ARMED march on Washington

[bluefrog]

Many politicians, groups, and "lower courts for hire" have advocated "repealing" the 2nd Amendment by attempting to re-define it to mean government military members only.

I'll give you this one, since it's open to interpretation

There are literally hundreds of well-organized groups proposing new restrictions on guns.

I just did a quick google search and couldn't find any bills being proposed to restrict guns. Maybe you know of one?

Hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of law-abiding citizens have already had their guns taken away, including every non-government employee who lives in Washington DC.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Denny's post contradicts it.

 

[Denny Crane]

First time in my life I've seen 72% pro/20% anti referred to as a split decision.

Overwhelming majority seems a more accurate phrase.

Not the first time a 5-4 supreme court decision has been called a "split decision."

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

1. Nearly as many Dems as Reps own guns and ALL who cherish America's "government of, by, and for the people" concept support the 2nd Amendment. Can't have either without the other.

Only a tiny minority of gun owners take part in demonstrating, or joining support/lobbying groups, but a large majority would be willing to kill anyone who tries to take their guns away. I figure we're about 10-15 years away from the day citizens start defending their homes and families from government-conducted home invasions designed to dis-arm the populace.

2. Gun rights have little to do with mandating small government and nothing at all to do with outlawing abortion.

3. Many Dems agree with the Reps that Pelosi is indeed Satan's Mistress and would love to see her go away permanently. She represents to me everything wrong with the Democratic Party. I voted for Obama for President, not Pelosi. She never got the memo.

A fair post. Also, #3 is funny.

While I'm a gun rights person, I fail to see the need for people to own semi automatic weapons and others with virtual arsenals.

 

[mook]

A fair post. Also, #3 is funny.

While I'm a gun rights person, I fail to see the need for people to own semi automatic weapons and others with virtual arsenals.

I'm in the same boat.

I also don't get the "open carry" guys who get off on taking their firearms into restaurants and creeping people out. I mean, my dad carries a pistol sidearm when he goes out on hikes (pop at the odd rattlesnake or whatever). But to a Dairy Queen? WTF?

I may have a constitutional right to anal masturbation, but that doesn't mean I have to stuff a 12 inch lubed purple dildo in my back pocket before heading out to Starbucks.

The whole idea seems counter-productive. You don't get undecided people to sympathize with gun rights by going into crowded public places with firearms. It just pisses them off/scares them.

 

[mook]

Although to clarify: semi-automatic shotguns are incredibly commonplace and really aren't any more of a threat than pump shotguns. I don't have a problem with semi-automatic .22's either (I own one). Those things are fun as hell to shoot, but aren't exactly the weapon of choice for anybody looking to go on a rampage.

Higher caliber semi-auto rifles I just don't get. I've shot them and they are kind of fun, but that small payoff isn't really worth the societal risk in my mind.

 

[bluefrog]

I may have a constitutional right to anal masturbation, but that doesn't mean I have to stuff a 12 inch lubed purple dildo in my back pocket before heading out to Starbucks.

I just spent 20 minutes pouring over the U.S.S. Constitution and I couldn't find this referenced anywhere. Could you provide a link?

 

[tlongII]

When I lived in Oregon, our house was broken into and I shot the "fine young gentleman" who was scaring the heck out of my family and trying to steal what I had worked hard to buy. Sadly, however, I didn't kill him. I say sadly because a little over a month later that same "fine young gentleman" went into a house 3 streets over from mine and killed a father and mother in front of their children when he was trying to rob their home. Luckily for everyone else, this "fine young gentleman" was caught and locked away. Asked why he chose that house, and why he killed those people he reponded with this. "The last house I broke into I was shot. No warning, no nothin, just shot. I didn't go back to that house cause I didn't want to get shot no more, so I went to another house that didn't have no guns." How did you know they didn't have any guns, asked the officer. "I ain't sayin, but I found out they didn't, so I went there." Why did you shoot them, asked the officer. "Because I needed their stuff, and I told them not to try and stop me, but they didn't listen."


I guess my point is that owning a gun might have saved my families lives, and if I hadn't been so nervous, a gun might have saved the lives of two parents doing nothing but trying to protect their family.


Guns = Good

People = Bad

Where did you live?

 

[Blaze01]

The Pelosi caricature makes her look like one of the minions of hell.

Uh...She IS a minion of hell....

Thought that was obvious....

 

[Mediocre Man]

Where did you live?

I was born and raised in Portland. I lived there for 40 years, but have since moved to Texas.

 

[OddEnormous]

When I lived in Oregon, our house was broken into and I shot the "fine young gentleman" who was scaring the heck out of my family and trying to steal what I had worked hard to buy. Sadly, however, I didn't kill him. I say sadly because a little over a month later that same "fine young gentleman" went into a house 3 streets over from mine and killed a father and mother in front of their children when he was trying to rob their home. Luckily for everyone else, this "fine young gentleman" was caught and locked away. Asked why he chose that house, and why he killed those people he reponded with this. "The last house I broke into I was shot. No warning, no nothin, just shot. I didn't go back to that house cause I didn't want to get shot no more, so I went to another house that didn't have no guns." How did you know they didn't have any guns, asked the officer. "I ain't sayin, but I found out they didn't, so I went there." Why did you shoot them, asked the officer. "Because I needed their stuff, and I told them not to try and stop me, but they didn't listen."


I guess my point is that owning a gun might have saved my families lives, and if I hadn't been so nervous, a gun might have saved the lives of two parents doing nothing but trying to protect their family.


Guns = Good

People = Bad

No offense but that story sounds like absolute bullshit.






(gald you're safe all the same)**

** If true

 

[Mediocre Man]

No offense but that story sounds like absolute bullshit.






(gald you're safe all the same)**

** If true

Seriously, 100% true. I was living in the Parkrose area at the time. Renting my parents house actually, until our home in Clackamas was built.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm in the same boat.

I also don't get the "open carry" guys who get off on taking their firearms into restaurants and creeping people out. I mean, my dad carries a pistol sidearm when he goes out on hikes (pop at the odd rattlesnake or whatever). But to a Dairy Queen? WTF?

I may have a constitutional right to anal masturbation, but that doesn't mean I have to stuff a 12 inch lubed purple dildo in my back pocket before heading out to Starbucks.

The whole idea seems counter-productive. You don't get undecided people to sympathize with gun rights by going into crowded public places with firearms. It just pisses them off/scares them.

The theory is that the bad guys will think twice about messing with anyone if there's a random chance that person is armed.

 

[bluefrog]

I'm skeptical of guns as an effective way of self protection. I think you are better off just getting a dog or a stun gun.

 

[barfo]

When I lived in Oregon, our house was broken into and I shot the "fine young gentleman" who was scaring the heck out of my family and trying to steal what I had worked hard to buy. Sadly, however, I didn't kill him. I say sadly because a little over a month later that same "fine young gentleman" went into a house 3 streets over from mine and killed a father and mother in front of their children when he was trying to rob their home. Luckily for everyone else, this "fine young gentleman" was caught and locked away. Asked why he chose that house, and why he killed those people he reponded with this. "The last house I broke into I was shot. No warning, no nothin, just shot. I didn't go back to that house cause I didn't want to get shot no more, so I went to another house that didn't have no guns." How did you know they didn't have any guns, asked the officer. "I ain't sayin, but I found out they didn't, so I went there." Why did you shoot them, asked the officer. "Because I needed their stuff, and I told them not to try and stop me, but they didn't listen."


I guess my point is that owning a gun might have saved my families lives, and if I hadn't been so nervous, a gun might have saved the lives of two parents doing nothing but trying to protect their family.


Guns = Good

People = Bad

Was he armed when you shot him, MM?

barfo

 

[Nate4Prez]

Just look at the home page for GOP.com. The Pelosi caricature makes her look like one of the minions of hell. (The contrast in tone with Democrats.org is stunning.)

Gotta love the other videos on that website

I like the way the RNC's site display's the area Obama approved for oil drilling like it was "approved" to be drilled but Obama blocked it. Spin Much?

The Way Republicans Portray It


Actual Newly Approved Area

 

[Nate4Prez]

The theory is that the bad guys will think twice about messing with anyone if there's a random chance that person is armed.

First, they would know they are carrying a gun, cause they walk around with it showing so everyone can see. So, it wouldn't be a "random" chance they were armed, the bad guy would know they are armed. When I see people walking around with exposed guns I feel afraid for my own safety because I don't know that person, and I don't know what their intentions might be.

Secondly, if I am a gun carrying drug dealer and I see someone with a exposed holster gun and I have a gun, I know that I can surprise this person by shooting him first cause I am going to take his gun and sell it for a profit. This makes it more likely that someone carrying a gun will bring about more danger for the people around him.

Lastly, if someone wants to keep guns in their home for self protection (like MM) I'm cool with that. But when you go out walking around with it you have to realize the potential danger you are putting others in. I work in a bank. I have one particular customer who spent 18 months in Vietnam, and I have a tremendous amount of respect for him. He now is a jeweler and often carries over 6k in gold and diamonds with him, and I see him everyday. He wears an exposed hand gun everywhere he goes. If he was in the bank and someone came in to commit a robbery I have no doubt he would open fire on the robber, he has shoot three people in his pawn shop that he used to own in Detroit. But what he doesn't realize is that if someone is robbing the bank I wouldn't give two shits about the money. I would empty the vault and send them on their way because (1) the money is insured and (2) I don't want to put anyone in harms way.

 

[Denny Crane]

First, they would know they are carrying a gun, cause they walk around with it showing so everyone can see. So, it wouldn't be a "random" chance they were armed, the bad guy would know they are armed. When I see people walking around with exposed guns I feel afraid for my own safety because I don't know that person, and I don't know what their intentions might be.

Secondly, if I am a gun carrying drug dealer and I see someone with a exposed holster gun and I have a gun, I know that I can surprise this person by shooting him first cause I am going to take his gun and sell it for a profit. This makes it more likely that someone carrying a gun will bring about more danger for the people around him.

Lastly, if someone wants to keep guns in their home for self protection (like MM) I'm cool with that. But when you go out walking around with it you have to realize the potential danger you are putting others in. I work in a bank. I have one particular customer who spent 18 months in Vietnam, and I have a tremendous amount of respect for him. He now is a jeweler and often carries over 6k in gold and diamonds with him, and I see him everyday. He wears an exposed hand gun everywhere he goes. If he was in the bank and someone came in to commit a robbery I have no doubt he would open fire on the robber, he has shoot three people in his pawn shop that he used to own in Detroit. But what he doesn't realize is that if someone is robbing the bank I wouldn't give two shits about the money. I would empty the vault and send them on their way because (1) the money is insured and (2) I don't want to put anyone in harms way.

I was speaking to concealed carry laws, where it looks like states that allow it have lowered crime rates since enacting those laws.

Open carry? Seems like it is like wearing a bulls-eye.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Was he armed when you shot him, MM?

barfo

I am going to say yes for two reasons.

1. When I screamed like a girl hoping to scare him, he pulled something from his jacket that looked like a weapon. Fot all I know though, it could have been a banana.

2. He shot and killed two people when he was robbing their house.


Now whether he was or not doesn't matter to me. Don't come in my fucking house and try to take shit that isn't yours, or I will shoot you. You are no asset to society anyway.

 

[Minstrel]

Don't come in my fucking house and try to take shit that isn't yours

So I take it that you're not cool with that?

 

[barfo]

You are no asset to society anyway.

Well, that hurts my feewings.

barfo

 

[barfo]

I am going to say yes for two reasons.

1. When I screamed like a girl hoping to scare him,

Did you have reason to believe he was afraid of girls?

2. He shot and killed two people when he was robbing their house.

But that was after you shot him, right? Perhaps that experience convinced him to start carrying a gun. It certainly doesn't seem to have convinced him to stop robbing houses.

barfo

 

[Mediocre Man]

Did you have reason to believe he was afraid of girls?



But that was after you shot him, right? Perhaps that experience convinced him to start carrying a gun. It certainly doesn't seem to have convinced him to stop robbing houses.

barfo

Good point. I guess I am to blame for their deaths. That's what his family argued as well.

 

[bluefrog]

The armed march on Washington occured without incident. The marchers that were armed never actually crossed the river into D.C. and their weapons were not loaded apparently. They had about 2000 people turn out. Link

 

[Mediocre Man]

Good for them. It's nice to see a large group of people with guns walking around and have no incident. Maybe some OTHER groups of people can see that and start doing the same.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Good for them. It's nice to see a large group of people with guns walking around and have no incident. Maybe some OTHER groups of people can see that and start doing the same.

All it takes is one idiot. A march of 100,000 people with unloaded guns and a peaceful purpose can become something radically different if only ONE person in the crowd lied about his gun being unloaded and tries to make a statement.

 

[bluefrog]

All it takes is one idiot. A march of 100,000 people with unloaded guns and a peaceful purpose can become something radically different if only ONE person in the crowd lied about his gun being unloaded and tries to make a statement.

I didn't think the idea of arming people in support of the 2nd amendment was a good idea. Many of the marchers got their point across without packing heat. There's no reason the rest of them couldn't have done the same.

I'm glad it was peaceful though.

 

[Ed O]

All it takes is one idiot. A march of 100,000 people with unloaded guns and a peaceful purpose can become something radically different if only ONE person in the crowd lied about his gun being unloaded and tries to make a statement.

Who cares about hypotheticals? People were wringing their hands about what they perceived was POSSIBLE, and now (even though nothing untoward happened) they are retroactively upset at the perception of what was possible?

People drive on the freeway every day, and all it takes is one person in a car trying to make a statement, and the commute gets radically different. Does that mean that we should make people take public transportation and only drive cars on their own real property?

The idea that individuals cannot peacefully protest merely because of the presence of handguns is silly to me.

This the same kind of thinking that has people calling the Tea Party "teabaggers"... people are just waiting for something--anything--to go wrong so they can point and say "I told you so".

Ed O.

 

[bluefrog]

The idea that individuals cannot peacefully protest merely because of the presence of handguns is silly to me.

This the same kind of thinking that has people calling the Tea Party "teabaggers"... people are just waiting for something--anything--to go wrong so they can point and say "I told you so".

Ed O.

Things could have gone bad and there are a bunch of "what-if"s we could ask but I don't get the point of bringing guns to a march. Are they trying to intimidate politicians? Are they trying to accustom people to the sight of guns in public areas?

Do we need aborted fetuses at pro-choice rallies? Do we need kushy dank nuggets at pro-marijuana marches?

Some marches can be peaceful but violence erupts when tempers get heated (which is why I think they stipulated that every gun be unloaded). Seems like a recipe for disaster to me.

 

[Ed O]

Things could have gone bad and there are a bunch of "what-if"s we could ask but I don't get the point of bringing guns to a march. Are they trying to intimidate politicians? Are they trying to accustom people to the sight of guns in public areas?

A few reasons right off the top of my head reasons:

1. Because they can.
2. To get attention to their cause.
3. To deflate the notion that violence is necessarily caused by the presence of guns.

Do we need aborted fetuses at pro-choice rallies? Do we need kushy dank nuggets at pro-marijuana marches?

There are plenty of pictures of fetuses at pro-life rallies, and plenty of pot smoking at pro-marijuana marches.

Some marches can be peaceful but violence erupts when tempers get heated (which is why I think they stipulated that every gun be unloaded). Seems like a recipe for disaster to me.

I understand your position. I think that you are too sensitive to the use of firearms by the vast majority of the law-abiding population.

Ed O.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

All it's gonna take is one moron at one of these Tea Party pro-gun rallies to open up either on the crowd or the "authority figures" to set the "right to bear arms" movement back several decades. That's all I'm saying. These groups are playing with fire by their actions, and they have no one else to blame other than themselves if they get burned.