I Have No Knowledge of Their Motivations. But…

I don't know about all the new laws. I do know that in 1982, I was issued a concealed weapon permit in Georgia that was issued by a Probate judge. On the back, it specifically said that the permit was not valid at "political rallies."

This only makes sense. I am as ardent a supporter of the 2nd Amendment as anyone you are likely to find, but there is a time and place for everything and just because you CAN do something doesn't always mean you WANT to do it.

--[opposing reforms that hinge on government-run health care]--

What reforms that "hinge" on healthcare? It's healthcare reform, in the singular not reforms suggesting that there are grander political changes being made because of needed healthcare reform.

--[He has no knowledge of their motivations]--

WHAT?!

Carrying a firearm IS INTIMIDATION by any descriptive standard! I defy you to describe otherwise! Carrying a firearm to a political event in the United States in this day and age is STOOOPID intimidation!
Shall we all carry firearms and stare down one other at political events? Oh how intelligent THAT would be! A single emotional spark and BANG, we become like Baghdad.

Jeepers, Father Time. Breathe...

Even if I agreed that carrying a firearm is intrinsically intimidating, the link to "racial issues" does not follow.

What you see here (and I have seen it earlier this week and last week on CNN as well as heard it recently on smarm-queen NPR shows) is the farther left of the population once again removed from reality and the public at large (who so often is so much smarter than the lefties are). The idiotic and even psychotic, as well as stupid, reaction to the sight of people carrying guns (in Arizona, where openly carrying firearms is legal, specifically; don't these stupid leftists ever leave their DC and NYC cocoon?) was the worst thing that happened regarding the issue of armed attendees.

Despite all the leftist delusions and dishonesty, on the other hand we saw from the start that the Obama health care "Town Hall" circus events were stage-managed (as have been his press conferences), while the chattering little hens decried and disparaged the public opposition to the garbage health care effort (so many examples they showed on CNN were of normal people rather than the occasional highly upset person). The worst behaviors they have shown on TV or replayed on radio are not as bad as the far left extremists (or the related fools who say stupid things like "health care is a right"), and of course the real violence we saw was the incident of SEIU union goons giving typical leftist brown-shirt tactics to a public protestor.

I'm not surprised if stupid leftists try regurgitating stale Sixties radical drivel and bizarre nonsense to give weight (without serious substance) to their protest of the legitimate protests of Democratic misconduct. They're just being useful idiots for the Dems who already have employed Stalinist tactics (in addition to open violence) toward protestors while hypocritically calling the _protesters_ (i.e,. the public) un-American.

Hmm...I wonder how they are going to explain what the black guy with a semi-automatic rifle was doing outside of a townhall meeting?

Maybe he was paid to be there? Who knows? But I seriously doubt he was there to oppress minorities.

Yes, the guns are for intimidation, but not to intimidate any certain race of people.

Hi shannonlee -- I dropped this link in at my other post, but it directly answers your question about how to explain the black guy open carrying:

LINK

Well...it's MSNBC...if anyone can make Fox look "fair and honest", it is MSNBC. Even liberals know MSNBC is a joke.

I thought Dionne was quite talented to slip in a Nazi reference (with the jackboots headline) along with the racial accusations. He pretty much covered his bases.

MSNBC is like the other liberal media (of which Fox is often a notorious exception, and hated for it), but MSNBC has chosen to be notably farther left, flirting with fringeyness, not mere extremism, in order to get an edge, perhaps. (I'm not sure to what extent it's an effort to extend the recent rise of far left talk radio and teevee like sick-buffoon Olbermann, or a misinterpretation of what can or "should" be done after the 2008 election of Obama which featured the far left and silly youth, whom MSNBC may be targeting as its developing audience.)

* * *

"I thought Dionne was quite talented to slip in a Nazi reference (with the jackboots headline) along with the racial accusations. He pretty much covered his bases."

Yep, he's the latest joining in the Pravda campaign (and accurately, too, the der Sturmer campaign) against the "misbehaving" mainstream. (Supporting this health care idiocy is now a "a core ethical and moral obligation," after all, if you believe Obama's latest sickening -- and desperate? -- appeal to emotion.)

The level of misconduct directed at the rising opposition to Dem misconduct seems due at first to lack of comprehension (disconnected from the public and reality -- how can Obama and the Democrats _fail_?) and then out of desperation (and resentment) (how can they, how _dare_ the mainstream object to this!).

So let me get this straight, when the left wanted to protest Bush they were caged in "Free speech zones" and carded before they entered and left. If you chose to show up at the event the local police arrested you. NOW we suddenly can carry rifles to political rallies and its no big deal. Funny George W. and Reagan both disagreed with that but since a Dem is in office quick lets not pay any attention. On the race thing, if it has nothing to do with race where was this type of protest during Clinton's term? I mean not counting OKC, I know that is incendiary but is that not the path we are currently on yet again?

I would also like to note though he does not know their motivations neither do you and I would have hoped that the extreme tilt we had taken was something that Americans could agree on but of course either because he is a Dem or an African American an exception has been made. You choose which ever excuse you prefer but Clinton was a Dem as well so that is a more difficult one to stand by.

Personally I think people are carrying these guns to rallies and town halls to show that the people still have some degree of power, and ultimately the government must answer to the people. While I don't agree with their methods and don't think they articulate their positions very well, I do agree with that message.

So far I haven't seen anything to suggest the people carrying the guns are Nazi racists, although I'm sure there are some out there.

Thanks, Magical, for sending me off to do a bit of research. I've heard that before: "This didn't happen during Clinton, and he was a Democrat. Therefore...."

It looks to me as if open carry laws in the states have been passed in the years *after* Clinton's presidency. Can't tell with New Hampshire. They may have always had it by default (never legislated against it). It does look, though, as if the question about why Clinton didn't deal with this is moot.

I am, however, willing to wager a large bet that folks who have concealed carry permits were doing so then, and are doing so now.

Edited to add: And I still think doing so at political rallies is a dumb idea.

"Yep, he's the latest joining in the Pravda campaign (and accurately, too, the der Sturmer campaign)"

Hahaha, the right-wingers are trying to be victims again.

Polimom- So we are saying its acceptable against Dems and not Repubs but has nothing to do with race. Still a double standard, still not right but it does not have to be hung on the race thing and thats at least nice. Again why is it ok against Dems but Repub presidents get free speech zones? Anyone...anyone....

Magical, "So we are saying its acceptable against Dems and not Repubs but has nothing to do with race"

Actually, I haven't said anything like that. What are you talking about? Nowhere have I suggested that it's acceptable for either -- much less one but not another. I've quite consistently said, in fact, that's it's a dumb idea at political events. Period. Why are you twisting it up into something partisan?

Sorry polimom that was not directed at you though it may have looked like it. I meant it more like, so as a society we have decided... Not you personally as I had seen your earlier note on it though I think calling it dumb politics is akin to calling an battleship a boat. Technically true but a rather large understatement. My question is when a real assassin sneaks in with these groups and acts what will that do to our country?

"when a real assassin sneaks in with these groups and acts what will that do to our country?"

Oh. Well, that's easy to answer. Were that to happen, I believe it would destroy our country.

And this is why it is a danger that RIGHT and LEFT should both try to calm down but instead one side feeds the flames and the other decides to make it a wedge issue. I would also like to note that we should be giving huge credit to our current president for NOT acting like the Bush Admin did and putting people in "Free speech zones" but instead we are whining because they are making the other side look bad with words. Its like we all woke up in Jan of this year after an eight year nap. While his numbers are low is he raising the terror threat level like Ridge was asked to? I am asking this to note that comparing one side to the other is not really a fair comparison right now and taking Obama out of historical context is disingenuous at best and propaganda at worst. Currently we have 3 parties, Dem Repubdem and Repub, the Repubdems want to force the dems to become what they miss about the repubs but instead need to fix their own party and get over it. If your side is tarred as racists I have an idea, stop running the southern strategy for a few election cycles. Dems got tired of looking like big spenders so Clinton spent less than Reagan or Bush, its called changing your brand, did they sit around and whine about the label(some I sure did but it did not matter and it was not the other sides fault for the perception) or did they fix it?

"Currently we have 3 parties, Dem Repubdem and Repub"

You have NO idea how much I was that were true.

But you've done confused me again, Magical. "If your side is tarred as racists I have an idea, stop running the southern strategy for a few election cycles."

Are you talking to me again?

Edited -- well crumb. duplicate comment. they must be making the disqus changes right now or something, cuz it's acting very oddly... sorry, all.

"Currently we have 3 parties, Dem Repubdem and Repub"

You have NO idea how much I was that were true.

But you've done confused me again, Magical. "If your side is tarred as racists I have an idea, stop running the southern strategy for a few election cycles."

Are you talking to me still? Or a wider, more generic 'you'...?

Sorry Polimom its the generic "you" to me you sound like a classic moderate. The people I am really talking to are the trickle down republicans that have run away in fear because of the extreme their side has become. Heck I was a moderate in 2000, Bush just turned me into a screaming liberal.

" The people I am really talking to are the trickle down republicans that have run away in fear because of the extreme their side has become. "

Sound a lot like Blue Dogs. Maybe we should hook the Blue Dogs up with them.somewhere in the middle as one group runs left and the other runs right.

Leonidas- See that is where I disagree. I do not think the left has run left, I think they have largely remained where they are. I do not think the right has run right but instead run theocratic since 2000. The blue dogs have what remains about what I once respected about the Repub party, fiscal discipline and small government ethos mixed with a little NRA.