TPM LiveWire

Twelve Carry Guns -- Including Assault Rifle -- Outside Obama Event


Several people carried guns at rallies outside an event where President Obama was speaking.

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

About 12 people were carrying guns, including at least one semi-automatic assault rifle, outside a building where President Obama was speaking today.

No one was arrested outside the VFW National Convention in Phoenix, according to the Associated Press, where hundreds of people demonstrated both for and against health care reform. There are no reports that the 12 were part of an organized group.

The man spotted carrying the assault rifle and a pistol, who gave his name only as "Chris", was asked why he was armed. "Because I can do it," he said. "In Arizona, I still have some freedoms." You can watch the video from ArizonaCentral.com (go to about 1:30). He's being interviewed by a man who's also wearing a handgun.

Two police officers kept close by. Carrying guns, including the AR-15 assault rifle, is legal under Arizona law.

"If we need to intervene, we will intervene at that time," said Detective J. Oliver.

CNN's Ed Henry reported seeing a second man with an assault rifle, but that has not been confirmed.

These reports come less than a week after two people brought guns to a presidential event in Portsmouth, N.H. At Obama's town hall there, one man was arrested for having a gun hidden in his car after the Secret Service found him at Portsmouth High School hours before Obama arrived carrying a pocketknife. He didn't have a license for a concealed weapon.

Another man in Portsmouth was spotted carrying a gun in a leg holster outside the school. The unconcealed weapon was legal under New Hampshire law and he was not arrested. Later, when asked why he brought the gun, he replied, "That's not even a relevant question. The question is, why don't people bear arms these days?"

And that's not all. A man brought a gun to a town hall with Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) last week, without incident. At an event with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), someone dropped a gun, but he had a permit and no police report was taken. And two weeks ago, a New Mexico man tweeted that reform opponents should bring guns to town halls and "badly hurt" SEIU reps.

Join the Conversation!

168 comments

Recommend Recommend (0)

August 17, 2009 6:06 PM   

all you need is a cherrybomb to go off to get people to think their lives are in imminent danger. hamas vs. fatah, transported to the US.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:47 PM    in reply to morselofthought

Cherry bombs are illegal in the state of Arizona.

Assault weapons, banana clips, unregistered concealed weapons, 50 caliber sniper rifles are all legal.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:29 PM    in reply to morselofthought

Question: How to you tell a nut-job like Hinckley and your typical anti-Obama protester with a gun?

Answer: You can't.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:09 PM   

The right wing is already deluded and nutty. Now we can add armed and dangerous. Not one of these people I've seen have offered a lucid argument carrying weapons at a rally.

Bosnia-Herzogovinia, here we come.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:00 AM    in reply to AlphaLiberal

Here's a lucid argument:

Bill of Rights - 2nd Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Our founding fathers were able to predict that a Federal government might slowly build up its powers to unwanted levels. So, they put in a fail safe. They allowed the people to keep and bear arms, so that if the Federal government got too powerful, we could kill it by forming militias in the States.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 8:37 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

That is not a lucid explanation of why someone would feel compelled to bring a weapon to a public political event. That is just rude and disrespectful. Apparently we need more gun laws because people with guns seem to lack common sense.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 3:51 PM    in reply to An Outhouse

Step 1: Demand a lucid argument.

Step 2: Receive lucid argument.

Step 3: Say it's not a lucid argument.

Profit!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 3:58 PM    in reply to AlphaLiberal

The right, left, and center wings have ALWAYS been armed here unless they have voluntarily disarmed themselves or allowed the government to make the decision for them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:16 PM   

Ya gotta be kidding me. Can you imagine this four years ago? Hey, maybe things are getting better!

Not.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:18 PM   

I guess they all read the "Rules for Radicals".

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:23 PM    in reply to Lalo35adm

By all means, provide the quote where Alinsky called for taking up arms.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:23 PM    in reply to AlphaLiberal

"Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat."

You folks aren't used to people exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. It causes you fear. We are forcing you outside your experiences to cause you confusion.

Textbook Alinsky.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:22 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

Twist words much? Nowhere does Alinsky say "make your point with a weapon."

People who need a weapon to make a political point must not have much else going. The weapon adds nothing.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:23 AM    in reply to AlphaLiberal

Ah, I see how it works.

1) Defy someone to cite specifically how exercising your 2nd Amendment rights legally is an Alinsky tactic

2) When they are able to do it, accuse them of twisting his words

3) Profit!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:29 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

Sorry dude - that wasn't Alinsky.
It was Mao - "All power flows from the barrel of a gun."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 4:32 PM    in reply to AlphaLiberal

Sure he does:

Rule 12: Hurt people. Pick targets. Go after people. Isolate them. Cut off their support. Hurt them. Cruel but effective.

What do you think he's saying? This is Insurgency 101 guys.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 4:11 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

Armed thugs at public meetings is more Mussolini than Alinski.

And if you're idiot enough to think this is a good idea, take a step back and ask yourself if people like the two jerks with the semi-automatics (or that jerk in New Hamshire) would be welcome by most parents near their childrens' school, or whether they'd want to go to a city council meeting with those jerks standing outside the door.

Even if no one is hurt or killed, you're defining what Republicanism is for the 21st century. Consider the consequences.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:25 AM    in reply to mbayrob

Your side brought union thugs to the meetings sir and beat up a helpless black man selling trinkets.

I defy you to cite any news story which says that anyone not legally armed has attended any town hall meetings. You cannot, because they have not.

Your abject fear is affecting your judgement.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 10:36 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

Your side brought union thugs to the meetings sir and beat up a helpless black man selling trinkets.

If you have to resort to using completely untrue and thoroughly discredited points to make your argument you have lost. This, of course, is the way of the troll.

You have been given enough rope here. You have now officially hanged yourself with it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:31 PM    in reply to mjshep

Not necessarily the way of the troll.
It's the way of the jackass - there is some overlap in the two groups.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:22 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

The secret service will have to expand their perimeter to extend a block away from where the president of the United States is and confiscate all guns within that perimeter. We have to assume any one of the gun carriers is a potential enemy of the United States or a disturbed person like Hinckley.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:07 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

I'm neither confused or afraid. I just wouldn't want you to get hurt.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:56 PM    in reply to Lalo35adm

These nutters are doing this for one reason and one reason only. they are daring the Secret Service aka "Obamas storm troopers" to stop them, so they can get some good press yelling "See, Obama really DOES want to take our guns away!"

You can bet that everyone is under strict orders not to touch or hassle anyone with a gun, because it would be political suicide.

So no one is going to be stopped for carrying a gun. Must be driving them all nuts that no one is bothering them. I just hope that when the shit does hit the fan it's the nutball winger who gets it, and not some poor bystander.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:46 PM    in reply to CEOsMustGo

I doubt that the American Totalitarian system will manifest itself in a way that makes gun ownership a counterweight. It will be much more subtle than that. The gunowners, given their ideological tilt, may even be fooled into welcoming it. Either way, they'll be sitting at home with their arsenal, and nothing to aim it at. Guns are not the problem. America is a sick country, full of sick people who feel they can solve their problems through violence, on a personal and on an international scale. We can try to take away guns from the lunatics, but they will always find a way to get their toys, and it does not address the deep underlying sickness.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:27 AM    in reply to Spike

Yes ... it's that damn Constitution they keep using to find a way to get their toys!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:09 PM    in reply to CEOsMustGo

You can bet that there's a sniper with his crosshairs on each one of them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 4:10 PM    in reply to kernel

You are sick in the head.

Honestly, you like the idea of someone getting ready to shoot someone in the head?

That gets you off?

I think it would be good if you took yourself to get checked out by a professional.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:18 PM    in reply to Lalo35adm

Alinksky had the balls to stand up to authority without the need to carry a gun. These dickless wonders are so intent on proving their manhood, it won't be long before someone gets killed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:32 AM    in reply to Dorn76

Alinsky Rule 12: "Pick targets. Go after people. Isolate them. Cut off their support. Hurt them. Cruel but effective."

Sounds pretty violent to me.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 4:18 PM    in reply to Dorn76

Interestingly... Manhood or adulthood is the state or age of being responsible for yourself. In a way, owning and carrying a gun is--in fact--one method of being responsible for yourself, specifically your own protection.

I'm not going to simplistically infer that NOT carrying a gun is an indicator of irresponsibility for one's own protection. However, looking at the crime rates, police response times, and simply the number of dead, unarmed people...

One must wonder whether it's a better, more responsible, and mature thing to carry a gun or to be the one hoping someone else carrying a gun and maybe a badge will take responsibility for your protection.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 4:36 PM    in reply to Deathbunny

The threats to safety just walking down the street are not made up out of thin air. Here, take a look at this NY Times graphic on the epidemic of murder in the streets of NY. Every blue dot is a murder victim:

http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map?ref=nyregion

If you're not able to defend yourself, then you're just asking to be a victim. Just ask the store owner in Harlem who was forced to gun down four robbers in broad daylight.

There's no question that he believed he needed a gun - even an illegal one - to protect himself from NY's finest.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:19 PM   

I've been following this all day and have been believing that this black guy was another right-wing whacko plant, like that St. Louis guy.

Now a different thought is starting to creep into my mind - what if he is actually a lefty who is trying to make the statement to the righties "you got guns...we got guns...you got big guns...we got big guns".

Watching the video of him talking to that 'reporter' (who, I believe, was also packing heat), this black guy didn't look crazed. CNN video clip could not pick up this guy's statements to the 'reporter'...but I'd love to hear what he was saying.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:23 PM    in reply to Scottsdalian

WTF? He's black so he might be a "leftie"?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:53 PM    in reply to martis

How many black right-wingers are there? Really? That's not exactly an irrational assumption.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

pol

user-pic

August 17, 2009 7:09 PM    in reply to Fried Chicken Lover

I wondered the same thing.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:21 PM    in reply to Fried Chicken Lover

Remember the black guy in St Louis? Rightie

Most of us are probably assuming that someone who shows up at an Obama event carrying an assault rifle is a right-wing nutjob. I was merely trying to "think outside the box" about the possibility that this was a leftie response. That's all.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 1:38 PM    in reply to Scottsdalian

I take that back, apparently Chris is a righty.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:55 PM    in reply to Scottsdalian

The report was the guy with the AR-15 was with the pro-health care reform mob, the anti-tax and the birther mobs were located in another area.

Yeah!! Yeah!! Lets all bring guns now, the NRA says it will keep us safer, although the police may disagree. The Repugs in Arizona even unsuccessfully tried to legalize allowing elementary school students to 'carry'-in school!

I wonder if McCain took a gun with him on his trip to pal around with and sleepover at the ranch of the American killing terrorist buddy of McCain's in Libya, Colonel Gadhaffi??

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:49 PM    in reply to NobleCommentDecider

The Repugs in Arizona even unsuccessfully tried to legalize allowing elementary school students to 'carry'-in school!

Well, not really. Only for elementary students over 21 who hold a CCW. Hey, you never know...

The good news is that even the AZ lege saw how stupid the idea was. For you locals, Karen Johnson sponsored it. Remember Karen? She's baaack...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:38 PM   

Shoot I think I might go out and buy a gun, just so some of us from the sane side of the aisle are armed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:44 PM   

I'm all for the second amendment, but I can't take a weapon to a rock concert. Tell me again why I can take one for a health forum that POTUS is attending???

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:53 PM    in reply to 714Day

That's why rock 'n roll is unamerican.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:43 PM    in reply to 714Day

Rock concerts are held on private property. You are there by invitation.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:42 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

I'm there because I bought a ticket.
The Federal Building is public, isn't it, or the courthouse? Why can't I pack there?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 6:47 PM   

Nothing would bring successful gun control to this country faster than if right wingers start carrying their weapons everywhere.

Let's have a bunch of voting soccer moms see these nutbars carrying rifles through the town square everyday. Boom: outlawed by the end of the month.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:02 PM    in reply to BBpdx

I concur with BBpdx. There aren't a lot of frontier twons left in the U.S. where there's no law so everyone totes a gun. I doubt if the Scottsdale Moms would be too happy to see half the poele in the upscale mall walking around with loaded weapons.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:16 PM    in reply to jthdane

You are talking about attempting a constitutional amendment, right?

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it can be easily made illegal. Yeah, the people with guns at presidential events are friggin idiots, but not everyone that has a gun is a wingnut. I'd rather have an armed Left.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:56 PM    in reply to Fried Chicken Lover

The Left will never catch up. So many wingers have been buying bullets since January that the price has gone up. And that's not even to mention that the military is now building mega-churches on bases for the legions of fundamentalist wingers in the armed forces.

What we have to have is numbers -- we'll never beat them with force.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:54 PM    in reply to twirling fartknocker

This progressive has concealed carry permits in two states. While the right is cornering the market on threatening postures, they need to rethink. The consequence of those threats is not necessarily an intimidated bunch of lefties.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:50 AM    in reply to Salmo

We're definitely inside your fear loop.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 11:26 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

You're a coward and therefore definitely in my laugh loop.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:17 PM   

Wow... Add Arizona to the wacko state list... Meanwhile I work diligently to keep Missouri off that list.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:59 PM    in reply to Partisancheese

They've done been on that list. THE last State in the Union to recognize MLK Day. Yippee!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:20 PM   

Blast from the Bush/Cheney past:

Sunday, Aug. 26, 2001:

Bowing to Secret Service requests, Utah Republicans checked their weapons at the door to listen to VP Cheney...

Two knives and 25 guns and ammunition clips, brought to a state party convention by Utah residents with concealed-weapon permits, were stored in lockers outside the hall.

Gun owners had complained following Secret Service suggestions that people licensed to carry concealed weapons leave them in their cars..."

Apparently, Cheney did not feel gun packing Repugs made him 'safer'. link

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:45 PM    in reply to NobleCommentDecider

Acceeding to a request is normal.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:23 PM   

Did any of the armed individuals break any laws? No? Then we need to STFU.

They are engaging in perfectly legal activity for the explicit purpose of causing left wingers to wring their hands.

If we want to work to change the laws, that's fine. I'm all for more stringent gun control laws.

But for now, if the law says you can carry, you can carry. End of story.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:28 PM    in reply to VictorLaszlo

Perfectly legal until someone squeezes a trigger....

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:38 PM    in reply to NobleCommentDecider

Yes, and it's perfectly legal for me to drive my car, until I plow through a crowd of people.

For those who are concerned (and yes, I'm a bit concerned about this):

What would you like to see happen?

Would you like to see these people arrested and/or their guns confiscated? If so, on what grounds?

Do you want to mobilize to change gun laws so this would be illegal in the future?

Or do you just want to express the fact that it makes you uncomfortable, though you realize nothing can be done?

There needs to be a point. "Gosh, that kind of bothers me" isn't much of a point.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:48 PM    in reply to VictorLaszlo

Mobilizing to change gun laws would be fruitless. You cannot pass a law that strips people of their rights.

The law of the land says that individuals have a right to bear arms.

See District of Columbia v. Heller

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 9:51 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

Indeed it does. So the relevant question becomes whether and when to bear arms, and the meaning of various decisions on those questions. People at these vents have made a particular decision along those lines. The meaning of this development I think is clear, and stated above: STFU and don't pass legislation that the duly elected legislature of the country explicitly campaigned on -- and this is how serious about that we are. So then the question becomes, are we going to accept the explicit threat of violence (which is, as you say, a squeeze away from becoming actual violence) as the lingua franca for political communication going forward. That is the state of affairs in many countries around the world today; it can just as easily be so here. And if so, it is clear what political faction brought us to that state of affairs.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:05 AM    in reply to Mike Drew

Correct: The Democrat Party brought us here when they invited SEIU union thugs to beat up innocent town hall participants.

I notice there hasn't been much of that since it became evident that we weren't going to just lie down for that sort of BS.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 10:20 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

Got a link on any alleged assaults?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 11:10 AM    in reply to Mike Drew

The St. Louis Post Dispatch reported on the beating of Ken Gladney the day it occurred.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/laworder/story/0470FEB3219207458625760B001142AC?opendocument

Two SEIU goons were arrested and charged with suspicion of assault in his beating.

A protest is being held today in front of the American Civil Liberties Union because they refuse to help a black man beaten by white union thugs.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:39 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

Why did you lie about that?
The article doesn't even use the word "union", much less SIEU, and only identifies 3 people arrested.
Two of whom were St. Louis Post-Dispatch newsgatherers.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:46 PM    in reply to kenga

Correction - only two people were identified; one was a reporter who shouted to hos associate, the camerawoman, that he was being detained.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:43 PM    in reply to VictorLaszlo

The point victor is that this is a country that permits nutcases to carry guns and assault weapons in public, and a country that has the highest homicide rate east of Somalia.

For many businesses and foreign tourists, 'the solution' will be to go elsewhere. For residents there is no easy remedy, although smarter choices at the voting booth may help.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 5:19 PM    in reply to NobleCommentDecider

The point victor is that this is a country that permits nutcases to carry guns and assault weapons in public, and a country that has the highest homicide rate east of Somalia.

And the highest violent crime rates are in the areas and populations with the most restricted access to firearms.

Your point?

Also, actual nutcases--properly diagnosed and reported--are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms. So, you'll just have to deal with law-abiding citizens who disagree with you having guns.

For many businesses and foreign tourists, 'the solution' will be to go elsewhere. For residents there is no easy remedy, although smarter choices at the voting booth may help.

It's still a free country. Residents can easily move. The problem is--those areas where people made "smarter" choices at the voting booth--are also the same areas with high crime rates and higher taxes.

Which is ironic because more dependence on government--especially for safety--tends to create more cost and more poverty which creates a rich environment for criminal activity.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:16 PM    in reply to VictorLaszlo

Hey, thanks for clarifying that. We're just supposed to accept this further deterioration in our civic life.

We certainly need to keep the focus on health care reform. Agreed.

But that doesn't prohibit us from saying these jokers are extremists, as we should. What kind of person tries to make a political point with a weapon?

Someone who bears watching and criticizing.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:19 AM    in reply to AlphaLiberal

"What kind of person tries to make a political point with a weapon."

Hmmmmm. Abraham Lincoln?

Abraham Lincoln has the sole distinction of being the only President of the United States to order the American military to kill citizens of the United States to resolve a political conflict between the states concerning the legality of slavery.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 11:29 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

Hey cowardly dude, the Civil War was fought about a century and a half ago. Let it go.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 11:57 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

123easyA, you forgot your history. The South fired first on the North. You do remember Fort Sumter, don't you?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 4:49 PM    in reply to Croisan

I'm not sure what your point is.

Lincoln ordered the US military to kill Americans in order to impose his political views onto all other Americans.

I make this point not to suggest that Lincoln didn't have a just cause, but to counter the suggestion by AlphaLiberal that nobody makes their political points with a weapon.

On the contrary. Our history is filled with people imposing their political viewpoints by ensuring they are first adequately armed, beginning with our secession from England.

If they still taught American History in our schools, he'd probably be aware of this ... yet, here we are.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:30 AM    in reply to VictorLaszlo

Are you sure? Looks like brandishing to me (i.e., threatening).

It tends to be a misdemeanor.

That said I probably wouldn't prosecute for the reasons others have suggested: it's exactly what they want, and I'm not sure I'd get a conviction anyway.

I'm perfectly happy for people in rural communities especially to have a firearm for hunting or in case they get into trouble where law enforcement is too far away to help them (i.e., for self defense), but an event where Secret Service is everywhere doesn't meet that description. If you're not willing to put it in a locker or leave it in your car, you're making not just a point, but a threat. And in a crowd are you sure you've got control over your gun?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:32 AM    in reply to provincial

The mere fact that you are scared does not make a threat made.

Your fear does not dictate whether Americans can exercise their legal rights.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:31 PM   

God, the Secret Service snipers must have a really good tracking system to target these bozo's. I wonder if any of these putzes had a tickle in the middle of their back when they were scoped?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 7:49 PM   

Wasn't a constant right-wing meme just a few years ago that the Left was unhinged because it was just so wildly angry all the time and hateful of the President?!?

The Left was upset (although not unhinged) because an illegal war and occupation was ordered that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths, although the protests were not physically threatening in nature.

The only deaths now are those of imaginary grandmas in some hypothetical socialist dystopian future, but the guns are out as if the right is literally fighting for their lives.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:01 PM   

Imagine a lefty with a gun at some W. event a few years ago...

The MSM would have followed the story for months...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:49 PM    in reply to machinchouette

Plenty of "lefties" have guns. You just don't see them because they are legally concealed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:12 PM    in reply to machinchouette

If you so much as carried a sign in protest, you were kept literally miles away from Bush. These nutters should be grateful that they're allowed so closed.

Personally, I think Joe Klein is spot-on: http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/?id=3218984&ref=fpblg

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:05 PM   

A little common sense goes a long way...

You don't smoke while filling your gas tank, and you don't bring a gun to a volatile political event.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:10 PM   

Why do they feel the need to carry guns? It's all about compensation. The smaller their dick, the more they feel the need to carry a big gun.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:50 PM    in reply to fafner1

Why do you feel the need to disarm people? Are you fearful?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:03 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

Let's see... unstable, angry (and often racist) and paranoid people, armed to the teeth, wandering around in public fingering their... triggers?

Damn right I am. Because one of these nimrods is going to make a mistake and hurt somebody As for you: are you stupid?

Hopefully you aren't one of those idiots calling Obama or the Democrats Nazis. Since rough guys with guns were a big part of what went on in Germany in the early 1930s: the SA, for example.

The irony is kind of thick. And the talk about Alinsky? Trash.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:24 AM    in reply to mbayrob

So, Alinsky was right!

Merely exercising our legal rights has put you in a fearful, confused state. We've forced you outside your expertise.

And now we're no longer talking about your issue ... we're talking about our issue. We're controlling your debate by merely doing legal things that you don't understand.

It's working like a charm!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 8:36 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

Wow, so THAT'S why nazis fall to clowns! We used humor, something that conservatives can't understand! Quick, get the cross-dressing clown squads out to combat these gun-toting pencil dicks!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:16 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

We're talking about how small your dick is.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 4:30 PM    in reply to kernel

You seem overly fixated on dick size. Why is that?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 5:54 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

No, he feels fixated on his penis.

Then again, maybe it's fearing a black man's penis...

...er, I mean gun.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:19 PM   

"..one man was arrested for having a gun hidden in his car after the Secret Service found him at Portsmouth High School hours before Obama arrived carrying a pocketknife."

And here I'd thought Obama had brought a sword to the health care gunfight.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:31 PM   

Well, at least they didn't bring their dildoes.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:42 PM   

Where is the secret service?

What would have happened to one of these goons had they arrived at a Bush event with an assault rifle? Am I missing something, here?

Obviously, these are terrorists! Arrest them and hold them indefinitely, without charges!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:53 PM    in reply to ajkrueger

"What is the point of carrying a gun to a place you have a zero chance of using it ..."

Having a gun on your hip significantly reduces your need for ever having to use it.

I did notice that no SEIU union goon squads were pushing any of these guys around.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 9:07 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

**SEIU goon squads pushing deathers around? When did that happen? Hah! Probably happened when I was painting my sign saying

The size of the dick I'm packing is inversely proportional to the size of my Ã…K47. Say Hello to my Little Friend.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 5:57 PM    in reply to greylox

You like penis?

You looking for some?

I mean, I know you like talking about it.

I'm sure we can find you a little somethin-somethin to hold onto...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 8:48 PM   

Has anyone seen a woman with a gun at these events? My guess is that would be a no. These are just baboons who feel inadequate in some way trying to make up for it in other ways. What is the point of carrying a gun to a place you have a zero chance of using it...unless you have an "I want the Secrete Service to end my life" deathwish?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 9:53 PM    in reply to ZnanaB

Baboons. Nice. Have you seen the footage?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

MRT

user-pic

August 18, 2009 12:46 AM    in reply to ZnanaB

Actually, there was at least one woman in the crowd carrying a gun. There are pictures of her here:
http://www.stinque.com/2009/08/17/pack-up-your-troubles/

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:57 AM    in reply to MRT

Not that, you know, actual facts should be impeding the meme.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 5:52 PM    in reply to ZnanaB

Wow! Calling a black man legally carrying a firearm nowhere near the President a "babboon. Really?

Lower in the comments, we have someone else calling him a "coward negro."

The thinly-disguised racist code words seem to abound here.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 9:38 PM   

Can you imagine for a second what would have happened if 4 Hispanics, 4 African Americans and 4 Arab Americans had gone to a Bush event packing heat, including an AR-15.

They'd be dead.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:54 PM    in reply to Frank Pentangeli

One did. But your point is valid.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:11 PM   

This is going to make it very difficult for the Secret Service to protect Obama. If the wingers can get hundreds in the crowds to carry guns, then plenty of them will have the chance to assassinate Obama. Somebody will.

There are plenty on the right who want Obama dead. This is a big step toward that. And at the least they know they are frightening us. They are frightening me.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:27 AM    in reply to juccikucci

"They are frightening me."

Good. Alinsky's Rules for Radicals #3 is working:

Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:32 PM   

I don't condone gun violence and think there are too many "gun rights" in the US.

As an African American though, I have a fantasy of how these guys would react if a couple of guys from 'the hood' showed up with THEIR 9mm guns. But some one or some people would get killed and I'm not for that.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:24 PM    in reply to Hyla Brook

Just dress nicely, wear a tie, add an AR, go easy on the bling, and you'll be fine, just like this guy was.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 10:47 PM   

Why does anyone need to carry a weapon on a city street? there is a related post at http://iamsoannoyed.com/?page_id=588

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:36 AM    in reply to carlyt

Here's why someone might want to carry a gun on the street:

http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map?ref=nyregion

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:03 PM   

Put 'em all in "Second Ammendment Zones."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:04 PM   

Put 'em all in "Second Amendment Zones."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:56 PM    in reply to McBain

That, my friend is as BRILLIANT idea. Can you imagine? They'd crap themselves in outrage.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:42 PM    in reply to CEOsMustGo

No, put everyone else in Second Amendment zones... like New York City and Chicago...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:55 PM   

It's pure intimidation. Can you imagine if someone did that at a Bush rally? WTF?


Having said that, I recall that the Black Panthers, back in the 60s used to carry rifles, legally, I believe.

NOT that I'm condoning guns at public events like this.


"....As an African American though, I have a fantasy of how these guys would react if a couple of guys from 'the hood' showed up with THEIR 9mm guns ...."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:52 AM    in reply to bernie68

Coming from people deploying union goon squads, talk of intimidation is going to fall upon deaf ears.

You're being out-intimidated by people doing legal things, and it's causing you to wet your panties.

Just like Saul Alinsky taught us to do to you.

Rule 3.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:56 PM   

Just another way for the 'loyal opposition' to distract the country from the issue at hand, health care reform. Once you show up at a Presidential town hall loaded for bear, you absolutely know in advance that you will not be permitted to gain entrance to the event, that you will be turned away, and that you can expect to later appear on the evening local Fox gabfest to boast about your 2nd amendment rights. Watch as the health care ball gets dropped and keeps rolling away from the tasks at hand. More opposition genious probably sent to these people beforehand along with their talkingpoints for the day.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 17, 2009 11:57 PM   

Arizona: Where Minuteman crazy meet Birther Crazy...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:02 AM   

Just another way for the 'loyal opposition' to distract the country from the issue at hand, health care reform. Once you show up at a Presidential town hall loaded for bear, you absolutely know in advance that you will not be permitted to gain entrance to the event, that you will be turned away, and that you can expect to later appear on the evening local Fox gabfest to boast about your 2nd amendment rights. Watch as the health care ball gets dropped and keeps rolling away from the tasks at hand. More opposition genious probably sent to these people beforehand along with their talkingpoints for the day.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:56 AM    in reply to BetsyOakPark

Great! It's working!

Alinsky Rule 1: "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."

You'll start seeing guns everywhere now! Even plain clothed Secret Service agents and local non-uniformed police have become our allies in distracting you from your agenda.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:19 AM   

Welll, if whoever originated the story Rachel Slajda wrote on could tell the difference between an assault rifle and an AR-15 we could actually have a sensible conversation on the subject.

And yes, there is a big difference and it makes a big difference.

An AR-15 is a rifle. It is a lethal enough weapon without a doubt.

IT IS NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE.

An assault rifle is a far deadlier weapon and would have been illegal to carry.

The M-16 and M-4 assault rifles used by our military were derived from the civilian AR-15 rifle and while they are similar in appearance they are vastly different in capability.

So... Would saying that the protesters were carrying .30-06 rifles had the same affect as saying "assault rifles"...? Or is it necessary to distort the truth in order to increase the impact of the story?

And to make things worse the AR-15 was classified as an "assault weapon" under the "assault weapons ban"... but term "assault weapon" is a legal contrivance designed to confuse voters by, among other things, making any rifle with a box magazine seem equivalent to an actual assault rifle.

This deliberation conflation of two entirely different classes of weapons is a relic of the culture wars and, incidentally, is one of the reasons the wingnuts are convinced that Obama is eventually going to seize their weapons.

Don't perpetuate the myths.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 1:03 AM    in reply to zapkitty

The point is to intimidate other people by bringing military-type weapons to a peaceful civilian gathering. AR-15s look pretty much exactly like military assault rifles. Since nobody is actually opening fire, one hopes, whether they are semi-automatic or fully-automatic isn't really that important.

An AR-15 is more intimidating than a hunting rifle because it exactly resembles a military rifle. That's what is going on here.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:09 AM    in reply to Jacob Davies

"The point is to intimidate other people by bringing military-type weapons to a peaceful civilian gathering."

These aren't peaceful civil gatherings. The Democrats have organized these by deploying SEUI enforcers to intimidate the attendees - who are largely regular Americans.

Those regular Americans have responded by exercising their God-given right to self-defense. They've said, in so many words, that they won't be intimidated into accepting your socialist agenda and if it means defending themselves by arming themselves then they'll do that.

Democrats badly underestimated Americans when they deployed the SEIU pinky-ring brigade. That much is apparent.

We are going to arm ourselves, and if your goon squads don't stand down it's going to get far uglier than you are prepared for.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 9:42 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

Sounds like "123easyABC" has quite a fear of service employees. I get the distinct feeling that he is commenting from his mom's basement, and he's not just over for a visit, if you know what I mean.

One "upside" to these idiots carrying guns to these events is that most of them would likely shoot themselves just trying to draw from their holster. Most conceal-carry holders are just not very well-trained beyond the 2-day course, and in the heat of the moment are most likely to blow it (no pun).

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 11:19 AM    in reply to virgil_001

Ahh,

Here in this comment is Alinsky's rule #5 in action: "When you can't win the debate on the merits, resort to ridiculing your opponent."

Sorry, but I won't take the bait and fall into the ridicule trap you're trying to set.

Nice try, though!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 12:22 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

hmmm..

"Sorry, but I won't take the bait and fall into the ridicule trap you're trying to set.

Nice try, though!"

"Ah, I see how it works.

1) Defy someone to cite specifically how exercising your2nd Amendment rights legally is an Alinsky tactic

2) When they are able to do it, accuse them of twisting his words

3) Profit!"

"...when they deployed the SEIU pinky-ring brigade."

Merely exercising our legal rights has put you in a fearful, confused state. We've forced you outside your expertise.

I, admittedly know little about Alinsky, whom you keep quoting, so I used teh Wiki:

Regarding Rules for Radicals:

In the first chapter, opening paragraph of the book Alinsky writes, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."

Are you really interested in representing the Have-Nots with your defense of the 2nd Amendment rights?

A little further down the Wiki page:

"There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families – more than seventy million people – whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year [in 1971]. They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don't encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let's not let it happen by default."

Is this really the position you are defending? A need to help the masses impart change and move to the left?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 2:36 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

This troll seems high.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 1:10 AM    in reply to zapkitty

If the AR-15 was classified legally as an assault rifle, that's kind of good enough for me, ya know? Given the relatively minute import of the distinction (which you note), and all...

Sometimes we just have to bear the burden of possessing an uncommonly detailed familiarity with a topic that comes to general attention.

That said, assuming you are correct, I'm fairly sure TPM would be willing to run the correction.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 2:52 AM    in reply to Mike Drew

"If the AR-15 was classified legally as an assault rifle, that's kind of good enough for me, ya know?"

Bullshit. The AR-15 is not and was never classified as an assault rifle... by any regulatory or legislative body.

"Given the relatively minute import of the distinction (which you note), and all..."

Bullshit. "... minute... "? You may wish to conflate a rifle with a machine gun but wishing won't make it so.

I said that a rifle was lethal... and that an assault rifle was far more deadly.

Both are statements of fact.

And BTW the brand name AR-15 means Armalite rifle... not assault rifle.

So we need to deal with just the facts... and not perpetuate myths from the culture wars.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 3:05 AM    in reply to zapkitty

Okay dude, sorry. I was just going by what you said -- I'm not trying to perpetuate any myths here.

What's not a myth is that there were a dozen people with lethal weapons among the crowd at an event with the president in attendance, up from one and two at events last week. I think that's kind of the salient point to take away from today, would you agree? That's not to dismiss your concern that we get the facts right or anything.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:07 PM    in reply to Mike Drew

You mean other than the dozens in the crowd with concealed weapons and the bunch on the rooftops with badges?

Honestly, the President brings enough armed homies on his own, gets support from local ARMED law enforcement, etc.

It's not about the guns, it's about being scared of who has the guns.

Get it right.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 3:28 AM    in reply to zapkitty

And by the way, "This deliberation conflation"? Is it your experience of this site that it routinely goes around getting facts wrong on purpose just to embellish the description of an event that is vividly documented by pictures that speak for themselves? Do you contend that the use of this term "assault rifle" is a deliberate media conspiracy (the term was first used today by the AP in its wire story on the weapons, and was used elsewhere) to make this story appreciably bigger than it ought to be based on a slight misstatement of the kind of gun in question? You really think this is deliberate -- that a bunch of Manhattan liberals know exactly what classifications the AR would and wouldn't fall under and are choosing to misrepresent it?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 6:08 AM    in reply to Mike Drew

That's pretty sad.

Distort much?

Apparently so.

What I actually said was:

"And to make things worse the AR-15 was classified as an "assault weapon" under the "assault weapons ban"... but the term "assault weapon" is a legal contrivance designed to confuse voters by, among other things, making any rifle with a box magazine seem equivalent to an actual assault rifle."

"This deliberation conflation of two entirely different classes of weapons is a relic of the culture wars and, incidentally, is one of the reasons the wingnuts are convinced that Obama is eventually going to seize their weapons."

And conflation, deliberate conflation, was and is the only term for what happened back then. Even pistols were included under the political label of "assault weapons."

And thus I concluded:

"Don't perpetuate the myths."

So what the hell would that politically-based conflation have to do with TPM?... unless TPM is suddenly going to start supporting gun bans? ;)

No. I called the writer of this article on carelessness and I explained the probable origin of the misconception... and nothing more.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 10:22 AM    in reply to zapkitty

Fair enough. I read "this" to refer to the media's use of the term today.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 10:30 AM    in reply to zapkitty

However, a legal category "assault weapon" that is defined specifically and without reference to the term "assault rifle" is not mentioned doesn't conflate the categories. So I had little choice but to conclude you were referring to some mistaken use of the term "assault rifle," in particular yesterday's, when you charged that they were being conflated.

You would agree that this debate is quite subordinate in significance to the reality that twelve people had guns outside an event where the president was speaking, though, would you not?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 2:31 PM    in reply to zapkitty

So what do you hunt with with an AR-15?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 7:41 PM    in reply to Msinformed

Depends on what caliber, what the local laws are, etc. In some variants--like the AR-10 and SR-25, you can hunt most things legally if not prohibited specifically and with appropriately sized magazines.

In Arizona, with a 5-round magazine, you can legally try to shoot anything you can legally hunt with a center-fire rifle. (http://www.azgfd.gov/pdfs/h_f/regulations/HuntingRegulations.pdf) However, I don't think buffalo would be recommended for smaller caliber AR's. Most common would likely be Coyote, Javalina, some birds, "Predatory and Fur-Bearing Mammals", and others.

Other states, I don't know.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 8:08 PM    in reply to Msinformed

In AZ? Coyotes.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

MRT

user-pic

August 18, 2009 12:59 AM   

I think we shouldn't ignore the possibility that these people were carrying guns simply because they wanted to get on TV. "It worked for the guy in NH so it's bound to work for me" is the line of thinking. Only this time, there were too many of them and the AR-15 guy got the coveted media frenzy. The fame culture demands more and more outrageous activity and the ante has been upped. I think we should just deny them the public platform they crave and let the Secret Service handle it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 1:06 AM   

The difference between rights and responsibilities is perfect illustrated here; as well as the difference between child/ adult, and fear/rational.

These idiots have the right but act irresponsible. Attention seeking children rather than respectful adults. Functioning on an irrational fear.

I wonder what these idiots are costing us in the extra security detail by the risk they cause? I wonder if they think about- here in the land of Columbine and Oklahoma City- who they may inspire, and to what ends? Right wing hate speech precipitated Dr. Tiller's death.

No doubt these idiots were identified, and I like the notion of these morons centered in the cross hairs of the hidden rooftop Secret Service agents rifle, just in case.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 9:21 AM    in reply to MDavidson

"I wonder what these idiots are costing us in the extra security detail by the risk they cause? ...
No doubt these idiots were identified, and I like the notion of these morons centered in the cross hairs of the hidden rooftop Secret Service agents rifle, just in case."

You've revealed by this comment your ignorance and fear.

These folks didn't have to be "identified" because they notified the police in advance that they would be exercising their rights. They're law-abiding citizens ... not like lefty neo-fascist mask-wearing goons disrupting World Bank events.

These law-abiding Americans even met with police ahead of time, and arranged ahead of time to receive police protection from those of you on the left who would attempt to restrict their right to bear arms.

We're so inside your decision loop that you can't even figure it out.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 10:18 AM    in reply to 123easyABC

You're confusing fear with concern. And, while they may be law-abiding citizens who are known to law enforcement, they are irresponsible for bringing loaded weapons to such events. Fidel Castro was well within his rights to put nuclear missiles in Cuba too.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 11:22 AM    in reply to virgil_001

How'd that work out for Fidel?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 18, 2009 2:40 PM    in reply to 123easyABC

123easyABC is definitely in some sort of loop.

Reply