GOD bless America and OUR Right to carry weapons! The problem wasn't Kostric, the problem is an uneducated, liberal-biased media! The media is supposed to be neutral and just report the news, not make a commentary. Kostric is an American that decided not to be censored and have his Rights buried for the sake of others fears.
how is it fear mongering? does no one recall the little incident in tucson earlier this year? pyschos can get guns too, there's nothing wrong with pointing this out
@afaultytoaster No shit Sid. I was poking fun at your amazing spelling and garbage point of view. Psychos should be better screened the kid is fucked up not the CCW laws of Arizona. Vermont, Arizona and Alaska are the best states in the country!!!
@afaultytoaster Security needs to increase!!! Not taking guns away from law abiding citizens. If they ban and take away all guns do you think the President will still have Secret Service Agents with guns??? Of course, because they can only take them away from Law Abiding Citizens not the criminals who commit crimes against elected officials!!! So sad about Giffords that douche that shot her and the others was a coward!!!
Respond to this video... The newscaster you Sid!!! "I feel they will have him cleared long before the president arrives" or some Sidly shit to that nature. Do you think that that fucking Sid that shot up those people in Arizona was open carrying right up to the point where he shot poor Gabby and all those innocent people??? I think not!!!
These right wingers simply go apeshit over the fact that a black man got elected president. So they bring guns to political rallies to try to intimidate and menace people. What kind of a degenerate asshole needs to bring a gun to a political rally. A scared little right wing prick. If he was anywhere near the president I hope the secret service shot him right then and there.
These people have never heard of open carry? Of exercising our freedoms in order to KEEP THEM? These people are so scared of guns. Why? Guns don't kill people - the people firing them do. Gun control has never been about taking away guns - it's always been about who controls them. If we don't continue to maintain and demonstrate that UPSTANDING CIVILIANS can and WILL bear arms, we will lose that right, BECAUSE of people like these news casters, who are afraid of guns. Then we'll be defenseless.
Let's see, The Asian and Eu countries are developing robots that walk, Do stairs, carry things, ride bikes, talk to people, and almost look like humans. Mean while, White American Right Wingers are crying about carrying guns. Because they are afraid. OF WHAT? Who really knows. And they think America is going to last. I say you can't truly win an argument with a gun. But Stupid "people" don't really understand one real truth. and that is, If you live by the gun, you will die by The gun.
yea dude has a gun, but he also has an earpiece, seems like a pms set-up to make the right look like gun toting rednecks, can we atleast stop being so damn ignorant on this channel
i like the contrast between the fits that people threw for people simply wearing pins questioning the lies that led us into iraq.... all that talk about how wrong it was to trash talk a president... 'in a time of war' it's all so tired....
um...if you're gonna shoot somebody, you're not gonna have your gun anywhere it can be seen. there's no real problems. the dude's got a permit, and permission by private property to have the gun out. people are just damn paranoid. this anchorman's never been anywhere near a ghetto. none of them have.
@pjicleanair420 - yes. They are too stupid to be able to comprehend that gun laws only help criminals and hurt law abiding citizens. They have absolutely no ability to think critically. Genuinely stupid people. I mean that in a medical sense. Clinically stupid.
Dumb fucking MSNBC reporters. What is so wrong with a law abiding citizen exercising his rights? They would be crying for this guys assistance if they had some dumbass criminal threatening their lives.....
This video, as well as the words chosen by the host to describe the video, are skewed. They have purposely singled out a white man, in an attempt to make this a race issue.
See this YouTube video showing a BLACK MAN at the event, carrying a MACHINEGUN, a pistol and a magazine of ammo in his back pocket:
MAN WITH GUN AT OBAMA EVENT - A TALE OF TWO NETWORKS by KNIGHTWATCH
Wow, They make the guy sound like a criminal or something. Hes a Law abiding citizen exercising his rights, Big Freakin deal! Anyway I give the guy props for stickin it to the man
It is our right to bear arms and it is our right for freedom of assembly. However, if everyone in the crowd at a presidential speech had a gun it would make our President's security very difficult. So, how can you choose who has the right to bear a gun at a speech you can't s that's why no one in the crowd at such a function is allow to bear arms. Whether the president was a liberal or a conservative has nothing to do with it, because no [recent] previous president has allowed such an action.
What other parts of the Constitution don't these nut-roots at MSNBC not understand? Good lord, the man is totally within his rights and these hyperventilating libs just don't get it.
This reporter is an obvious granola crunching liberal who wants everything to be filled with daisies and roses. This is quite ridiculous, as Americans we have rights. Its not an issue as long as its known to be legal. What really bothered me though is his concern for people VOICING THEIR OPINION. Absolutely crazy. Of course I don't blame Obama for than, its just the media is so liberal its disgusting.
The only thing this reporter is doing is spreading fear amongst the viewers. What this man did was perfectly legal!! Was it smart...no. But brave nonetheless.
You liberals may not like him, but resorting to calling him a fanatic that wants to hurt people is childish. Like it or not; Americans have a constitutional RIGHT to bear arms.
I am a proud NRA member and I love this country and the rights we have. You liberals have the same rights as this protester does. We are all Americans!
Seriously? Lawyers should be able to find guilt with this man? He is only doing what our founding fathers gave him the right to do. MSNBC is a freggin' joke. This clown also said that the word Socialist is the new "N" word. What is wrong with the majority of our country that seemingly rational human beings are falling for such obvious fascist beliefs? When will the American population Wake UP?? Most "Americans" can't even tell me who we fought in the Revolutionary War.
OMG HE HAS A GUN IN THE OPEN!!!! um so we can all see he has a gun and if every one there had a gun it would be different. but no only 1 guy had 1. this guy is not posted in some crow nest gonna shot him. i mean if he jsut has it in the holster with his sign he harmless. why would u think he some crazy. now if he had it hidden on him then yeah worry about him.
Good point. If a Secret Service guy goes nuts and sprays bullets into the crowd, fellow Secret Service men will shoot him dead. Same goes with cops and soldiers. And the same concept can apply to an armed society.
If the pilots on 9/11 were armed, "911" would be known as nothing more than an emergency number.
If students and staff at Virginia Tech were armed, it's unlikely that Cho would have went through 2 rounds, much less 175 of them.
By arming yourself, people around you are safer for it.
Anyone who doesn't understand that this man was just showing everyone "Hey, you have rights, you have the right to protect yourself, you have the right to protest.. This man was no where near the president. He had no intentions of shooting the president. He was a protester, not a murderer. The media and their 'Non-Gun" attitude has even swayed the conservative right in this country. Grown adults can't even touch a gun without feeling like they may defacate on themselves.
I don't care for Obama's policies, but no one needs this gun BS. Obama will trip himself up just as any politician does who is ignorant of what Americans really want. The real horror of this scenario is Joe Biden becoming president. Dan Quayle was a buffoon too. We had Desert Storm while he was in office. Just as they say about the Town Hall meetings...it was all staged by the opposition. These 24 hr news channels bombard everyone bias, both ways.
They don't need to worry about open carry people. Those that open carry are not a threat. They are making their weapon and position known. The ones they need to worry about are those hiding in tall grass, in buildings, or carrying concealed.
This guy probably had a few snipers trained on him and a couple undercovers lurking nearby.
No need to freak out. Even the officials didn't freak out. They understood his rights, and protected them. Well done police and Secret Service.
No offense I understand his rights but why are you down the street with a gun at a church. Its sad any day you have to bring a gun to church or any religious place not just church.
Why is it sad? Was it also a sad day when the 2nd Amendment was penned into law? I think it was a very joyous day that citizens were guaranteed the freedom to arm themselves by the Constitution.
Seeing this and other citizens openly arm themselves at the location just outside where the President will be is a testament to awesome freedoms we have in this nation. It speaks a lot about the freedom of personal protection, but it also speaks a lot about the freedom of our citizens from tyranny.
Of course there were targets on him like snipers. But why can't you personally protect yourself at your house. You don't need to be at a church. Makes no sense to me I can understand your home but that makes no sense unless he was private security for the church. I don't think he was.
You make some good points, but I'm afraid you aren't seeing the big picture. Guns aren't just about personal protection, they are also about freedom. The primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment wasn't for personal protection, hunting, collecting, target practice, etc... The primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment (the right for individuals to bear arms, and the right for each state to organize a militia) was to protect the people from an unlawful government.
If your life is in danger, rescue is only a phone call and about 5 minutes away, and armed police will come to protect you. But for those that are armed, it's seconds away. Think about it- when police respond to a call, there's always a victim. The crime is or already has taken place.
Bearing arms is all about personal responsibility. Responsibility to yourself, your family, and your country.
I belief if more citizens are armed, it's better for everyone (except the criminals).
The reason I disagree is because if everyone being armed made a safer society then "ghettos" should be the safest places on earth. Obviously they aren't.
You know what societies have lower crime and murder per capita? Ones with laws that make it tougher for bad people to get guns in the first place.
as long as they were American citizens and were legally allowed to carry the weapon then no one would have a problem with that.The difference is that conservatives carry their weapon legally and would not think of shooting anybody, a liberal with a gun would definitly think of shooting Bush or Palin or any conservative. The only winners when we ban guns from law abiding citizens are the criminals. Their are thousands of Black men legally carrying guns , not a problem.All Americans have the right
Huh? When's the last time you heard of a liberal shooting up a place in the US? All of the shooters I can think of (at least in recent history) were right-wingers of some type. Like the guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum and that guy who shot Dr. Tiller.
People weren't even allowed to wear anti-Bush t-shirts to Bush speeches. Let alone carry guns to his speeches. Ronald Reagan banned the Black Panthers from showing up at his speeches. It seems Obama respects the 1st and 2nd Amendment more.
malvo and his accomplish were liberals shooting out of a car trunk. There were tons of anti-bush protestors wearing bush lied people died shirts and carrying signs. Did MSNBC tell you they weren't allowed. The Black panthers should be banned, like the klu klux klan. The man who carried his legal gun to Obama's speech was African American. Black Panthers carry illegal guns. The chick who tried to Kill Reagan, Liberal. Liberals wonder where the 2nd amendment came from and that is funny.
I never heard about Malvo's political leanings. Okay, one liberal. The Black Panthers are nationalists, not liberals. I haven't heard about them killing anyone, they're like a left-wing black version of the NRA. They're militant but unlike the Klan they don't kill people.
he was a liberal, Cho who shot up Virginia tech was a liberal who hated Bush. Joann Chesamard, a Black panther, took part in the murder of policemen. The NRA aren't anti-American or anti-white? How can you make that comparison?are all Liberal women like yourself uninformed about everything. Bobby Seale, founder of the Black panthers ,Killed another member because he thought he was talking to the police. Huey Newton, another founder, was involved in Officer Freys murder, and was killed by a rival
I've seen nothing that claims Cho was a liberal. What is "anti-American" and how are the Black Panthers anti-American? Are they anti-white? The original Panthers weren't but the modern ones are (ironically the modern-day Panthers are actually right-wing). One of the NRA's first actions in the 19th century was actually to lobby the government to have African-Americans' guns taken away. I'm not kidding.
As for the internal killings of the Panthers they are rumors. They were never charged.
No you are an Emo Liberal, just admit it. You make up more stuff than most liberals and try to pass it off as fact. You should have compared the black panthers to the Ku Klux Klan. two extreme opposites. You claim the original Panthers weren't anti-white?? To much nail polish up your nose. That's like someone saying the Klan isn't anti-black, or anti-jewish. Your anti Bush, anti killing terrorists, anti 2nd amendment, anti conservative and anti facts. Just get your nails done and say thank you.
The reason I didn't compare the Black Panthers and the Klan is because they aren't the same. The Panthers don't advocate for Black Supremacy or a black-only America and they don't lynch people. A more fitting comparison would have been the Klan and the Nation of Islam (however the Nation hasn't killed anyone that I've heard of except for maybe Malcolm X).
Your right , the panthers weren't black only, they were just anti-white.The language of the Black Panthers was violent as was their public stance. The two founders of the Black Panther Party were Huey Percy Newton and Bobby Seale. They preached for a "revolutionary war" but though they considered themselves an African-American party, they were willing to speak out for all those who were oppressed from whatever minority group. They were willing to use violence to get what they wanted.
If you call being militantly anti-racist being "anti-white". The old Panthers weren't anti-white, they even had white members and encouraged white people who agreed with them to form their own White Panthers (which one group actually did). The new Panthers, who are conservative, are actually more anti-white than the old ones. The new ones stem more from the Marcus Garvey tradition.
Anyway, they have 2nd Amendment rights as well whether you agree with them or not.
The Black Panthers are conservative?? They want communes where people , not the owners control companies and housing.Just say that Ted Kennedy was a conservative, or nancy Pelosi, Or Barney franks.I support the fact that all Americans have 2nd amendment rights.Just bcause you agree with the violence of the panther movement doesn't make them all up-right citizens.The FBI destroyed the Black panther movement by exploiting their need for power and vioence. They are simply a violent anti-white group
Let them open a businessCritics of the NBPP say that the group's politics represent a dangerous departure from the original intent of black nationalism; specifically, that they are starkly anti-white, and also anti-Semitic. The NBPP is considered by the Southern Poverty Law Center to be a "black racist" hate group, and even many of the mildest critics of the organization have said that, at the absolute least, the NBPP's provocative brand of black supremacy undermines other civil rights efforts..
They weren't anti-white !!! They just wanted to kill all the law enforcement officers who were white, but because of their stupidy they killed black officers. Both the new and old are totally anti-white with the NBBP being more prone to violence and aligning with the NOI and their anti-white, anti-Jew platform. The old BPP used violence to intimidate and confront anyone opposed to their vision of black supremecy and purging of whites from their neighborhoods.
1) The COINTEL was on a mission to destroy the Black Panthers (while they gave the Klan a pass). The Panthers got into more than one conflict with the police because the police often tried to stop their activities. They didn't go and actively search for cops to kill.
2) There is nothing in old BP policy about black supremacy. Why do you think they had white members and even encouraged a White Panthers?
Either way both groups still have 2nd Amendment rights even though I don't like them.
From the beginning the Black Panther Party's focus on militancy came with a reputation for violence. They often took advantage of a California law which permitted carrying a loaded rifle or shotgun as long as it was publicly displayed and pointed at no one. Carrying weapons openly and making threats against police officers, for example, chants like "The Revolution has co-ome, it's time to pick up the gu-un. Off the pigs!", helped create the Panthers' reputation as a violent organization.pigs=cop
Yeah, and how is that any different than these right-wing militias cropping up and these pro-gun Republican groups that have openly expressed desire to kill liberals and even forcibly remove a democratically elected president (Obama)?
You claim they are just a bunch of fun guys representing everybody which is a boldface lie. The NRA never expressed a desire to kill anyone and is more than willing to vote their displeasure at Obama at the next election. The NRA wants criminals with guns locked up for life. There are many Liberal democrats that are long standing members of the NRA. Majority of U.S. citizens oppose Obama's tax hikes and give away's to people who refuse to work. Why do you insist on making up things?
No. I simply said equating them to the Klan is ridiculous. They had no plans to take over American and turn it into an all-black country. They didn't go out killing and lynching white people either. The NOI would be a more fair comparison.
But it is true that the NRA was originally against blacks owning guns.
No but they just wanted to kill whitey but that's O.K.The NRA is sometimes said to be the single most powerful lobbying organization in the United States. Its political activity is based on the principle that gun ownership is a civil liberty protected by the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and it claims to be the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the United States. Always have been for civil rights for all regardless of color. Why do you again make up stuff ??
Please quote where their principles were to "kill whitey".
As for the NRA, I got my facts confused. They haven't officially supported the past attempts to ban African-Americans from owning guns but some supporters in the NRA didn't fight against the law either.
The New Black Panther Party provoked a melee outside of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's campaign headquarters after she had lost a Democratic primary to her opponent, Hank Johnson. The NBPP's Chief of Staff, Hashim Nzinga, had been acting as security detail for McKinney when, in a volatile confrontation, he physically attacked reporters, derogatorily calling them "Jews" and insisting that they must focus on Hank Johnson rather than on McKinney, since Johnson, he alleged, was a "Tom". NBPP=thugs
Hell yes I'm anti-Bush. I'm anti-corporatist and anti-tearing up the Constitution.
"anti killing terrorists"
And here it comes. Like the typical far-right bonhead when you can't prove a point you just stoop to insults and attacks on personal character. Please point out where I said I was against killing terrorists. And no, I'm not anti-2nd Amendment. I'm anti-carrying a gun to a fucking public discussion about healthcare. Can I carry a gun to the next Republican speech?
If your legally allowed to carry a gun , then Yes by all means you can carry a gun to a republican speech. Although at the Obama love fest the citizen was kept outside, he was legally allowed to carry a weapon. God bless the constitution. Like the typical far left , no facts liberal you make up stories and try to pass them as facts. Allowing lazy bums to take money from hard working taxpayers is tearing up the constitution. Liberals love to trash the constitution if it hurts taxpayers. just fact
"Allowing lazy bums to take money from hard working taxpayers"
Funny you say that, low-income white Evangelicals and Republicans from the Bible Belt and the Rustbelt have the highest rate of dependency on welfare in the country. Are they "lazy bums"? But I have a feeling "lazy bums" in your world might be code for "minorities".
Anyway, good thing you mentioned the Constitution. Obama is the ONLY president I've ever heard of allowing guns to his speeches. Did Bush? Hell no. Reagan? Nope.
Again you make up facts. 19% of the caucasian population have used public assistance. because there are more caucasians it seems like a huge #. Of that # 56% use it as a short term stop gap. In the African-American community 37% use public asst.Of that # 11% use it short term. Lazy bums means lazy bums. No president allows anything to anyone. Reagan was shot by a gun you fool Bush would have no say if legal citizens carried guns. Why do you always make stuff up. Like a woman scorned. EMO liberal
Unless you are out in the woods are protecting your home u really don't need a gun. Hey we live in such a crazy world I guess you need to protect yourself were ever you go. Hey once people learn
peace,love and respect everywhere you won't need any weapon to protect yourself from another human being. Peace is what this world needs.
What part of legal doesn't he understand? And no attorney in New Hampshire is going to get an injunction against the man's presence on church property just because he's armed...
This type of behavior is so typical of MSNBC tools.
Patriot, your right it is legal, but is it using good judgment in bringing a loaded weapon at a heated event like this? Some of these events have turned physical.
It was loaded. He was asked I think while on Hardball, and his response was something like, "wow, who would be stupid enough to walk around with an unloaded firearm".
Yes they have turned physical - Seems like this is the place you would want to be able to defend yourself doesn't it? In a situation that might turn physical. Take a look at a vid titled - Gun carrying American at Obama event (and 3 others) get assaulted by paid, union thugs - This very same armed man is able to avoid a problem because he is carrying.
The statement that some events have turned physical is prima facie evidence that carrying a loaded firearm at an event is both reasonable and prudent. In layman's terms, if the threat of physical violence exists it is a good idea to be armed.
Patriot, Its cool to be able to have this discussion. I think its not in good judgment, but we have the right to disagree and still be American (or whatever nationality we may be). Is prima facie the term you really want to use here? it implies, 'on first examination' which can imply 'without thorough examination, or haste in judgment'. I wouldn't call this particular issue irrefutable, although I won't argue to the point of its legality.
If someone from the "hood" blindsided and punched you in the face then kicked you in the head repeatedly to the point you might die if there was no intervention is not worth escalation? Fine, ammo is expensive anyway. I will just mind my own business and not end.....err I mean escalate the situation.
What's crazy is the amount of people that see this and are amazed. Our citizens have no idea of what the gun laws are in their state and panic at this sight. I would love to have an organized "National Carry Day" in an effort to make everyone aware that carrying a gun is perfectly legal in a lot of states. How many people in the crowd are legally carrying concealed?
I'm sure the victims that were shot in Colorado Springs at the New Life Church in December 2007 thought they didn't need a gun either. The total killed was not more because of a church member who was carrying that day. Carrying a gun in a church? Absurd isn't it?
Second, don't you think this guy is a known quantity to local law enforcement. If he was a threat, he would have been removed.
Third, many, many times I have warned my fellow tea party patriots, the press will try to spin everything you do negatively.
Don't give them ammunition. We will win the battle through the electoral process, though it may take two presidential election cycles. Sans concrete evidence of election rigging, leave the guns at home.
I'm glad yall crackers were stupid enough to brings guns to town hall meetings. Thank you for allowing me to bring my choppa with me next time i go out in public.
This is a excellent display of patriotism. If those of you who don't like it have a problem, then leave the USA. These are our rights... God bless America.
emergency injunction! what the hell is wrong with him? What happened to states rights? Jefferson and the founding fathers would be appaled. He is not hiding the gun, he doesnt seem threatened, he is in a private property, he has every right to have it, legally exposed. Stop this propaganda and fear, over nonsense.
The guys in the clip are just plain stupid. It's the law that you can openly carry in NH. No matter how many lawyers you have you will not be able to legally stop this man from carrying on private property. Will these people get it through their thick skulls that they have no authority to even think about taking that mans gun away. He is just your run of the mill , law abiding, citizen that is exercising his CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to carry his weapon.
That's good logic, shoot someone because they shove you around a protest. Discharging a weapon at a peaceful protest is just stupid. If you are looking to incite a riot, bringing a handgun to a crowded venue is a good way to do that. There are things you should not do, like yell FIRE in a theater.
Nobody suggested to shoot somebody for "shoving them around". The very presence of force deters violence. Furthermore, if somebody is "shoving him around" to the point which it is threatening his well-being, then it is logical to do so.
I wouldn't expect you to grasp what I was trying to convey in my last post. I am saying, if your going to carry a firearm, you should be prepared to take a life. Police obviously made a choice to serve and protect.. The protester is obviously carrying the weapon to make a political statement. A handgun is not a prop, and it shouldn't be used as one. By the way, he probably endangered the lives of everyone around him, as I am sure the secret service had snipers targeting him.
"By the way, he probably endangered the lives of everyone around him, as I am sure the secret service had snipers targeting him"
Are you suggesting that Secret Service snipers are so undisciplined they'd shoot somebody for no reason? No, nobody was in danger and odds are that nobody was targeting him as he wasn't in any position to be a threat to POTUS whom rides in an armored car and wasn't exposed anywhere near the protest.
lmao. "Are you saying this guy is ALLOWED to have a gun on PRIVATE property?!" "that's just the way the law works in new hampture" no, that's how it works everywhere dumbass. It's his right as a citizen to have a gun, and for them to make such a big deal out of it shows how idiotic they are. Of course it's his right to have a gun, maybe he wants to protect himself from extremests. It's dumb to say "lets get rid of this sick freak" he's on private land. it's his right.
If the same thing happened at a bush event, they would have dragged the man's ass away to Guantanamo and tortured him as a terrorist. Hell they would remove you if you just showed up with an anti-bush t-shirt or bumper sticker. Where were these great patriots then?
This is the same BSNBC reporter, Carlos, that suggessted that Socialist is Code for N-Word. These 2 clowns are not used to seeing a gun in public unlesss it's some ganabanger or robber. Plus Obama is a brutha'!!! Forgive them.
I am having a hard time why people don't just have a lick of common sense. I don't trust anybody, and especially alot nuts out there that want to harm our Prez. Yes a gun near the president for a protest isn't smart, Reagan was shot it 1981. Now you have a Black President with all these racist whackos in our country.
Hahah I was laughing the whole time I was like ooo a gun so scary.... hell you could kill someone with a rock so lets make sure they remove them all befor the presadent comes.. people take things to seriously some times..
oh no he has a gun.... idiots. ITS LEGAL in the state let alone a consitutional right. Being able to potentially hurt someone isnt an indicator of any violent intentions. dumb obamanite newsworms need to grow up.. and that lady looks and most likely is retarded.
So that guy is defending himself? Against what? Challenging ideas that are contrary to his own?
Bringing and displaying a firearm (or any type of weapon) to an ideological public debate is plainly uncivilized. A bigot's way of saying: "Pay attention to me!"
Typical right-winger. Resorting to insults instead of dealing with reality.
Like I asked - would you support a Black Panther with no criminal record carrying a gun near a President McCain or Palin? Or better yet an Arab Muslim American?
GOD bless America and OUR Right to carry weapons! The problem wasn't Kostric, the problem is an uneducated, liberal-biased media! The media is supposed to be neutral and just report the news, not make a commentary. Kostric is an American that decided not to be censored and have his Rights buried for the sake of others fears.
TangoDown229 2 months ago
how is it fear mongering? does no one recall the little incident in tucson earlier this year? pyschos can get guns too, there's nothing wrong with pointing this out
afaultytoaster 3 months ago
@afaultytoaster Was he open carrying? I think not!! I don't know if "pyschos" can get guns but yes Psychos can get guns! Hahaha!!!
VTGuffMstr 3 months ago
@VTGuffMstr arizona law allows gun owners of 21 years to concealed carry without a permit
afaultytoaster 3 months ago
@afaultytoaster No shit Sid. I was poking fun at your amazing spelling and garbage point of view. Psychos should be better screened the kid is fucked up not the CCW laws of Arizona. Vermont, Arizona and Alaska are the best states in the country!!!
VTGuffMstr 3 months ago
@VTGuffMstr since the screening needs improving, it isn't fear mongering to point this out
afaultytoaster 3 months ago
@afaultytoaster Security needs to increase!!! Not taking guns away from law abiding citizens. If they ban and take away all guns do you think the President will still have Secret Service Agents with guns??? Of course, because they can only take them away from Law Abiding Citizens not the criminals who commit crimes against elected officials!!! So sad about Giffords that douche that shot her and the others was a coward!!!
VTGuffMstr 3 months ago
@VTGuffMstr who said anything about taking guns away from people?
afaultytoaster 3 months ago
Comment removed
VTGuffMstr 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Respond to this video... The newscaster you Sid!!! "I feel they will have him cleared long before the president arrives" or some Sidly shit to that nature. Do you think that that fucking Sid that shot up those people in Arizona was open carrying right up to the point where he shot poor Gabby and all those innocent people??? I think not!!!
VTGuffMstr 2 months ago
hay is this news from mayor KING bloomberg of NYC NEWS class?
THEEND123321 6 months ago
2nd amendment being exercised by a responsible gun owner.
Reporting from fear mongering douche bags.
wellingtonian 8 months ago
The government cannot have citizens with guns. The government wants citizens to be unarmed so they can completely dominate everyone's lives.
furyofbongos 8 months ago
These right wingers simply go apeshit over the fact that a black man got elected president. So they bring guns to political rallies to try to intimidate and menace people. What kind of a degenerate asshole needs to bring a gun to a political rally. A scared little right wing prick. If he was anywhere near the president I hope the secret service shot him right then and there.
heartfire451 9 months ago
@heartfire451 idiot
Why be afraid, I have rights, and a gun.
stainless1911 8 months ago
Holy friggin crap am I glad I live in Indiana, they cant tell US HOW to wear our guns. I can have 20 concealed weapons on my persons.
MrJustforgetaboutit 9 months ago
What is wrong with these people!?
danielquitschau 11 months ago
These people have never heard of open carry? Of exercising our freedoms in order to KEEP THEM? These people are so scared of guns. Why? Guns don't kill people - the people firing them do. Gun control has never been about taking away guns - it's always been about who controls them. If we don't continue to maintain and demonstrate that UPSTANDING CIVILIANS can and WILL bear arms, we will lose that right, BECAUSE of people like these news casters, who are afraid of guns. Then we'll be defenseless.
RycastProductions 1 year ago
@RycastProductions what I love is the incredulous reaction to someone being armed in public let alone armed near a politician
ThatFoolishBoy 1 year ago
These guys are obviously obilivous to the 2nd Amendment.
KD4UXH 1 year ago
Let's see, The Asian and Eu countries are developing robots that walk, Do stairs, carry things, ride bikes, talk to people, and almost look like humans. Mean while, White American Right Wingers are crying about carrying guns. Because they are afraid. OF WHAT? Who really knows. And they think America is going to last. I say you can't truly win an argument with a gun. But Stupid "people" don't really understand one real truth. and that is, If you live by the gun, you will die by The gun.
commonman80 1 year ago
he has a gun, can he do that!??!?!? lmao
ShiftNMove 1 year ago
yea dude has a gun, but he also has an earpiece, seems like a pms set-up to make the right look like gun toting rednecks, can we atleast stop being so damn ignorant on this channel
junkuff 1 year ago
lol "apparently the law allows this man to be here"? has this idiot read the second amendment?
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
omg god he has a gun.theres a man with a gun.we need more people to to practise the 2nd amemdment
algoreisahoax 1 year ago
It's not the guy lawfully carrying that you should be worried about. It's the one who's unlawfully carrying concealed that you need to watch for.
philliproemer21 1 year ago
i like the contrast between the fits that people threw for people simply wearing pins questioning the lies that led us into iraq.... all that talk about how wrong it was to trash talk a president... 'in a time of war' it's all so tired....
markofthebeasts 1 year ago
um...if you're gonna shoot somebody, you're not gonna have your gun anywhere it can be seen. there's no real problems. the dude's got a permit, and permission by private property to have the gun out. people are just damn paranoid. this anchorman's never been anywhere near a ghetto. none of them have.
chikapiss 1 year ago
i think these news anchors just want the criminals to have the guns
pjicleanair420 2 years ago 11
@pjicleanair420 Sure it keeps them employed when they can report on criminal activites.
Libertyin2010 11 months ago
@pjicleanair420 - yes. They are too stupid to be able to comprehend that gun laws only help criminals and hurt law abiding citizens. They have absolutely no ability to think critically. Genuinely stupid people. I mean that in a medical sense. Clinically stupid.
furyofbongos 8 months ago
@furyofbongos i agree with you, but have to remember the elitist always know what is right even when they are wrong.
lovejen01 8 months ago
stupid cunt, guns are a part of this country.. deal with it
pjicleanair420 2 years ago 3
lol this was the most rediclous excuse for quality and ethically reporting news i have ever seen
pjicleanair420 2 years ago
MSNBC-many see nobody cares
pjicleanair420 2 years ago
Dumb fucking MSNBC reporters. What is so wrong with a law abiding citizen exercising his rights? They would be crying for this guys assistance if they had some dumbass criminal threatening their lives.....
Cobalt135 2 years ago
This video, as well as the words chosen by the host to describe the video, are skewed. They have purposely singled out a white man, in an attempt to make this a race issue.
See this YouTube video showing a BLACK MAN at the event, carrying a MACHINEGUN, a pistol and a magazine of ammo in his back pocket:
MAN WITH GUN AT OBAMA EVENT - A TALE OF TWO NETWORKS by KNIGHTWATCH
watch?v=VxTb_cEZR3g
quaffer22 2 years ago
Wow, They make the guy sound like a criminal or something. Hes a Law abiding citizen exercising his rights, Big Freakin deal! Anyway I give the guy props for stickin it to the man
Clayman302 2 years ago
It is our right to bear arms and it is our right for freedom of assembly. However, if everyone in the crowd at a presidential speech had a gun it would make our President's security very difficult. So, how can you choose who has the right to bear a gun at a speech you can't s that's why no one in the crowd at such a function is allow to bear arms. Whether the president was a liberal or a conservative has nothing to do with it, because no [recent] previous president has allowed such an action.
wrestlah87 2 years ago
What other parts of the Constitution don't these nut-roots at MSNBC not understand? Good lord, the man is totally within his rights and these hyperventilating libs just don't get it.
bcfbasil 2 years ago
Oh my God, a law abiding citizen with a gun, call the police.
aaharrington 2 years ago
The man with the gun is a patriot and hero.
I wish he was the president instead of that anti-christ we have in office, lol
buffboynick 2 years ago
the man with the gun is wearng an ear piece, he is probably a look out for the sectret service.
jodiescookin 2 years ago
This reporter is an obvious granola crunching liberal who wants everything to be filled with daisies and roses. This is quite ridiculous, as Americans we have rights. Its not an issue as long as its known to be legal. What really bothered me though is his concern for people VOICING THEIR OPINION. Absolutely crazy. Of course I don't blame Obama for than, its just the media is so liberal its disgusting.
mikil100 2 years ago
are these reporters really that dumb??? I guess they would rather live in commie Russia than the United States
dupree187 2 years ago
what a couple of morons these "reporters" are
Scrap5000 2 years ago
The only thing this reporter is doing is spreading fear amongst the viewers. What this man did was perfectly legal!! Was it smart...no. But brave nonetheless.
You liberals may not like him, but resorting to calling him a fanatic that wants to hurt people is childish. Like it or not; Americans have a constitutional RIGHT to bear arms.
I am a proud NRA member and I love this country and the rights we have. You liberals have the same rights as this protester does. We are all Americans!
Sentinel781 2 years ago 2
i like guns! bang! bang!
stacier333 2 years ago
"lawyers have to file some sort of injunction" What a dumbass.
dellamalo 2 years ago
Why is every one who owns a gun automatically a dad guy to every one.
task002 2 years ago
Hilarious. These reporters are so completely ignorant of all the laws. "Wait, he can do that??" Ohhh sheeple, you make me laugh.
Zmarley0116 2 years ago 13
It's time to water the tree of YOU DON'T BRING A FUCKING GUN ANYWHERE NEAR THE PRESIDENT!!!!!!! YOU JUST FUCKING DON'T!!!!
olivemike81 2 years ago
The commentators are incredulous that there is still a state in the union that takes the second amendment seriously. This is funny.
rwilb2 2 years ago
Seriously? Lawyers should be able to find guilt with this man? He is only doing what our founding fathers gave him the right to do. MSNBC is a freggin' joke. This clown also said that the word Socialist is the new "N" word. What is wrong with the majority of our country that seemingly rational human beings are falling for such obvious fascist beliefs? When will the American population Wake UP?? Most "Americans" can't even tell me who we fought in the Revolutionary War.
Live Free or Die!!
magikman26 2 years ago
Why does it matter if he has a gun? Who cares? Guns are not inherently evil. MSNBC is such a joke.
terminator007007 2 years ago
OMG HE HAS A GUN IN THE OPEN!!!! um so we can all see he has a gun and if every one there had a gun it would be different. but no only 1 guy had 1. this guy is not posted in some crow nest gonna shot him. i mean if he jsut has it in the holster with his sign he harmless. why would u think he some crazy. now if he had it hidden on him then yeah worry about him.
darkisato 2 years ago
The man with the gun: William Kostric IS BLACK YOU MORONS!!!
milkmaid789 2 years ago
Comment removed
ClassicFIHD 2 years ago
How come the Secret Service gets to have guns? What if they get spooked or upset and fire into the crowd?
OldCottage2 2 years ago
Good point. If a Secret Service guy goes nuts and sprays bullets into the crowd, fellow Secret Service men will shoot him dead. Same goes with cops and soldiers. And the same concept can apply to an armed society.
If the pilots on 9/11 were armed, "911" would be known as nothing more than an emergency number.
If students and staff at Virginia Tech were armed, it's unlikely that Cho would have went through 2 rounds, much less 175 of them.
By arming yourself, people around you are safer for it.
diggingforgold 2 years ago 2
MSNBC is no better than fox, god they're so pathetic.
Logical602 2 years ago
Anyone who doesn't understand that this man was just showing everyone "Hey, you have rights, you have the right to protect yourself, you have the right to protest.. This man was no where near the president. He had no intentions of shooting the president. He was a protester, not a murderer. The media and their 'Non-Gun" attitude has even swayed the conservative right in this country. Grown adults can't even touch a gun without feeling like they may defacate on themselves.
jjmorgan71 2 years ago
I don't care for Obama's policies, but no one needs this gun BS. Obama will trip himself up just as any politician does who is ignorant of what Americans really want. The real horror of this scenario is Joe Biden becoming president. Dan Quayle was a buffoon too. We had Desert Storm while he was in office. Just as they say about the Town Hall meetings...it was all staged by the opposition. These 24 hr news channels bombard everyone bias, both ways.
RodRambler 2 years ago
lol
paramedic6801 2 years ago
Actually, it isn't a "law" per say.
It's an amendment of the constitution. One so importnat, it was seconded only to freedom of speech / assembly.
It is the one designed to protect all the other amendments.
Check it out.
funkasoris 2 years ago
That man was racist and crazy. I don't care if it was legal he was there to hurt. Hey they took shots at Regan, Kennedy, and whomeverelse.
Empha84 2 years ago
How exactly is he a racist
stdbgt42 2 years ago
Racist? How so?
They don't need to worry about open carry people. Those that open carry are not a threat. They are making their weapon and position known. The ones they need to worry about are those hiding in tall grass, in buildings, or carrying concealed.
This guy probably had a few snipers trained on him and a couple undercovers lurking nearby.
No need to freak out. Even the officials didn't freak out. They understood his rights, and protected them. Well done police and Secret Service.
diggingforgold 2 years ago
No offense I understand his rights but why are you down the street with a gun at a church. Its sad any day you have to bring a gun to church or any religious place not just church.
Empha84 2 years ago
Why is it sad? Was it also a sad day when the 2nd Amendment was penned into law? I think it was a very joyous day that citizens were guaranteed the freedom to arm themselves by the Constitution.
Seeing this and other citizens openly arm themselves at the location just outside where the President will be is a testament to awesome freedoms we have in this nation. It speaks a lot about the freedom of personal protection, but it also speaks a lot about the freedom of our citizens from tyranny.
diggingforgold 2 years ago
Of course there were targets on him like snipers. But why can't you personally protect yourself at your house. You don't need to be at a church. Makes no sense to me I can understand your home but that makes no sense unless he was private security for the church. I don't think he was.
Empha84 2 years ago
You make some good points, but I'm afraid you aren't seeing the big picture. Guns aren't just about personal protection, they are also about freedom. The primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment wasn't for personal protection, hunting, collecting, target practice, etc... The primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment (the right for individuals to bear arms, and the right for each state to organize a militia) was to protect the people from an unlawful government.
diggingforgold 2 years ago
(cont'd)
If your life is in danger, rescue is only a phone call and about 5 minutes away, and armed police will come to protect you. But for those that are armed, it's seconds away. Think about it- when police respond to a call, there's always a victim. The crime is or already has taken place.
Bearing arms is all about personal responsibility. Responsibility to yourself, your family, and your country.
I belief if more citizens are armed, it's better for everyone (except the criminals).
diggingforgold 2 years ago
The reason I disagree is because if everyone being armed made a safer society then "ghettos" should be the safest places on earth. Obviously they aren't.
You know what societies have lower crime and murder per capita? Ones with laws that make it tougher for bad people to get guns in the first place.
A86 2 years ago
So did you have a problem with Bush banning guns from his speeches? He didn't even allow anti-Bush t-shirts to be present at his speeches.
Would you support black men or Arab American men carrying legally registered guns at a Bush speech or a McCain/Palin speech?
A86 2 years ago
as long as they were American citizens and were legally allowed to carry the weapon then no one would have a problem with that.The difference is that conservatives carry their weapon legally and would not think of shooting anybody, a liberal with a gun would definitly think of shooting Bush or Palin or any conservative. The only winners when we ban guns from law abiding citizens are the criminals. Their are thousands of Black men legally carrying guns , not a problem.All Americans have the right
bigbad169 2 years ago
Huh? When's the last time you heard of a liberal shooting up a place in the US? All of the shooters I can think of (at least in recent history) were right-wingers of some type. Like the guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum and that guy who shot Dr. Tiller.
People weren't even allowed to wear anti-Bush t-shirts to Bush speeches. Let alone carry guns to his speeches. Ronald Reagan banned the Black Panthers from showing up at his speeches. It seems Obama respects the 1st and 2nd Amendment more.
A86 2 years ago
malvo and his accomplish were liberals shooting out of a car trunk. There were tons of anti-bush protestors wearing bush lied people died shirts and carrying signs. Did MSNBC tell you they weren't allowed. The Black panthers should be banned, like the klu klux klan. The man who carried his legal gun to Obama's speech was African American. Black Panthers carry illegal guns. The chick who tried to Kill Reagan, Liberal. Liberals wonder where the 2nd amendment came from and that is funny.
bigbad169 2 years ago
I never heard about Malvo's political leanings. Okay, one liberal. The Black Panthers are nationalists, not liberals. I haven't heard about them killing anyone, they're like a left-wing black version of the NRA. They're militant but unlike the Klan they don't kill people.
A86 2 years ago
he was a liberal, Cho who shot up Virginia tech was a liberal who hated Bush. Joann Chesamard, a Black panther, took part in the murder of policemen. The NRA aren't anti-American or anti-white? How can you make that comparison?are all Liberal women like yourself uninformed about everything. Bobby Seale, founder of the Black panthers ,Killed another member because he thought he was talking to the police. Huey Newton, another founder, was involved in Officer Freys murder, and was killed by a rival
bigbad169 2 years ago
I've seen nothing that claims Cho was a liberal. What is "anti-American" and how are the Black Panthers anti-American? Are they anti-white? The original Panthers weren't but the modern ones are (ironically the modern-day Panthers are actually right-wing). One of the NRA's first actions in the 19th century was actually to lobby the government to have African-Americans' guns taken away. I'm not kidding.
As for the internal killings of the Panthers they are rumors. They were never charged.
A86 2 years ago
BTW, I'm neither a woman nor a liberal (or a conservative). I'm rational.
A86 2 years ago
No you are an Emo Liberal, just admit it. You make up more stuff than most liberals and try to pass it off as fact. You should have compared the black panthers to the Ku Klux Klan. two extreme opposites. You claim the original Panthers weren't anti-white?? To much nail polish up your nose. That's like someone saying the Klan isn't anti-black, or anti-jewish. Your anti Bush, anti killing terrorists, anti 2nd amendment, anti conservative and anti facts. Just get your nails done and say thank you.
bigbad169 2 years ago
Emo LIberal? Lol, what the hell is that?
The reason I didn't compare the Black Panthers and the Klan is because they aren't the same. The Panthers don't advocate for Black Supremacy or a black-only America and they don't lynch people. A more fitting comparison would have been the Klan and the Nation of Islam (however the Nation hasn't killed anyone that I've heard of except for maybe Malcolm X).
A86 2 years ago
Your right , the panthers weren't black only, they were just anti-white.The language of the Black Panthers was violent as was their public stance. The two founders of the Black Panther Party were Huey Percy Newton and Bobby Seale. They preached for a "revolutionary war" but though they considered themselves an African-American party, they were willing to speak out for all those who were oppressed from whatever minority group. They were willing to use violence to get what they wanted.
bigbad169 2 years ago
If you call being militantly anti-racist being "anti-white". The old Panthers weren't anti-white, they even had white members and encouraged white people who agreed with them to form their own White Panthers (which one group actually did). The new Panthers, who are conservative, are actually more anti-white than the old ones. The new ones stem more from the Marcus Garvey tradition.
Anyway, they have 2nd Amendment rights as well whether you agree with them or not.
A86 2 years ago
The Black Panthers are conservative?? They want communes where people , not the owners control companies and housing.Just say that Ted Kennedy was a conservative, or nancy Pelosi, Or Barney franks.I support the fact that all Americans have 2nd amendment rights.Just bcause you agree with the violence of the panther movement doesn't make them all up-right citizens.The FBI destroyed the Black panther movement by exploiting their need for power and vioence. They are simply a violent anti-white group
bigbad169 2 years ago
The New Black Panthers, yes. They just want to replace white owners with black owners.
As for the number of white people on welfare:
(dot) time (dot) com / time / magazine / article / 0,9171,974473,00 (dot) html
Speaking of making up facts I'd like to see where you got YOUR numbers from.
A86 2 years ago
Let them open a businessCritics of the NBPP say that the group's politics represent a dangerous departure from the original intent of black nationalism; specifically, that they are starkly anti-white, and also anti-Semitic. The NBPP is considered by the Southern Poverty Law Center to be a "black racist" hate group, and even many of the mildest critics of the organization have said that, at the absolute least, the NBPP's provocative brand of black supremacy undermines other civil rights efforts..
bigbad169 2 years ago
Yeah, I know. I said the old BP isn't anti-white. The NBPP IS.
I agree with you entirely. I'm black and I don't like the NBPP.
A86 2 years ago
They weren't anti-white !!! They just wanted to kill all the law enforcement officers who were white, but because of their stupidy they killed black officers. Both the new and old are totally anti-white with the NBBP being more prone to violence and aligning with the NOI and their anti-white, anti-Jew platform. The old BPP used violence to intimidate and confront anyone opposed to their vision of black supremecy and purging of whites from their neighborhoods.
bigbad169 2 years ago
1) The COINTEL was on a mission to destroy the Black Panthers (while they gave the Klan a pass). The Panthers got into more than one conflict with the police because the police often tried to stop their activities. They didn't go and actively search for cops to kill.
2) There is nothing in old BP policy about black supremacy. Why do you think they had white members and even encouraged a White Panthers?
Either way both groups still have 2nd Amendment rights even though I don't like them.
A86 2 years ago
From the beginning the Black Panther Party's focus on militancy came with a reputation for violence. They often took advantage of a California law which permitted carrying a loaded rifle or shotgun as long as it was publicly displayed and pointed at no one. Carrying weapons openly and making threats against police officers, for example, chants like "The Revolution has co-ome, it's time to pick up the gu-un. Off the pigs!", helped create the Panthers' reputation as a violent organization.pigs=cop
bigbad169 2 years ago
Yeah, and how is that any different than these right-wing militias cropping up and these pro-gun Republican groups that have openly expressed desire to kill liberals and even forcibly remove a democratically elected president (Obama)?
A86 2 years ago
You claim they are just a bunch of fun guys representing everybody which is a boldface lie. The NRA never expressed a desire to kill anyone and is more than willing to vote their displeasure at Obama at the next election. The NRA wants criminals with guns locked up for life. There are many Liberal democrats that are long standing members of the NRA. Majority of U.S. citizens oppose Obama's tax hikes and give away's to people who refuse to work. Why do you insist on making up things?
bigbad169 2 years ago
No. I simply said equating them to the Klan is ridiculous. They had no plans to take over American and turn it into an all-black country. They didn't go out killing and lynching white people either. The NOI would be a more fair comparison.
But it is true that the NRA was originally against blacks owning guns.
A86 2 years ago
No but they just wanted to kill whitey but that's O.K.The NRA is sometimes said to be the single most powerful lobbying organization in the United States. Its political activity is based on the principle that gun ownership is a civil liberty protected by the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and it claims to be the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the United States. Always have been for civil rights for all regardless of color. Why do you again make up stuff ??
bigbad169 2 years ago
Please quote where their principles were to "kill whitey".
As for the NRA, I got my facts confused. They haven't officially supported the past attempts to ban African-Americans from owning guns but some supporters in the NRA didn't fight against the law either.
A86 2 years ago
i figured since you make up so much B.S. that you'd give me a pass on the Kill Whitey platform.
bigbad169 2 years ago
The New Black Panther Party provoked a melee outside of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's campaign headquarters after she had lost a Democratic primary to her opponent, Hank Johnson. The NBPP's Chief of Staff, Hashim Nzinga, had been acting as security detail for McKinney when, in a volatile confrontation, he physically attacked reporters, derogatorily calling them "Jews" and insisting that they must focus on Hank Johnson rather than on McKinney, since Johnson, he alleged, was a "Tom". NBPP=thugs
bigbad169 2 years ago
Hell yes I'm anti-Bush. I'm anti-corporatist and anti-tearing up the Constitution.
"anti killing terrorists"
And here it comes. Like the typical far-right bonhead when you can't prove a point you just stoop to insults and attacks on personal character. Please point out where I said I was against killing terrorists. And no, I'm not anti-2nd Amendment. I'm anti-carrying a gun to a fucking public discussion about healthcare. Can I carry a gun to the next Republican speech?
A86 2 years ago
If your legally allowed to carry a gun , then Yes by all means you can carry a gun to a republican speech. Although at the Obama love fest the citizen was kept outside, he was legally allowed to carry a weapon. God bless the constitution. Like the typical far left , no facts liberal you make up stories and try to pass them as facts. Allowing lazy bums to take money from hard working taxpayers is tearing up the constitution. Liberals love to trash the constitution if it hurts taxpayers. just fact
bigbad169 2 years ago
"Allowing lazy bums to take money from hard working taxpayers"
Funny you say that, low-income white Evangelicals and Republicans from the Bible Belt and the Rustbelt have the highest rate of dependency on welfare in the country. Are they "lazy bums"? But I have a feeling "lazy bums" in your world might be code for "minorities".
Anyway, good thing you mentioned the Constitution. Obama is the ONLY president I've ever heard of allowing guns to his speeches. Did Bush? Hell no. Reagan? Nope.
A86 2 years ago
Again you make up facts. 19% of the caucasian population have used public assistance. because there are more caucasians it seems like a huge #. Of that # 56% use it as a short term stop gap. In the African-American community 37% use public asst.Of that # 11% use it short term. Lazy bums means lazy bums. No president allows anything to anyone. Reagan was shot by a gun you fool Bush would have no say if legal citizens carried guns. Why do you always make stuff up. Like a woman scorned. EMO liberal
bigbad169 2 years ago
Unless you are out in the woods are protecting your home u really don't need a gun. Hey we live in such a crazy world I guess you need to protect yourself were ever you go. Hey once people learn
peace,love and respect everywhere you won't need any weapon to protect yourself from another human being. Peace is what this world needs.
Empha84 2 years ago
Amen.
Unfortunately, a whole lot of bad people are going to have to die before we can burn all the guns on a pyre of peace.
I have had far more need for a weapon in the middle of Americas most "progressive" cities, than I have needed one in the sticks.
Humanity has a long way to go before we can truly be free of violence, if we ever can.
It's our most difficult social paradox really. And has been for a long as anybody has been counting.
"Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum."
funkasoris 2 years ago
Three words for the reporter "Carlos":
IT ... IS ... LEGAL ...
What part of legal doesn't he understand? And no attorney in New Hampshire is going to get an injunction against the man's presence on church property just because he's armed...
This type of behavior is so typical of MSNBC tools.
Patriot1976 2 years ago
Patriot, your right it is legal, but is it using good judgment in bringing a loaded weapon at a heated event like this? Some of these events have turned physical.
bniron 2 years ago
i doubt if it is really loaded. He has a right to wear it, so good for him.
paramedic6801 2 years ago
It was loaded. He was asked I think while on Hardball, and his response was something like, "wow, who would be stupid enough to walk around with an unloaded firearm".
diggingforgold 2 years ago
Yes they have turned physical - Seems like this is the place you would want to be able to defend yourself doesn't it? In a situation that might turn physical. Take a look at a vid titled - Gun carrying American at Obama event (and 3 others) get assaulted by paid, union thugs - This very same armed man is able to avoid a problem because he is carrying.
LordRuckus 2 years ago
The statement that some events have turned physical is prima facie evidence that carrying a loaded firearm at an event is both reasonable and prudent. In layman's terms, if the threat of physical violence exists it is a good idea to be armed.
Patriot1976 2 years ago
Patriot, Its cool to be able to have this discussion. I think its not in good judgment, but we have the right to disagree and still be American (or whatever nationality we may be). Is prima facie the term you really want to use here? it implies, 'on first examination' which can imply 'without thorough examination, or haste in judgment'. I wouldn't call this particular issue irrefutable, although I won't argue to the point of its legality.
bniron 2 years ago
Yes, because escalating a situation from a fistfight to a shootout is reasonable and prudent.
I mean, it works so well in the "hood", right? Nobody messes with you if you carry a gun there.
Aphytus 2 years ago
If someone from the "hood" blindsided and punched you in the face then kicked you in the head repeatedly to the point you might die if there was no intervention is not worth escalation? Fine, ammo is expensive anyway. I will just mind my own business and not end.....err I mean escalate the situation.
Cobalt135 2 years ago
What's crazy is the amount of people that see this and are amazed. Our citizens have no idea of what the gun laws are in their state and panic at this sight. I would love to have an organized "National Carry Day" in an effort to make everyone aware that carrying a gun is perfectly legal in a lot of states. How many people in the crowd are legally carrying concealed?
LordRuckus 2 years ago
bring a gun into a crowd is crazy....and at a church....rights...what about everyone elses rights....wont get mugged get real you cowards!
Sooozee 2 years ago
I'm sure the victims that were shot in Colorado Springs at the New Life Church in December 2007 thought they didn't need a gun either. The total killed was not more because of a church member who was carrying that day. Carrying a gun in a church? Absurd isn't it?
LordRuckus 2 years ago 2
no one should have a gun in a crowd! and worse than that people think this is okay.....and at a church...what kind of people are you. such hatred!
Sooozee 2 years ago
youre a bunch of lame toads. its a gun, not an alien life form. you people are too easily amused. i bet he doesnt get mugged.
infinityshock 2 years ago 2
First, the gun was legal, no story...
Second, don't you think this guy is a known quantity to local law enforcement. If he was a threat, he would have been removed.
Third, many, many times I have warned my fellow tea party patriots, the press will try to spin everything you do negatively.
Don't give them ammunition. We will win the battle through the electoral process, though it may take two presidential election cycles. Sans concrete evidence of election rigging, leave the guns at home.
DMashakUSA 2 years ago
I'm glad yall crackers were stupid enough to brings guns to town hall meetings. Thank you for allowing me to bring my choppa with me next time i go out in public.
Norincshoota 2 years ago
The fact that you call it a "choppa" shows just how nignorant you are. How many liquor stores did you rob to buy your POS Norinco?
aaharrington 2 years ago
I like the cameraman.... It's like he can't believe the gun will stay in its holster.
*zooms to gun*
*pans away*
oh god it's a gun
*zooms to gun*
Quanturos 2 years ago
"...the guy is just being allowed to stay there?" yes you dork its legal!
genkijin 2 years ago 2
This is a excellent display of patriotism. If those of you who don't like it have a problem, then leave the USA. These are our rights... God bless America.
travismany 2 years ago
Whoopdy freak'in do, like he was concerned when Bush dodged 2 shoes, I bet he was applauding the shoe thrower the first time he found out about it.
jrd1461 2 years ago
OMG I have a gun on in my own home!
lattagary 2 years ago
I would love to see that douchebag anchor call a lawyer for an emergency injunction when armed thugs break into his house.
032125 2 years ago 2
SHOCKING! SIGNIFICANT! ALMOST DISTURBING!
haha.
032125 2 years ago
That is expected, that is the precise reaction from the New World Order where they command, you listen and obey.
It does deserved a good laugh. ;)
LeeKwangEng 2 years ago
Oh he had a gun big wooptie freakin deal. Get used to it youll see plenty of them when Hussein declares martial law on this country.
heisthelight1611 2 years ago
If you don't exercise your rights you will lose them,Pretty simple way to make your point.
HomeRemodelWorkshop 2 years ago
nice gun.
DixieDoe 2 years ago
Shoot please :D so that everyone learn a lesson :)
ayotollah 2 years ago
File an emergency injunction?
LOL.... OMG what a NUT. Do these MSLSD fools REALLY that amazed that armed people are "peaceful"??
THIS speaks volumes to the way Liberals view WE THE PEOPLE and when push comes to shove.... IGNORE our Constitutional rights.
DeathScouter 2 years ago
Fucking cunt want to get rid of the gun owner now.
Biased news media speaking out against gun rights.
That news cunt is a cancer in our society.
buttdagger 2 years ago 2
ZOMG THAT MAN HAZ GUN SOMEBODY STOP HIM!
lol at liberalfags
BigBossIsBack 2 years ago
Nothing wrong with that.
HiCapacity 2 years ago
shoe = gun?
cptjack80 2 years ago
AMAGAWD A GUN.
PulletSurprise 2 years ago
Knowing the history of the United States. You don't bring a gun anywhere near the president.
Dragonfly6160 2 years ago
Why? Only republicans presidents get shot at.
Also, if you really think THIS guy would shoot, take a look on that grassy knoll over there
TheOrangeRoad 2 years ago
You are forgetting John F. Kennedy..Democractic President..God bless his soul.
ThisJustin123 2 years ago
emergency injunction! what the hell is wrong with him? What happened to states rights? Jefferson and the founding fathers would be appaled. He is not hiding the gun, he doesnt seem threatened, he is in a private property, he has every right to have it, legally exposed. Stop this propaganda and fear, over nonsense.
nader85021 2 years ago
how much do you want to bet that the secret service had a sniper covering the protesters head eh?
AncientLegacy 2 years ago
"He's about to be greeted in New Hampshire by hundreds of protesters and one guy with a gun" lol
Tomwentinsane 2 years ago
The guys in the clip are just plain stupid. It's the law that you can openly carry in NH. No matter how many lawyers you have you will not be able to legally stop this man from carrying on private property. Will these people get it through their thick skulls that they have no authority to even think about taking that mans gun away. He is just your run of the mill , law abiding, citizen that is exercising his CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to carry his weapon.
Airforce1Gunny 2 years ago
That's good logic, shoot someone because they shove you around a protest. Discharging a weapon at a peaceful protest is just stupid. If you are looking to incite a riot, bringing a handgun to a crowded venue is a good way to do that. There are things you should not do, like yell FIRE in a theater.
Eaacker 2 years ago
Nobody suggested to shoot somebody for "shoving them around". The very presence of force deters violence. Furthermore, if somebody is "shoving him around" to the point which it is threatening his well-being, then it is logical to do so.
tylerw02 2 years ago
I wouldn't expect you to grasp what I was trying to convey in my last post. I am saying, if your going to carry a firearm, you should be prepared to take a life. Police obviously made a choice to serve and protect.. The protester is obviously carrying the weapon to make a political statement. A handgun is not a prop, and it shouldn't be used as one. By the way, he probably endangered the lives of everyone around him, as I am sure the secret service had snipers targeting him.
Eaacker 2 years ago
"By the way, he probably endangered the lives of everyone around him, as I am sure the secret service had snipers targeting him"
Are you suggesting that Secret Service snipers are so undisciplined they'd shoot somebody for no reason? No, nobody was in danger and odds are that nobody was targeting him as he wasn't in any position to be a threat to POTUS whom rides in an armored car and wasn't exposed anywhere near the protest.
tylerw02 2 years ago
lmao. "Are you saying this guy is ALLOWED to have a gun on PRIVATE property?!" "that's just the way the law works in new hampture" no, that's how it works everywhere dumbass. It's his right as a citizen to have a gun, and for them to make such a big deal out of it shows how idiotic they are. Of course it's his right to have a gun, maybe he wants to protect himself from extremests. It's dumb to say "lets get rid of this sick freak" he's on private land. it's his right.
chaosofhumanity 2 years ago
If the same thing happened at a bush event, they would have dragged the man's ass away to Guantanamo and tortured him as a terrorist. Hell they would remove you if you just showed up with an anti-bush t-shirt or bumper sticker. Where were these great patriots then?
arcturus33333 2 years ago
Good comment
Dragonfly6160 2 years ago
This is the same BSNBC reporter, Carlos, that suggessted that Socialist is Code for N-Word. These 2 clowns are not used to seeing a gun in public unlesss it's some ganabanger or robber. Plus Obama is a brutha'!!! Forgive them.
reno93535 2 years ago
god bless nh. we still pass no laws contrary to the constitution. look up you nhs constitutution liberal morons.
sjrups 2 years ago
Comment removed
ButtaBee 2 years ago
I am having a hard time why people don't just have a lick of common sense. I don't trust anybody, and especially alot nuts out there that want to harm our Prez. Yes a gun near the president for a protest isn't smart, Reagan was shot it 1981. Now you have a Black President with all these racist whackos in our country.
opo112902 2 years ago 3
GASP!
A man exercising his rights! My God! Someone stop this monster!
Vansain 2 years ago
Hahah I was laughing the whole time I was like ooo a gun so scary.... hell you could kill someone with a rock so lets make sure they remove them all befor the presadent comes.. people take things to seriously some times..
haha48 2 years ago
oh no he has a gun.... idiots. ITS LEGAL in the state let alone a consitutional right. Being able to potentially hurt someone isnt an indicator of any violent intentions. dumb obamanite newsworms need to grow up.. and that lady looks and most likely is retarded.
otte47 2 years ago
2:33 lol
GlenstormCentaur 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Obango thugs carry clubs outside polling places.. NOT A PROBLEM..
A protester carries a legal gun,,,, BIG PROBLEM..
I LOVE NEW HAMPSHIRE. We have guns, and are not afraid to show them..
F-- THESE TALKING TWERTS.
mw308 2 years ago
Obango thugs carry clubs outside polling places.. NOT A PROBLEM..
A protester carries a legal gun,,,, BIG PROBLEM..
I LOVE NEW HAMPSHIRE. We have guns, and are not afraid to show them..
F-- THESE TALKING TWERTS.
mw308 2 years ago
A guy has a gun? Oh my Oh my! You mean people have the gall to defend themselves these days? Near the President? Burn Every Village!!
arcnaver 2 years ago
So that guy is defending himself? Against what? Challenging ideas that are contrary to his own?
Bringing and displaying a firearm (or any type of weapon) to an ideological public debate is plainly uncivilized. A bigot's way of saying: "Pay attention to me!"
IxoZ 2 years ago 3
why would that be any different? they do anyway execept they are concealed and prollly without a permit
loverboy8991 2 years ago
it cracks me up the way these people act when someone actually exercises the rights of this country. I CAN'T BELIEVE HE HAS A GUN
loverboy8991 2 years ago
The hell it doesn't.
WindsorFox 2 years ago
So you'd be okay with a Black Panther excercising his 2nd Amendment rights carrying a gun near a President McCain or Palin?
A86 2 years ago 2
The law is the law doucheweasel, if one has no criminal record, they may carry a gun.
BlatentYak 2 years ago
Typical right-winger. Resorting to insults instead of dealing with reality.
Like I asked - would you support a Black Panther with no criminal record carrying a gun near a President McCain or Palin? Or better yet an Arab Muslim American?
A86 2 years ago
Typical left-wing doucheweasel that can't comprehend. I said the law is the law regardless of whom you are if you are a legal law abiding citizen.
BlatentYak 2 years ago