Guns Near Obama

Armed Men Show at Obama Rally
(Nothing Happens)

The above headline is one you won't see on any mainstream media outlet. Even though it's truthful and describes exactly what occurred, they don't dare run such a headline.

In Arizona, a gentleman showed up at one of Obama's appearances in business attire, openly carrying a semi-automatic pistol and an AR-15 rifle slung over his shoulder. I should point out that Arizona is an open-carry state and you need no permit to do so.

Police checked him out and, finding that he was doing nothing illegal, was cooperative and not making any threats, they let him be. Sure, they and the Secret Service kept an eye on him as he moved around in the crowd outside the venue. Most important, he didn't cause any problem.

But the one thing some media outlets tried hard not to mention was that this man was African-American. Why? You be the judge. It could be that people like Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claimed that healthcare protesters who were "too nicely dressed", like this man, were "Republican activists" and heaven forbid this man could be Black, Republican and a gun enthusiast without doing something illegal.

Incidents in Tennessee and New Hampshire were also mentioned. In New Hampshire, a man with a legally carried and holstered pistol held up a sign. I've seen two quotes of what the sign read. Either it asked, "Is it time to water the tree of Liberty?" or it said "It is time to water the tree of Liberty". Both are references to Thomas Jefferson's famous quote that the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants from time to time.

Liberal commentator David Sirota's recent column tries to claim that by exercising our 2nd Amendment rights at a political rally it becomes "intimidation" or "coercion" and thus "terrorism". While this is typical of most media nitwits, he goes further to try to tie these incidents to the old south and the "Jim Crow noose".

Is this the liberal's idea of "terrorism"? Quoting the founding fathers on a protest sign, at a political event (exercising the 1st Amendment) while legally carrying a holstered handgun (exercising the 2nd Amendment). I want to vomit when I see unadulterated pig excrement like that.

No laws were broken. No one was hurt. Firearms stayed in their holsters where they are safely secured. The rifle remained slung over the man's shoulder. There's no news here. None at all. Not unless it's manufactured.

And, that's just what it is. People who fear guns and fear others who have guns have manufactured a story. Stories like Sirota's claim the mere presence of a gun, legally and responsibly carried, while trying to exercise one's first amendment rights is like... The KKK intimidating blacks. Or like car bombs near voting booths. Or it is like a mob holding a noose to lynch a man.

Which would be funny, if they weren't so serious about it. You can bet some half-brained idiot will try to get his or her congresscritter to pass a law prohibiting people from having guns anywhere near a political event.

I looked up another event where armed men arrived in at a state capitol building and caused an uproar. Step back to May 2, 1967. Ronald Reagan was in his fifth month as Governor of California. The Watts riots were less than 2 years old. And the Black Panthers, who called for a revolution and Socialist takeover were a "radical" group.

You can see the headlines at right. The major difference between the reporting on May 2, 1967, when armed Black Panthers briefly occupied the California Capitol building and events in 2009, is that the Panthers received more sympathetic coverage.

The real purpose of these recent displays are not to intimidate or frighten people. They are to remind the American public that our rights are being trampled and that a citizen trying to fully exercise his rights is a target for government or public harassment and scorn. Exercising the 1st and 2nd Amendment together is, to the media pundits like Sirota, somehow now verboten.

Why is it that these same folks aways loudly proclaim "It's My Right!" when it comes to their bodies, the use of drugs, violent and lurid lyrics in music and other such pursuits? But it suddenly becomes a "public safety issue" or a "societal issue" when a person simply exercises their right to own or carry a firearm? Why is a woman's right to choose, which is not found in the constitution - an inalienable personal right while her right to keep and bear arms, which is expressly written in the constitution, is not?

I guess it is inconceivable to some people that we can exercise all of our rights all the time!

Post Script: These protesters obviously researched their state and local laws before proceeding. I am not advocating anyone do the same thing without consulting a local attorney. You don't want to end up in jail for violating some law you were not aware of.

Have a comment? Editor@handgunclub.com