An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Civil Rights, Back on the Agenda

The Truth About Charles Grassley (and Health-Care Reform) »

Why Americans are Up in Arms (Guest Voice)

Posted by CAGLE CARTOONS in Health, Politics.
Sep 2nd, 2009 | Comments

Why Americans are Up in Arms

by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown

Leftist elites are up in arms about Americans up in arms. At two recent Obama town hall meetings, men exercising their Second Amendment rights were spotted carrying firearms. While we do not condone threatening the president or anyone else for that matter, these citizens are well within their rights. It is legal to carry a firearm while demonstrating to protect your liberties.

In New Hampshire, William Kostric showed up near a town hall meeting carrying a pistol, and a placard proclaiming, “It is time to water the tree of liberty!” in reference to the famous Thomas Jefferson quotation, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots.” Kostric had no intention of hurting the president; he was exercising his rights and making a political statement using the pistol as a visual reminder. When interviewed by Chris Matthews of MSNBC, Kostric said he went to the town hall because he “wanted people to remember the rights that we have, and how quickly we are losing them.” After making this statement, Chris Matthews verbally accosted him and compared him to John Wilkes Booth and other fanatics. Kostric clearly explained that he was not advocating violence, but was practicing his constitutional right to bear arms.

The second incident prompted the media to erroneously pronounce the opponents of Obamacare as racist rednecks. A young man named Chris wore an AR-15 slung over his shoulder with a 9 mm pistol strapped on his hip. Roughly a dozen others were also carrying firearms with Chris outside an Obama appearance in Arizona. Earlier, these individuals coordinated their right to openly carry firearms with the Phoenix Police Department. They deliberately did this to show the country that the Phoenix police are very supportive of their rights to keep and bear arms. The elitist media missed the whole point and went ballistic.

Chris Matthews fretted about assassination attempts, while Contessa Brewer stammered, “there are questions about whether this has racial overtones… I mean here you have a man of color in the presidency and white people showing up with guns.” MSNBC’s pop culture analyst Touré anxiously said, “I’m not going to be surprised if we see somebody get a chance and take a chance and really try to hurt him.” However, these talking heads glossed over a crucial detail: the man carrying the AR-15 was black. They were dishonestly trying to portray the group of gun toting citizens in Arizona as racists. MSNBC cleverly edited the video footage to show only the semi-automatic rifle, hiding the face of its bearer, Chris, an African American.

The liberal media conveniently ignore that in 2000 at one of George W. Bush’s events, Black Panthers demonstrated while carrying firearms. The Black Panthers actually have a history of murder and violence in contrast to the Phoenix demonstrators. The Panthers, just as newsworthy, generated no buzz at the time. They should have been referenced in light of recent events by these talking heads.

These liberal media elites outraged by gun-bearing citizens showing up at Obama events have probably never used a gun in real life. Chris Matthews, Rick Sanchez, Contessa Brewer and the rest who assume guns represent violence don’t likely own a firearm. Most Americans don’t see firearms as a symbol of violence, like our founding fathers, they see them as a tool for personal protection.

William Kostric and Chris have it right, if we don’t stand and demonstrate peacefully for all of our freedoms, they will quickly slip away and vanish. Remember, it’s much easier to hold onto something, than try and get it back after you’ve lost it.

©2009 Floyd and Mary Beth Brown. The Browns are bestselling authors and speakers. Together they write a national weekly column distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate. This column is copyrighted and licensed to run on TMV in full.

Guest Voice posts do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of TMV or its many writers.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

Polimom

As I've written elsewhere on this subject, I'm in general agreement with this post. They are within their rights.

However, it's worth mentioning that sweet, friendly Chris belongs to Steven Anderson's church in Tempe. Thus, to portray Chris in Arizona as some ordinary, misunderstood guy is whistling right past the graveyard as badly as did MSNBC.

DLS

The central issues here are the Dems' increasingly poor misconduct, the increasing public opposition to it, the desperation about the Dems'-created failure of their health care effort, and the increasing desperation and resentment, etc., among the proponents, including the media. Context is everything.

What these people will do if the Dems recognize their failure (even if they don't admit it, as they probably will not) and retreat, and [gasp] pause and reconsider what they are doing, is anyone's guess right now.

jeainnj

Interstingly, his pastor wants President Obama to die (from Little Green Footballs):

"The freak who brought an AR15 semi-automatic rifle to an Obama rally in Arizona is interviewed, as he attends the church of Pastor Steven Anderson — who is praying that Barack Obama will die:

Tempe pastor reiterates wish for President Obama’s death.

“I concur, I think we’d be better off if God would send (Obama) where he’s going now instead of later,” said Broughton. “(Obama) is destroying our country.”

When asked if he was advocating violence against the President, Broughton said he wouldn’t answer the question directly.

“I don’t care how God does it, I’m not going into further detail than that,” said Broughton. “It would be better now than later.” (from LGF).

Being free to exercise rights is one thing. These people seem intent on going as far as they can without openly, directly advocating murder. Freedom comes with responsibility.

These folks sound a lot like the pro-lifers who advocated Tiller's death. Of course, AFTER he was shot down in church they all disavowed that, didn't they?

Polimom

Being free to exercise rights is one thing. These people seem intent on going as far as they can without openly, directly advocating murder. Freedom comes with responsibility.

You're right, it does require responsibility. And fwiw -- I think anybody carrying a weapon to a political event is missing some crayons out of their scribble-box. BUT -- "these people", in this case, is Chris Broughton (and his pastor, though he wasn't at that rally). I haven't read anything, anywhere, that puts the guy in NH in that level.

TheMagicalSkyFather

I would again like to note that our President is acting like an American President and not herding these people into "Free Speech" zones. This may not be a big deal for some of you but I will never forget those very un-American moments, nor will I forget them when more extreme elements are condoned by someone being screamed at for daring to bring it up. Yea its not illegal to have a gun but what place does it have at a rally other than to instill fear? As for the black panthers, arrest them as well. Of course how many incidents after that happened??????

Oh yea "freedom of speech" zones dealt with that issue I suppose.

Zzzzz

So where were these freedom advocates when the Bush administration was locking up American citizens without access to counsel or anybody; without actual charges (just insinuation); with the intention of detaining indefinitely (until the Supreme Court got involved)? WTF?! Where were they when Bush protestors were herded into "Free Speech" zones, and the police got between them and any media? When people were thrown out of public events for quietly and peacefully wearing an anti-Bush shirt? When the Bush administration sent CIA agents to infiltrate peace groups? Where were they when the Bush administration passed Medicare Part D with unfunded liabilities that well exceed Social Security? How come they only care about government intrusion when a Democrat is in the White House???

Kastanj

"Leftist elites"? I'm sure they're proud of their piece, but I recommend not inviting prats in the future.

redbus

"Chris Matthews, Rick Sanchez, Contessa Brewer and the rest who assume guns represent violence don’t likely own a firearm."

Likely? So part of the argument is based on unproven supposition. I'm no Chris Matthews fan, but his comment about John Wilkes Booth doesn't seem too far-fetched, in context.

pdx632

So what would have been the response from the Right had a middle Eastern looking man wearing a headscarf shown up at a Bush event while carrying an AK47? I strongly suspect we would not be hearing anything about his second amendment rights.

TheMagicalSkyFather

When exactly did the Republican party become the party of identity politics and poor "woo is me" whining? This was supposed to be the Dem party but the last election cycle or two has seemed to flip things around in a very strange way.

Slamfu

Zzzzz, you just don't get it. Sure, Bush might have been abolishing habeus corpus and spying on us with gov't resources and no warrants, but Obama is trying to give us free healthcare! Surely you can see the difference, the clear and present danger that Obama presents to the founding principles of this country. Obama = Hitler. There, I said it.

armymike

I'm sorry, I disagree with the article. It is NOT okay to bring a firearm near the President. Don't give us this crap about people exercising their Second Amendment rights. Would it have been okay to do that around Bush? Nope, it would not have. Wearing an anti-Bush t-shirt was enough to get someone arrested. I guess having your feelings hurt is worse than actually being physically hurt or worse. It's okay because one gun-carrier was African American? What does that have to do with anything? How about the Becks, the Bachmans, and the Limbaughs setting the stage for someone to use those guns? They are winding up people who don't take the time to actually learn about a topic without actually saying they should kill the President. I can hear Bill O'Reilly now, "I'm shocked that someone would actually use their AR-15 to shoot the President. Oh my, I just don't see how it happened." And yes, I've been deployed and have been in combat.

JSpencer

Speaking as a hunter and gun owner, who in fact does understand and believe in the 2nd amendment, I see little to be gained in the way of productive expression by flaunting weapons at townhall meetings. As far as I'm concerned those people are grandstanding fools who are looking for media attention more than they are constructive input. If any left leaning people had done the same at a Bush meeting we all know what would have hit the fan.

ElZagna

"The liberal media conveniently ignore that in 2000 at one of George W. Bush’s events, Black Panthers demonstrated while carrying firearms."

Is is asking too much for a cite when making a claim such as this?

I'd like to know where the event happened, what was the event all about, why the Black Panthers were there, how close they were, how many there were, and a host of other details before I'll accept your implied claim of an equivalence.

I tried to Google it myself but all I got were recent conservative talking points saying the same thing you did - all without citations.

When writing for the Web, it's so easy to include a link that I have to be suspicious when someone doesn't.

Silhouette

All you have to do is imagine the reverse scenario. Imagine how well tolerated democratic protestors who were openly insinuating they wanted the death of Bush or Cheney, showing up at Bush/Cheney political rallies with sidearms strapped to them? Loaded, no less..

Oh I'm SURE the secret service would've been ever so kind and respected their second amendment rights of "protection while they're exercising free speech".....

Not...

You see the same people supporting this here would be the same ones cheering the dems being thrown in prison for showing up with a pocket knife,let alone a loaded glock. Odd isn't it?

RememebrNovember

Arizona, Alaska and Texas- what are three states I will never visit, patronise or spend a tourism dollar in.

RememebrNovember

Guns don't represent violence..oh noes!. They've only been responsible for the deaths of millions. Nope, nosirree bob. They all had it comin' , they all accidentally fell on the barrels while pulling the trigger.

Idiots. I encourage everyone to watch "Idiocracy" and then tell me where this country is going. They need to teach fact-checking on the Internet in schools. We need more moving violations handed out on the information superhighway!

Polimom

"Arizona, Alaska and Texas- what are three states I will never visit, patronise or spend a tourism dollar in."

Why's that?

tidbits

Since I live in AZ, I've decided to conduct an experiment. I'm going to borrow my wife's .357 (yes she owns one), strap it to my thigh (yes she has a holster), loaded (yes, she has ammo for it)...and walk around the Safeway parking lot for a while. With any luck, I can get a friend to videotape the reactions of ordinary people I encounter. You know - how many strangers smile and say "hi" versus how many go 50 feet out of their way to avoid me.

I'll let you know how it went as soon as I get out of jail.

TheMagicalSkyFather

Do not blame the states: Texas, Alaska and Arizona are all nice places with great people in them. In fact some of the nicest and most amusing people I have ever met have been from Arizona(no idea why). We are a nation of malcontents by nature but I blame the current issue on those that incite the crowds to do such things with propaganda. Though I will also blame those that defend those propagandists if something bad really does happen.

DLS

"walk around the Safeway parking lot "

[grin]

On Bell Road west of I-17 there's Albertsons, and don't forget the gas stations and the car wash, among the places I've been near where I used to live where I saw people carrying ... GUNS! [gasp]

(That, and inside a Burger King once.)

NOTE: If it makes the anti-gun crazies less nervous, there are buildings there with NO WEAPONS signs that typically feature a handgun silhouette with a circle and slash over it. I hope that helps.

saorise

This offends me on a very personal level. I was taught from a very young age the responsibility of owning and using a gun.
There were only two reasons to use it. To defend myself or to hunt for food.
Bringing a gun to a heated public gathering, where tensions are already running high is an act of intimidation and pure foolishness.
It is a statement alright - it is a statement of potential violence. It is a clear statement that the wearer of that gun feels threatened and will respond to that threat.
And I am from the south, specifically I have spent most of that in Texas - it is where I learned to use a gun properly not foolishly. This article has not convinced me that this is a 2nd Amendment issue. That is nonsense.

Polimom

I'd like to know where the event happened, what was the event all about, why the Black Panthers were there, how close they were, how many there were, and a host of other details before I'll accept your implied claim of an equivalence.

I tried to Google it myself but all I got were recent conservative talking points saying the same thing you did - all without citations.

You know, I've been wondering that same thing myself. I came across a reference to a 1967 march in Sacramento at Wikipedia here (under "political activities").

Reference to the same incident found here, and is interesting, in context of this particular thread and dialogue.

The SPLC has an entry from 2000 (link that includes this statement:
Since the mid-1990s and right up to the present, the new Panthers have specialized in confrontational, armed demonstrations - protests guaranteed to win attention from the media.

This is actually more than I realized there was.

In June 2000, there are wide reports of an armed march in Texas. I've seen a video, but it was in a comments thread and I haven't been able to run the source down so I can't put it in here. (Actually, here's a link that has a couple videos. It's not a site I normally would put out here as credible, since they're highly partisan. But the videos look authentic.)

Polimom

Jeepers! Took some doing, but here's the story as reported by the local (Houston) media in June 2000: Link The incident apparently took place at the George R Brown Convention Center in Houston.

Here's another local story (from a slightly better source) that talks about that incident at the end. Link This Quannel X quote seems pretty timely:
Quanell X said they're only unpopular because of racist tendencies. "Nobody broke the law," he said. "White folk carry guns in federal Civil War reenactments every year in Houston and Texas, but why did they get afraid when a group of well-disciplined and focused black men were coming down the streets with guns? Because that is their own internal guilty conscience eating at them."

tidbits

This oughta get me in someone's dog house on this thread. I've made some fun of gun toters, and certainly agree that guns are not appropriate evening wear at political events, but their actually are arguable reasons for open carry laws.

As some know, I live in Scottsdale, north Scottsdale to be more precise, and within the city limits. As Scottsdale expanded northward the city adopted a number of eco-friendly building requirements. Particularly, those regs require the setting aside of substantial land in its natural (desert) state. This is mostly in washes that run through and around residential neighborhoods. This preservation of natural habitat in substantial acreage results in humans and natural denizens of the desert living in close proximity. Understand that north Scottsdale is foothill country, abutting desert mountains.

Going for a walk, taking the dog out, going hiking or any number of other activities can result in an encounter with coyotes, two breeds of rattlesnake (Mojave and desert diamondback), javelina (nasty tempered wild desert pigs), bobcat, and even the occasional mountain lion (yes I've seen one within two miles of my home crossing a city street).

Fortunately, as a sedentary dolt, I rarely engage in outdoor activities beyond the swimming pool in the back yard. But if I did, I'd be tempted to carry two guns...one with snake shot and one with something more substantial. And, I'd want to carry them "open" for easy access in the event of a surprise encounter. On the other hand, if you were carrying that much heavy steel in this heat, you'd prbably collapse of heat stroke.

TheMagicalSkyFather

So now we have 1 incident from the left and how many from the right? Sorry but when you have to dig this hard the equivalence is no longer there, but again they should not have had guns at a political rally either.

Now if you go back to the 60's and early 70's you do have a good deal more incidents but that is what I was speaking of when I noted how left and right have seemed to switch roles over the last few years.

Thanks for the post Polimom, I was beginning to think it was yet another fringe conspiracy theory that the pundit class took out dusted off and acted like was common place when it happened, uh once. Kind of like how we are taking away Christmas every year and are also forcing everyone to pray in every school in America, it happens once in one small town and the pundit class uses it as a club that we can all beat each other over the head with.

EEllis

Quanell X is with the New Black Panthers which I understand is a different org.

Lets also understand no one has shown up trying to enter any event armed. They show up to make a point protesting outside events.

Polimom

EElis, you're correct -- the NBP group is a completely different organization from the BPs, who pretty much disappeared by the end of the 1970s.

GreenDreams

Say, aren't Floyd and Mary Brown the racist slime that created the manipulative and deceptive hate ad "Willie Horton?" Pathetic partisan hacks.

The comments thread is fairly interesting though. Seems only DLS thinks people who object to guns at a political rally are "crazies" rather than the ones with the guns.

RememebrNovember

Hmm...Alaska- wolf-killing gun crazy Palin country. reat salmon though, I'll give em that. Fedex ftw!

Texas-gun totin' seccesionist lovin' execution crazy Bush Country
Arizona-Gun Crazy Militia-creatin', anti-hispanic pastor-praying-for President's death country-...

did I miss anything? Oh yeah there's a big hole in Arizona I hear, and a smelly hippie granola new agey coven in Sedona, lots of people go see. /pass.

And guns don't kill people, trigger happy uppity fearful slack-jawed people with guns do. and crazies. Just ask John Hinkley and Mark David Chapman. Want to set off a big fire, keep walking around with that keg of black powder and you'll walk by a sufficient heat source eventually. The odds are it will happen. The only winning move is not to play <Wargames>

RememebrNovember

The thing is, if you're in an area that has a lot of hunting sportsman it is pretty obvious people are going to walk around with guns. If you are in a suburban area and lots of folks are walking around with loaded handguns, chances are someone will get shot eventually, over an event escalated beyond controllable means(road rage, for one).
and the fact people are up in arms over this? Again, let's roll back the clock to Bush's "Freedom of Speech" areas and let's discuss the irony of that implementation. Why does no one want to face the simple fact that they should be glad that they are allowed to stand around with their glocks and aren't getting the Gitmo treatment or being arrested for "treasonous" signs. We have a President that believes in free speech, otw Glenn Beck and his ilk would be off the air by now ( not that he won't at the rate his sponsors are jumping ship, but that's due to consumer backlash, God Bless America). The irony of this situation is just well beyond the luddite's capacity for understanding. I point and laugh.

DLS

"Seems only DLS thinks people who object to guns at a political rally are 'crazies' rather than the ones with the guns"

Actually, I'm aware that there are crazy people and others emotionally or behaviorally "on edge" whom I distrust to be armed. An example in Phoenix when I used to live there was the fool who showed what kind of person he was by screeching toward the pumps at a fueling station, and as after he stopped at the rearmost pump, he wanted to move to another, he screeched up to the next one. He leapt out and I saw the huge revolver dangling from the belt around his (oversized) gut.

However, I also know fully well the routine irrationality and worse associated with the anti-gun crowd.

I regret that this may well detract from the picture you have independently chosen to construct.

DLS

"If you are in a suburban area and lots of folks are walking around with loaded handguns, chances are someone will get shot eventually"

Aside from the problems with upright or "on-edge" armed people (some of whom appear to be pushy and as if they're asking to be challenged, or better yet, threatened), there's the random safety issue. As a matter of fact, I noted when driving or riding (bike or motorcycle) in the undeveloped areas out of Phoenix, in Maricopa County, there typically were signs along roads that stated that (recreational) shooting was prohibited within a quarter mile of any occupied building (or words to that same effect).

Not that it's an excuse for overt gun control (such as with the infamous Dem 10,000 per cent tax on ammunition in Congress once or twice, or with banning ammo sales in LA County to suppress the holiday gunfire, that some wanted year-round), but even if ownership can't be infringed (most of the time), use can be. (Firearm discharge laws) In a suburban back yard I should have the right to shoot my guns if I want (I'd use a .22 with CB caps to be quiet, or use a suppressor if there weren't inane laws related to the latter). However, a trend I've seen is that shooting as well as hunting in suburbia, obviously, but in general, appears to be declining in incidence and in popularity, which may constitute a trend eventually in favor of gun control (not necessarily limited to handgun control).

EEllis

" If you are in a suburban area and lots of folks are walking around with loaded handguns, chances are someone will get shot eventually, over an event escalated beyond controllable means."

I don't believe this is true. I think when criminals have guns people get shot more, but there has been no cases I've heard of where increasing the freedom of law abiding citizens to own and carry guns has increased the stats on shootings.

blog comments powered by Disqus