZZZZ, your wrong".


That has already been addressed, and you know it. The Constitution does not say that one group of citizens gets to decide that some other group loses a right because the first group thinks the second is "scary", or makes them "uncomfortable". You know very well that I am talking about places that are not restricted, such as that meeting, so stop being obtuse.


Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
You and people like that councilman do not get to dictate the rights of others, simply because you don't agree that they should have said rights.



Originally posted by xedocodex
Well, we kind of do. Because we currently outnumber you and are organizing welll to petition our legislatures to make some sensible laws to regulate your "rights"...just how the 2nd amendment tells us to be well "regulated".


No, actually, you do not. Laws that go against the Constitution are not valid. Plus, there is nothing in the Constitution that states that some whiny bunch of citizens can strip the rights of another bunch. People have already provided some great examples to you, but you still seem unable to grasp this simple concept. I will try ONE more time, then, if you still refuse to see, write you off as hopeless.

You most likely drive a car, as do the majority of adult Americans. Suppose you have a group of people that decides cars are evil, because people die in car crashes, from bad drivers, mechanical failures, and so forth. This group decides to push for laws to ban cars, and make it almost impossible for you to own one. Now, you need your car to get to work, as you live in an area with no public transportation, and work too far from home to bike or walk. You are also disabled, and can't get around any other way. But this group wants to take your car away. After all, they claim, you could be incompetent. How can they know you are not? How can they know you don't plan to run people over when you go out driving? How do they know you won't snap one day, and plow your car into a park full of people, killing dozens? Others have killed with cars, so cars are bad, they claim. So, they gain numbers, using scare tactics, and blowing stories all out of proportion. Then, according to your logic, they can legally take your car away, and prevent you from ever owning one again. Right? They can regulate your "rights". THAT is what you are saying.

You even place the word "rights" in quotes, proving that you really don't think people have rights. You seem to think the government grants us "rights", not able to grasp that something granted is a privilege, and that rights are automatic, something the government does not grant, but that we have as people, and that they are NOT ALLOWED to take away. Do you get it yet? If you want to argue, then admit you don't actually believe in freedom, and we can discuss this more honestly.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 



Oh, the irony. You are "better armed" in the debate? What interesting word choice!


You would almost think I meant to use that phrase....yep....I did.

And if you are denying that many people on these boards, or on other forums on the internet, are not suggesting they "use their 2nd amendment rights" to prevent gun control...then you are just being willfully ignorant.


People on these boards and other forums did not advocate, as did that gun-grabbing liberal idiot politician, going out and shooting people that don't agree with them. I notice you totally ignore that bit of evidence, that it is YOUR side threatening and advocating violence against gun owners, not gun owners saying those things. Add to that clown the idiot mayor in NY that stated they would use Waco-style measures against gun owners that tried to keep their lawfully-protected guns. It's your side pushing for violence, and everyone knows it.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
No? No takers?



2) anyone *else* notice the REST of the room cleared out, too?! At the beginning of the video there are at least 20 citizens sitting in front of the council members - zoom to 6:05... There are 5 (FIVE) - where'd everyone go so fast?! Was there a cutaway we missed?




Oh, and where DID all the people go at the 6min mark who there there at the 0:00 / beginning?!


Not to sound like a broken record, but it's quite obvious you didn't even read the thread.

This was answered back on page 2, and pointed out, again, on page 6 by myself.

Even better, see Cripmeister's link on page 5, which would take you to the city website with the entire meeting broken into many segments.

These meetings can, and do, last many hours.

Some of the parts included in the video are from the Citizens Remarks, and the last one, the Mayor's remarks.

The REST of the room didn't simply "clear out" in 6 minutes.


ETA: Sorry, but that's as polite as it gets.





edit on 26-1-2013 by lernmore because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   
edit on 26-1-2013 by JustgibberisH because: ^Sorry



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   
It seems that you failed to answer my question.
Let me restate it.


reply to post by xedocodex
 



Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by xedocodex

And?

That isn't "unconstitutional", in fact, the Constitution doesn't even apply here because this councilman isn't representing the Federal Goverment and wasn't "disarming" him.

So, since it wasn't the Govt asking him to disarm, then there is no issue, as the councilman, in your world, is an individual, and he has about as much right to have him disarm as telling him to remove his shoes.

Nice try. You fail.

But, since the Councilman was acting within the Council meeting, as a Council member, he was representing the Govt and thus acting on behalf of the respective Govt.

Nice try. You fail again.





Originally posted by xedocodex
You don't have the right to carry your gun anywhere you please...if you think you do, go ahead and stroll into an airport with your gun, or a court, or the whitehouse....go ahead...and complain about how "unconstitutional" it is when they tell you that you can't carry your gun there.

Actually, you can carry just about anywhere, with the exception of some Govt buildings and Private Property.
Since there are no laws restricting US Citizens from lawfully carrying a firearm within the building there, in that meeting, then the Vet DOES have the right.

Nice try again. You failed......again.


But, aren't you a NON-US Citizen???
I don't see where YOUR incorrect opinion is relevant in this matter.
I suppose your retort will be the tired and old "This is an International Forum" and blah blah bah.

You can add your incorrect opinion all you like, but..................It doesn't matter to anything, as you are not a US Citizen and really have no say in the matter.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   
funny thing about concealed carry......its 'concealed' no one will know you are carrying..so unless one identifies themself as doing so..as the ccw guy did at the meeting..no one will or should know......and in states that allow ccw's... there are alot of people that could be carrying a concealed weapon legaly....those that suddenly feel uncomfortable around somebody with a ccw...probably should just stay home.......'cause at any time the people around them could have a legaly concealed weapon.....

so thier knowledge suddenly makes them fearfull even tho nothing has changed except thier own knowledge...the councilman didnt feel uncomfortable before he knew that there was a ccw in the audience...i wonder how the councilman would have acted if the ccw holder did not answer his question?

so when this councilman goes out shopping or whatever...is he noided out cause there could be ccw's all around him? his point of walking out was sorta meaningless in my eyes..i guess he was trying to make a personel statement...which is his right to do so...

and as a side note..as many posters have pointed out..the video that is linked was edited...a bunch of people did not walk out when the ccw guy identified himself......most seem to only read the OP and them make thier comments with out reading much or any of the thread



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 



But, aren't you a NON-US Citizen???
I don't see where YOUR incorrect opinion is relevant in this matter.
I suppose your retort will be the tired and old "This is an International Forum" and blah blah bah.

You can add your incorrect opinion all you like, but..................It doesn't matter to anything, as you are not a US Citizen and really have no say in the matter.


Where did you get the idea that I'm not a US citizen? LOL.

Born and raised...voted for Obama 2008 and 2012.

Soooooooo....this is awkward.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by xedocodex
 


Well, just due to the fact that you admitted you voted for Obama, you will be treated as if you were not a citizen.

CJ



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by xedocodex
 


Well, just due to the fact that you admitted you voted for Obama, you will be treated as if you were not a citizen.

CJ


Really...wow.

How very American and patriotic of you...someone didn't vote for the guy you like so you will consider half the country not a citizen.

But hey, you got in a zinger....I guess.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by macman
 



But, aren't you a NON-US Citizen???
I don't see where YOUR incorrect opinion is relevant in this matter.
I suppose your retort will be the tired and old "This is an International Forum" and blah blah bah.

You can add your incorrect opinion all you like, but..................It doesn't matter to anything, as you are not a US Citizen and really have no say in the matter.


Where did you get the idea that I'm not a US citizen? LOL.

Born and raised...voted for Obama 2008 and 2012.

Soooooooo....this is awkward.



Oh, a US citizen, but voted for the Tyrant 0bama. That explains it all.

You still failed to address the other items. Or are you just here to respond to the easy statement?



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by xedocodex
 


Well, just due to the fact that you admitted you voted for Obama, you will be treated as if you were not a citizen.

CJ


Really...wow.

How very American and patriotic of you...someone didn't vote for the guy you like so you will consider half the country not a citizen.

But hey, you got in a zinger....I guess.


What I said was because you admitted you voted for Obama you will be treated like you have no voice, and already the one response to you by macman attacks you for saying you did. I am not attacking you - I was pointing out there will be a group of people who believe your opinion is null if you voted for Obama - I am not one of those people.

CJ



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Scott Dudley for President.





top topics
 
176
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join