protesters bring firearms to town hall meetings

[uberdark]

so i have been reading that protesters are now bringing guns and showing them openly at these meetings. wait let me explain... they are standing just outside of the meetings in a public area and displaying their weapons for all to see. this just seems a bit much for me. i never knew of people bringing guns to meetings when bush was in office. now they are bringing them in front of obama. claiming out loud its their right to do so. which is fine by me with the guns..... but the tact for this is just ....i dont know..... WRONG..... a thing called intelligence seems to be sorely lacking of late in america and i for one am appalled. i know i will tick a few of you off, but dang man.....its not like obama is the antichrist. which btw a teacher at my school firmly believes and tells her students at any chance she gets. anyhow.... discuss.

p.s. and yes i know her saying it in school is wrong...but this be the bible belt.

 

[slah]

Only in America


...and some 3rd. world countries too I´d guess...

 

[skeeve]

Well, I understand you sentiments, and I even agree with them (especially you comment on intelligence in America), but... legally they did nothing wrong. In Arizona you can carry weapon as long as it is visible.

You know, if you want to spend an hour or so with clear understanding that a couple of secret service snipers keep you for target for all this time, sure, be my guest

 

[Dragonsreach]

Originally posted by uberdark
so i have been reading that protesters are now bringing guns and showing them openly at these meetings. wait let me explain... they are standing just outside of the meetings in a public area and displaying their weapons for all to see. this just seems a bit much for me. i never knew of people bringing guns to meetings when bush was in office. now they are bringing them in front of obama. claiming out loud its their right to do so. which is fine by me with the guns..... but the tact for this is just ....i dont know..... WRONG..... a thing called intelligence seems to be sorely lacking of late in america and i for one am appalled. i know i will tick a few of you off, but dang man.....its not like obama is the antichrist. which btw a teacher at my school firmly believes and tells her students at any chance she gets. anyhow.... discuss.

p.s. and yes i know her saying it in school is wrong...but this be the bible belt.

John
To quote Robert Heinlien:-
\"The Facts. Again, Again and Again what are the Facts?\"

OK Who Are the Protestors?
What Are they Protesting about?
What Meetings?
Where?
Are they Peaceful?
Or are they Threatening?

How can we discuss without the full facts?
All we can come up with is second guessing and supposition.

 

[BPI]

Hi Uber, i\'ve seen a bit about this on the news. Town Hall meetings to discuss Health Care with people standing outside with their guns \"because it\'s their legal right\" but really to intimidate & demonstrate their willingness to use (threat of) violence against a Government they didn\'t vote for. Still enjoying the comment along the lines of \"if America had death squads like the UK\'s socialised medecine then Stephen Hawking wouldn\'t be alive today\" !?!

As a UK cit I still get a bit weirded out seeing a policeman with a gun in airports/visiting London, let alone passing people in town with them strapped to their belts.

Must admit I sometimes sit on this side of the pond smugly thinking ill thoughts of the US but really I\'m only hiding from the shameful horrors that occur here!

B.

 

[uberdark]

sorry bout that.... follow the link.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090817/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_protesters_guns;_ylt=Am.uWBQlPJ2fuwiouwhRw3GCfNdF

 

[supervike]

I cringed when I first heard about these things....

I think they are making a valid \'freedom of speech\' expression by carrying their guns.

But, I also think that ultimately doing so could really hurt their cause.

Imagine the fallout, if something happened at any of these events. There would be a fasttrack to ban guns, or severely restrict them.

But, ideally, the government SHOULD be a bit frightened of it\'s citizens. It demonstrates who really should hold the power.

Americans and guns are really a cultural thing. While I appreciate it may be hard for other societies to understand why we have this deep seated NEED to own guns, I think it\'s a bit unfair for people to be so dismissal of the culture.

 

[slah]

Originally posted by supervike

But, ideally, the government SHOULD be a bit frightened of it\'s citizens. It demonstrates who really should hold the power.

I agree that the government should at least respect it´s citizens, but more as an idea or ideal. The governments representatives should not be afraid to get their asses shot of by protesters (which is the case here)

Originally posted by supervike

Americans and guns are really a cultural thing. While I appreciate it may be hard for other societies to understand why we have this deep seated NEED to own guns, I think it\'s a bit unfair for people to be so dismissal of the culture.

Slaves were a cultural thing as well and you chose to abolish that pracsis!

While I understand the reason for guns way back in the time of pioneering and indian wars, and arming militias during the civil war I completely fail to see the logical reason for them now, and am always amazed to see the public cry for allowing weapons.

The constitution (and the right to bear arms) is a piece of paper written hundred years ago under circumstances which can´t be compared to today and by people who in their wildest dreams couldn´t imagine society as it is today. I just don´t get why people are so hung up on it and fail to interpret it in context of society as it is today.

 

[Dragonsreach]

Originally posted by supervike
I think they are making a valid \'freedom of speech\' expression by carrying their guns.
The trouble is, to my mind, their valid \'freedom of speech\' expression may well be considered as intimidating and/or intimidation and thereby denying a \"freedom of speech\" to others.

But, I also think that ultimately doing so could really hurt their cause.
I totally agree.

Imagine the fallout, if something happened at any of these events. There would be a fasttrack to ban guns, or severely restrict them.
I will refer you to the Dunblaine Shooting in the UK. The Automatic \"kneejerk\" reaction of the then Govt to ban all firearms has backfired.
Controlled ownership of firearms in Legitimate circumstances is almost non-existant, while firearms in criminal hands has dramatically increased, as has their use.
And please do not believe or quote the heavily doctored Home Office statistics on violent crime.

But, ideally, the government SHOULD be a bit frightened of it\'s citizens. It demonstrates who really should hold the power.
I agree to the extent that any Govt should be afraid of its voters capability to remove it from office, not an armed section of the populace.

Americans and guns are really a cultural thing. While I appreciate it may be hard for other societies to understand why we have this deep seated NEED to own guns, I think it\'s a bit unfair for people to be so dismissal of the culture.
To be honest the mindset that is too often shown is that a propotion of Americans believe that the 2nd amendment means that they HAVE to own a firearm, not that they have the RIGHT to own a firearm.

PLEASE REMEMBER: I say that as someone who held a Firearms Certificate in the UK and has owned rifles.

 

[kathrynloch]

\"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.\"

Declaration of Independence.

 

[wiccanpony]

Quote: Vikey

But, ideally, the government SHOULD be a bit frightened of it\'s citizens. It demonstrates who really should hold the power.


“these people” are also intimidating to those who don’t agree with them ....... the message I’m reading loud and clear seeing folks waving guns, is if you don’t agree with “me” you are the Enemy and I have a gun to take care of that problem .... probably not rational thinking on my part but that is my gut feeling.

 

[freakinacage]

Originally posted by wiccanpony
Quote: Vikey

But, ideally, the government SHOULD be a bit frightened of it\'s citizens. It demonstrates who really should hold the power.


“these people” are also intimidating to those who don’t agree with them ....... the message I’m reading loud and clear seeing folks waving guns, is if you don’t agree with “me” you are the Enemy and I have a gun to take care of that problem .... probably not rational thinking on my part but that is my gut feeling.

on the contrary, i would say that is rational. why else would they bring a gun. a good argument should be able to stand up for itself, if they need a gun to punctuate it....

 

[Sand Rat]

Well, lets see - since people disagreeing with the president have had their signs removed from their hands (Denver) and been struck (Mass if I remember correctly) perhaps the thought of someone being armed will keep the number of incidents down.

After all an armed society is a polite society.

 

[Ritual]

Originally posted by kathrynloch
\"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.\"

Declaration of Independence.

When that was written, I\'m sure a revolution was a feasible option (they had just made one). But, imagine today what would happen with the US economy if the government was overthrown.

 

[Farin]

i´ve been following the hole town hall topic for the last week or so , and i don´t know if i´m supposed to laugh or simply be grossed out by the way those people behave. These meetings are supposed to be TALKS were concerned people can ask questions about health care reform and how it will affect their lives. Instead i see a completely hysteric mob yelling, crying and making weird accusations about \"death panels\" and euthanasia. And now their bringing in the big guns.
Donna and freakinacage are completely right, taking guns to a public meeting isn´t a presentation of personal freedom, it´s a thread. Not only to the politicians, but to the freeedom of speech of those wo disagree.

okay little rant, but let me add something usefull:

Since theses guys are all about freedom, maybe we should define freedom:

- \" Freedom is the subjective insight into the objective necessity \"
- Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel ( my own translation from german )

with other words, people should accept the fact (!!) that roughly 50 million people in the US are without insurance.
That on the long run insdurance cost will increase according to all sources i can find , not to mention that those uninsured people will cost the corporations and the country money through sick days, chronic diseases that can be prohibited by routine physicals (they can´t afford ), and so on.

So instead of making nonsesnse claims about personal rights, they might wanna think how bad for one´s freedom it is not to be able to pay one´s medical bill , or being ruined by clinic costs.

@skeeve:

let´s hope none of these agents is triggerhappy, or we probably deal with outragged people yelling \"governant oppression\" and publishing second gunman theories on the web

@Uberdark: nice to hear that the bible belt is living up to it´s reputation. Maybe your school should lecture her about state - church separation mandats - otr the need of letting people go if they prove to be stupider thatn the students - they did it at my school, so why not at yours

 

[supervike]

Originally posted by Ritual

Originally posted by kathrynloch
\"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.\"

Declaration of Independence.

When that was written, I\'m sure a revolution was a feasible option (they had just made one). But, imagine today what would happen with the US economy if the government was overthrown.

But time and comfort do not make those truths go away.

Just for the record, I don\'t own any guns. (other than miniature plastic and metal ones!) ...but still feel it is a hugely important part of our freedoms here in America.

 

[BPI]

Hi DR, I completely agree that the handgun ban in the UK after Dunblaine was a grotesque piece of political oppurtunism with no merit in rational terms. A friend of mine handed in all of his kit (no compensation of course) & moved to black powder & shotgun. Given the number of hoops he had to jump through to acquire his certificate in the first place it still annoys me. We\'ve checked, double-checked & looked round the back & decided you are an individual we deem responsible enough to own a gun, then an ill man shoots some people & all of the legitimate owners are penalised? Political short termism that\'s led to an increase in gun crime. I can\'t remember, was there an \"oh my god, think of the children\" hysteria running through the press as well? (as per Rebekah Wade\'s News Of The World \"paedo\" scare mongering).

WiccanPony, my gut reaction is that it is threatening as well. I wondered if anyone was going to post who\'s used to guns who had a different reaction to seeing that bloke (similar to the one I\'d have if someone had a camera with them). I think trying to seperate the political from the rational from the sensible from the cultural can be awfully tricky but interesting & often rewards with a better understanding.

I\'d find gun ownership defense a lot easier if I heard people saying \"how am I supposed to feed my family if I can\'t shoot a deer a week?\" or \"My gun club has a great family atmosphere & is a wonderful social gathering place for our community\" than the purely emotional/gun salesman \"if someone breaks into my house at night I\'ll blow their head off\" (the media I consume may be responsible for always interviewing the rabid nut rather than the friendly everyman of course).

B.

 

[Ritual]

Originally posted by supervike

Originally posted by Ritual

Originally posted by kathrynloch
\"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.\"

Declaration of Independence.

When that was written, I\'m sure a revolution was a feasible option (they had just made one). But, imagine today what would happen with the US economy if the government was overthrown.

But time and comfort do not make those truths go away.

Just for the record, I don\'t own any guns. (other than miniature plastic and metal ones!) ...but still feel it is a hugely important part of our freedoms here in America.

The principles may be sound, but the reality looks very different today compared to back then. In a time when a large part of the population were farmers a public uprising against the government was a real possibility. Today, when most people make their living in an international economy and people\'s lives are controlled by mortages from banks playing at an international arena, I think a public uprising (assuming the public would even be able to agree upon such a thing) would be a disaster.

 

[supervike]

I won\'t disagree....A public uprising would be an enormous disaster. It would have to be that the alternative were even more so...

 

[Sand Rat]

Originally posted by Farin

with other words, people should accept the fact (!!) that roughly 50 million people in the US are without insurance.
That on the long run insdurance cost will increase according to all sources i can find , not to mention that those uninsured people will cost the corporations and the country money through sick days, chronic diseases that can be prohibited by routine physicals (they can�t afford ), and so on.

Umm no - the actual number of uninsured in the US is closer to 8 million not 45 to 50 million as quoted (a good chunk of the \"uninsured\" are already eligible for federal programs here - and about 8 million of the uninsured are unisured by choice, not by lack of opportunity).

Unfortunately the lawyers in Congress and the Executive Branch of the government are not going after the real driving factor behind medical costs - tort cases. Medical costs in the US are more driven by the need for doctors, nurses, and hospitals to have insurance against malpractice claims than they are by actual cost of drugs/new equipment/facilities and so forth. But I somehow don\'t see a large collection of lawyers taking money from their own pockets.

Besides, if the plans that Congress and or the White House are proposing are so great, why are these bodies keeping their own independent health care plans that are paid for by the tax payers?