Man with assault rifle joins crowds outside president's Phoenix venue

[rbernie]

Excellent link, Viper2 - thanks.

Here's another scenario. Someone from the crowd reaches for the guy's gun and manages to shoot and kill another person at the rally.

And here is the crux of the anti-OC argument; the retention issue. Yes, it is the job of anyone OC'ing to be aware and actively manage weapons retention at all times.

I agree.

Not to trivialize the concern, but I think that the AR was pretty well under control.

 

[wvshooter]

Lot of responses here so I'll be brief. He shouldn't have had the rifle and IMHO he shouldn't have open carried a handgun. Not in the proximity of the President. And I don't say that because I like this president. I don't like him at all.

 

[DCortez]

I thought the guy was an Acorn plant.

 

[skoro]

I think most members of this forum understand the statement the gun-toting spectator in Arizona was making. Ditto the NH incident last week. But I don't think this kind of behavior does our cause any good. It wouldn't surprise me if large segments of the public sees this as irresponsible or even threatening.

Whether we like it or not, public opinion is a large factor in maintaining our 2nd amendment rights.

 

[lionking]

The thing is people were there because of health care.And people of both ends take their 1st amendment seriously.And some who might not have anything against the 2nd amendment are going to see that guy as trying to intimidate them trying to exercise their right to peacefully assemble.

They are going to wonder why is someone bringing a rifle who is obviously trying to make a statement to a gathering about health care and they may think that that person is trying to intimidate their stance on the issue.

 

[SoCalShooter]

This story s freaking awesome, we SHOULD start showing up open carry or concealed carry at these events as long as its legal in the area the event takes place. The government should be reminded peacefully from time to time that they aint the only ones who are armed.

If its just a few doing it, its bad publicity but if its 10's or hundreds of protesters legally armed at these events its sends a BIG FRicken message that we will not be TREAD on.

 

[Mags]

Here's another scenario. Someone from the crowd reaches for the guy's gun and manages to shoot and kill another person at the rally.

Since everyone is playing what ifs now. What if the President came under attack and the OCer came to the rescue. It goes both ways.

 

[jakemccoy]

And here is the crux of the anti-OC argument; the retention issue. Yes, it is the job of anyone OCing to be aware and actively manage weapons retention at all times.

I agree.

Not to trivialize the concern, but I think that the AR was pretty well under control.

It's a retention issue. It goes beyond that as well. Imagine if the scenario I described above actually happened at a Presidential rally. The debate wouldn't be simply about the legalities of what happened in the case. The fallout from such an occurrence would have far reaching ramifications to gun control laws across the country, and for what? Sometimes a cost/benefit analysis is in order. The potential risk is too great just to show, hey, I can carry and so I am. If the open carry were at somewhere else besides a Presidential rally, then the ramifications would not be so dire.

By the way, the guy said, "In America, people have the ability to fight back and resist." He also says, "I'm absolutely totally against health care in this way, in this manner. Stealing it from people, I don't think that's appropriate."

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/p...oenix-speech-with/q4OeoN6qZU-efcy1Zoq7xQ.cspx

The statement he was making with open carrying his rifle was quite a bit more than simply showing he has the right to carry. This guy was not bifurcating the issues. This guy was putting the health care debate right up there next to having the right to fight against a tyrannical government. I'm fully not agreeing with that approach with respect to these health care debates.

They are going to wonder why is someone bringing a rifle who is obviously trying to make a statement to a gathering about health care and they may think that that person is trying to intimidate their stance on the issue.

Well, listening to the guy with the gun, it actually seems like he was trying to intimidate.

 

[lionking]

quote

"The government should be reminded peacefully from time to time that they aint the only ones who are armed."

I agree however there is the right time and place for it,I don't think healthcare is a topic that should be showing we are armed.There are those that don't agree with you on healthcare and they have the right to voice themselves without feeling threatened.Are you showing the government you are armed or are you showing the people who disagree with you that you are armed?


__________________

 

[armoredman]

Who knows maybe everybody carries ARs when shopping in Arizona.

Certainly not!

 

[TexasRifleman]

it's clear from the posting on the Arizona forum this was well thought out, that the local LE were informed, and a very calm person volunteered to do this.

Also, rifle not loaded just in case someone tried to take it.

Still fail to see the problem with the whole thing.

Arizona has been open carry I guess since the dawn of time.

Just another day in the heat in my opinion.......

 

[MJZZZ]

Casual?

You should still wear your Team CZ-USA t-shirt on casual Friday. I'm shocked. Mike

 

[Sam1911]

No rights are unlimited. Try insisiting on your right to open carry the next time you visit a public place like a prison, or a kindergarden, or a naval base.

In many states the kindergarten would be no problem. The school zone = victim disarmament zone is not a federal law.

A prison is not a public place, you may not enter there (or leave) of your own free will and you are subject to search upon entry. A Naval base is not a public place, again you do not have the right to come and go as you please, and you may be subject to search. I don't mind answering your points, but think through them a little first as some of these non sequiturs bog down the discussion.

A more appropriate suggestion would be "try insisting on your right to open carry in a city park or on a public street." Seeing as most places do not prohibit such actions, and the laws of some jurisdictions have specifically been written to protect that right, I think I'm on pretty firm ground.

Now, (once more) are you arguing to have our laws re-written to further infringe our rights or are you merely expressing a wish that other gun-folks would circumscribe themselves?

-Sam

 

[FMJMIKE]

With all the threats to President Obama I think the guy is a little wacky. I do not support people carrying Assault Weapons at Political Events where the President is present............It just doesn't help anything and makes gun owners look nutty.

 

[armoredman]

As for the question on whether or not AZ has a law restricting carry of long guns - no. Anywhere you may open carry a handgun, you may carry a long gun. Also, no specific law against carrying at any political rally. I like the fact he was well dressed and not ranting, showed a good side to lawful carry, not to mention a very nice expenisve toy, (EOTech?), I wish I could afford!

Someone wanted a picture of someone open carrying a rifle outside in AZ? Bad picture, but it's me, vZ-58, outside, in AZ, legal as church on whatever day of the week you wish.



FMJMike, does the rifle have a full auto capability? If not, please desist in calling it an assault rifle - it isn't.


MJZZZ, it's at the dry cleaners.

 

[lionking]

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/08...-outside-Obama-appearance/UPI-82601250553958/

quoteIt is extremely disturbing that you have that kind of weapon in close proximity to where the president is," Ruben Gallego, a military veteran and state Democratic Party official, told the newspaper. "He was demonstrating his Second Amendment rights, but he was clearly there to intimidate people who were there exercising their First Amendment rights."

And this is the bad publicity I'm talking about.Some will see it as trying to intimidate what they think on health care and their right to voice and assemble peacefully.

While some who support these guys showing up to a rally with AR-15's to support the 2nd amendment,we may now have gained enemies who will support the next ban on them because they think they were threatened by GOP loyalists with rifles against health care reform.

 

[Zoogster]

Still don't agree with the action.

It may be a right, and a right I support. I also support discretion though.

The political mindset and landscape of gun supporters is probably further along in the minds of those in Arizona though.

In most of the nation I feel people should open carry, do marches open carrying and otherwise show support for exercising thier right.
Choosing to go from very little political carrying to carrying at presidential rallies is a bit excessive.

Now in Arizona open carrying may be so common and normal that they are already at the point where doing so at a presidential event is only as much of a step further as simply open carrying down a city street on a regular day many states.

The rest of the nation is not there though.
Doing too much too quickly can be more detrimental than helpful.
If people are generally not walking around with ARs in public then choosing to do so at presidential rallies before the public has had time to adjust elsewhere is excessive.

Step 1, then 2, then 3 etc Jumping to step 11 before people have become accustomed to step 2 makes it too foreign. Slightly foreign is okay and allows people to adjust. Too foreign and you may get detrimental backlash.
Backlash like the armed blacks marching during the civil rights resulting in a ban on open carrying (loaded) in places like California. Bans still in place to this day.

Do you want to achieve national laws against showing up at rallies armed and negative associations with open carry, or national acceptance and normalcy to exercising the RKBA?

 

[Expertowgunner]

why does it matter if this guy expressing his freedoms like any good american should is looked upon by the sheeple as a reason to have gun control. thats theyre problem and in the end i think america will unfortunately will be banned in one way or another to bear arms. i hope to god it wont but whether they tax ammo or whatever they will get it and you know why its because people dont stand up for what they believe in anymore they rather would avoid the "wrath" of the government by shutting up or sitting at their homes yelling at their tv about stuff they hate about that politicians do but never do anything. a select few of our nation would have the balls to do what this guy did and i commend that he literally was risking his life doing what he did and tried to prove a point and that point is that there are some people out there that are willing to prove that they really are americans.

 

[armoredman]

Someone from the crowd reaches for the guy's gun and manages to shoot and kill another person at the rally

The link from AZshooters says the rifle was unloaded for that reason. I personally don't carry an unloaded firearm, but it was there for the political statement. Also, there were several other members who were in attendance watching his 6. I still salute him, and watched the interview on ABC15, where he was polite and respectful.

 

[Zoogster]

why does it matter if this guy expressing his freedoms like any good american should is looked upon by the sheeple as a reason to have gun control.

It would be perfectly fine if people already normally walked around in Arizona with rifles on thier backs.
Then continuing it to a presidential rally would just be taking it one step further.

When nobody walks around with rifles on thier backs choosing to do so initially at presidential rallies is not one step further. It is 10 steps further and may accomplish the very opposite of what was intended.
Laws enacted that further restrict gun rights because something too foreign was done too quickly.

 

[Dr_2_B]

interesting

 

[ejbrush]

I just have to stir the pot a little...

and scoot away to can tomatos.

I have this great image in my head - some dude standing outside a townhall in a tie-dyed shirt, with an M1 slung on his shoulder, a big sign taped to a M1905 bayonet saying "Health Care Now" or "How about We start Ensuring Domestic Tranquility and Promoting the General Welfare..." or "This Machine Kills Fascists."

Pigeon-holers around the country would have conniptions.

 

[Zoogster]

some dude standing outside a townhall in a tie-dyed shirt, with an M1 slung on his shoulder, a big sign taped to a M1905 bayonet saying "Health Care Now"

We had that. It was when soldiers got together and marched on DC because World War One payouts and benefits had yet to be given to them. They were essentially marching for government healthcare, and there was elements of socialism in the crowd.

The crowd was broken up with tanks, and the NFA was passed under a different pretense shortly afterwards.

 

[Balrog]

The Gun Control Act of 1968 was at least in part passed in response to Black Panthers showing up at courthouses with rifles and pistols.

I think these people may be anti-2A activists, hoping to scare people into passing more gun laws.

 

[armoredman]

We had that. It was when soldiers got together and marched on DC because World War One payouts and benefits had yet to be given to them. They were essentially marching for government healthcare, and there was elements of socialism in the crowd.

The crowd was broken up with tanks, and the NFA was passed under a different pretense shortly afterwards

One huge differance, Zoogster - the Bonus Marchers were unarmed. They wanted the bonus promised for 1945 from WWI, paid out early due to the Great Depression. Unarmed and shivering, they camped out in Washington until the Army ran them off, and I believe one of the commanders one the raid was Major Geo. S. Patton.