EVE Search - Media Flips out over 2nd Amendment at Obama Town Hall

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Media Flips out over 2nd Amendment at Obama Town Hall

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
ceaon Gallente	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:07:00 - [1] Media Flips out over 2nd Amendment at Obama Town Hall dunno if this is posted already but is awesome Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist EvE FTW
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:12:00 - [2] Originally by: ceaon Media Flips out over 2nd Amendment at Obama Town Hall dunno if this is posted already but is awesome Okay, so its legal for him to have the gun... But they are still trying to figure out ways to get him out of the way? _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
Guillame Herschel Gallente NME1	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:13:00 - [3] The President is a Nih..! Originally by: Sera Ryskin And I have no idea what this bull**** about gang or solo is about.
ceaon Gallente	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:14:00 - [4] anyone know how this story ended ? Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist EvE FTW
ceaon Gallente	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:17:00 - [5] Originally by: Blane Xero Okay, so its legal for him to have the gun... But they are still trying to figure out ways to get him out of the way? seams TV commentators dont give a crap about that law just pay attention at this line Quote: Why cant we get rid of him now? that woman dont care about the law Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist EvE FTW
Guillame Herschel Gallente NME1	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:18:00 - [6] No, gomframmit damnitablit. I said the President is a Nih...! Originally by: Sera Ryskin And I have no idea what this bull**** about gang or solo is about.
Mr Reason	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:50:00 - [7] So people in that area are allowed to carry a gun out in the open. Ok that's cool I guess, in 1850. HAVING a gun is not an issue to me even though I'm personally against them, but I can understand people wanting to protect their own lifes and family or perhaps even have fun shooting stuff on a range. But being allowed to carry one out in the open, in a situation where there's lots of other people who saviour their lives just as much (or perhaps even more if that gun owner planned something) and with a public figure on the way? I'm sure you all feel very strong about your rights and 'freedom' and all that but seriously, who thinks this can EVER be a good idea?
Bestofworst Worstofbest Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.08.14 23:57:00 - [8] Originally by: Mr Reason So people in that area are allowed to carry a gun out in the open. Ok that's cool I guess, in 1850. HAVING a gun is not an issue to me even though I'm personally against them, but I can understand people wanting to protect their own lifes and family or perhaps even have fun shooting stuff on a range. But being allowed to carry one out in the open, in a situation where there's lots of other people who saviour their lives just as much (or perhaps even more if that gun owner planned something) and with a public figure on the way? I'm sure you all feel very strong about your rights and 'freedom' and all that but seriously, who thinks this can EVER be a good idea? Some else who illegally concealed a gun pulls it out and the man who legally brought his pulls it on the first guy and shoots him before he shoots some one else ________________________________________________ My Music Posts slowly rising in quality to the decline of my dignity.
soldieroffortune 258 Gallente Trinity Council	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:01:00 - [9] Wow, I don't even know what to say about this. They are tripping about a man legally carrying a gun, but because the President is coming there they want to make the man leave? Didn't Obama swear to an Oath of Office? Originally by: Presidential Oath of Office I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I don't see the issue here. Hell, I think the President should go up to that man and shake his damn hand for exercising one of the more debated rights we have and proudly doing it, and thus voicing his opinion. Please re-size your signature to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes.Applebabe
Grathar	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:05:00 - [10] Originally by: Mr Reason So people in that area are allowed to carry a gun out in the open. Ok that's cool I guess, in 1850. HAVING a gun is not an issue to me even though I'm personally against them, but I can understand people wanting to protect their own lifes and family or perhaps even have fun shooting stuff on a range. But being allowed to carry one out in the open, in a situation where there's lots of other people who saviour their lives just as much (or perhaps even more if that gun owner planned something) and with a public figure on the way? I'm sure you all feel very strong about your rights and 'freedom' and all that but seriously, who thinks this can EVER be a good idea? In the U.S. Law abiding citizens legally killed just over 3,500 felons in the defense of life last year. They usually have a gun with them. In the U.S. all of law enforcement...killed just under 250 felons last year in the prosecution of their duties. Its not that we feel strongly about it. Its just that we will kill anyone who thinks they can take our rights away. Our country was founded by force of arms. Our founding fathers tasked, by name, the citizenry of the U.S. to keep and bear arms to watch over the government for the potential of corruption, not the other way around. The militia is not the federally controlled national guard, or any other such federal agency. This and many other topics show how far our country has moved away from the republic we were founded upon.
Micheal Dietrich Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:10:00 - [11] My hats off to that man. He just stood up before many for what he believed in. And I find the medias commentary rather hilarious in how they portray him as a evil monger posing a threat. And while I'm not big on religion I've gotta thank the church for allowing him to express himself. Now I'll sit back and watch as this thread will turn into another pro/anti gun debate or how I like to call it 'you pansies getting all scared over a gun'. Fake edit: I also think that Mr. Obama should walk up and shake that mans hand. He's already being watched and I'm sure that if his hand went anywhere near that gun he would be tackled in seconds.
Jacob Mei Gallente	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:10:00 - [12] Three words sum this up: Slow. News. Day. On an unrelated note, Kneel before Zod!
Awesome Possum Insert Obscure Latin Name	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:19:00 - [13] Originally by: Mr Reason So people in that area are allowed to carry a gun out in the open. Ok that's cool I guess, in 1850. HAVING a gun is not an issue to me even though I'm personally against them, but I can understand people wanting to protect their own lifes and family or perhaps even have fun shooting stuff on a range. But being allowed to carry one out in the open, in a situation where there's lots of other people who saviour their lives just as much (or perhaps even more if that gun owner planned something) and with a public figure on the way? I'm sure you all feel very strong about your rights and 'freedom' and all that but seriously, who thinks this can EVER be a good idea? /facepalms europeans. ♥ Wreck Disposal Services
Micheal Dietrich Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:24:00 - [14] His name is William Kostric..... His name is William Kostric.....
Jonny 101 Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:27:00 - [15] Taking a gun to a school where the president is about to show up, oh yes I see no problems here. If this was your last president i'm sure nobody would send him straight to guantanamo or anything :P It's one thing having a gun and being allowed to carry it, another to bring it to a huge crowd when your head of state is about to arrive, bad taste or just plain stupid you pick but you obviously can't let people run around with weapons willy nilly when your president comes to visit, lets be honest, you americans do have more than enough nuts that'd love to shoot him. And I quite like this one, I don't think his policies are much better than the rest you've had, but at least this one speaks your damn language.
Awesome Possum Insert Obscure Latin Name	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:29:00 - [16] Originally by: Micheal Dietrich His name is William Kostric..... His name is William Kostric..... reporters should report. ♥ Wreck Disposal Services
Awesome Possum Insert Obscure Latin Name	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:31:00 - [17] Originally by: Jonny 101 Taking a gun to a school where the president is about to show up, oh yes I see no problems here. If this was your last president i'm sure nobody would send him straight to guantanamo or anything :P It's one thing having a gun and being allowed to carry it, another to bring it to a huge crowd when your head of state is about to arrive, bad taste or just plain stupid you pick but you obviously can't let people run around with weapons willy nilly when your president comes to visit, lets be honest, you americans do have more than enough nuts that'd love to shoot him. And I quite like this one, I don't think his policies are much better than the rest you've had, but at least this one speaks your damn language. What he did was completely legal. End of story. I'm sure the secret service ran checks on this guy the moment the local police gave them his name, and if they had found even a rumour of bad history, they would've pulled him as a security risk. ♥ Wreck Disposal Services
Micheal Dietrich Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:40:00 - [18] This is one of my favorites
Mr Reason	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:42:00 - [19] So law is law until someone "heard a rumor" then they're completely in their right to "take him away". Double standard simpleton reasoning imo, personally it would be easier to just go "no guns in public", dunno about you.
goodby4u Valor Inc. Cosmic Anomalies	Posted - 2009.08.15 00:56:00 - [20] Originally by: Mr Reason So law is law until someone "heard a rumor" then they're completely in their right to "take him away". Double standard simpleton reasoning imo, personally it would be easier to just go "no guns in public", dunno about you. The guy that is packing a gun for everybody to see is not the one you should be worried about, the one you should worry about is the one that conceals such a weapon. He has every right to hold that unconcealed weapon so the media should shut the hell up.
Mr Reason	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:00:00 - [21] Originally by: goodby4u Originally by: Mr Reason So law is law until someone "heard a rumor" then they're completely in their right to "take him away". Double standard simpleton reasoning imo, personally it would be easier to just go "no guns in public", dunno about you. The guy that is packing a gun for everybody to see is not the one you should be worried about, the one you should worry about is the one that conceals such a weapon. He has every right to hold that unconcealed weapon so the media should shut the hell up. By your reasoning anyone who wants to do some serious damage should carry openly, because that somehow means you're no threat. "Hey guys look at me carrying this firearm, I'm not here to use it in any way, that's why I'm carrying in the first place. Please go search for the other people who conceal theirs, go now go and find them while I'll stand here... waiting... to not use the gun I brought to this gathering, for no reason at all. No sirree!". I'm sure no one would think of this...
ceaon Gallente	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:00:00 - [22] even if this can be a gold mine for some ppl anyone should have a gun (at least in house) and depend of the size of that gun should have a proper instruction and whit periodical metal review atm if some one get into my house if am ****ed my only defence should be a chair and chicken knife also i live in a central street in my city and dunno if someone will dare to commit robbery Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist EvE FTW
Grathar	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:06:00 - [23] Even though I never cared much for Bush and usually vote libertarian, he actually showed up once in Phoenix, AZ. and walked around at the states largest gun show and met with thousands of people openly carrying. The secret service looked like they were sh#$@ting two bricks. I did not go up to shake his hand, but I was impressed anyway. Politicians are usually the worst kind of coward and tend to be closet aristocrats. Per capita, we are the most armed country on the planet. More than 1 of 2 Americans legally owns a firearm. In Phoenix we (medical field) had done an informal study. On all the accident scenes we had worked, our investigations show that 79% of all cars on the roadways of Arizona legally have a firearm in them. The F.B.I. uniform crime reports do not lie. The states with the strictest gun control laws have the highest violent crime rates. Criminals simply do not abide by laws...period. This is why places like California, NY, Chicago, DC have such high violent crime rates. In the states that have the most liberal gun laws such as Arizona, Montana, Colorado, Utah. They have much lower violent crime rates. This is a matter of public record. An armed populace is a polite populace. Once Florida passed its ccw (concealed carry permit basically) violent crime dropped by an amazing 27% in just one year and has continued to decline. The current squatter in the presidents office was born out of frustration. His current approval rating is a record. No American president has lost the amount of approval percentage he has lost within their first six months of office.
Jin Nib	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:07:00 - [24] Guns are the great equalizer. Naturally some people would prefer that they are more equal then others. Citizens being equal with career politicians, god forbid. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
Bestofworst Worstofbest Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:07:00 - [25] Originally by: Mr Reason Originally by: goodby4u Originally by: Mr Reason So law is law until someone "heard a rumor" then they're completely in their right to "take him away". Double standard simpleton reasoning imo, personally it would be easier to just go "no guns in public", dunno about you. The guy that is packing a gun for everybody to see is not the one you should be worried about, the one you should worry about is the one that conceals such a weapon. He has every right to hold that unconcealed weapon so the media should shut the hell up. By your reasoning anyone who wants to do some serious damage should carry openly, because that somehow means you're no threat. "Hey guys look at me carrying this firearm, I'm not here to use it in any way, that's why I'm carrying in the first place. Please go search for the other people who conceal theirs, go now go and find them while I'll stand here... waiting... to not use the gun I brought to this gathering, for no reason at all. No sirree!". I'm sure no one would think of this... Because like said before there would be a background check as soon as he was scene with the gun. If he had any bad history, he will be taken to the sides. Even if not, they are gonna keep an eye on him no matter what. They know where it is, so if he reaches for it they will know when to stop him. ________________________________________________ My Music Posts slowly rising in quality to the decline of my dignity.
goodby4u Valor Inc. Cosmic Anomalies	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:12:00 - [26] Originally by: Mr Reason Originally by: goodby4u Originally by: Mr Reason So law is law until someone "heard a rumor" then they're completely in their right to "take him away". Double standard simpleton reasoning imo, personally it would be easier to just go "no guns in public", dunno about you. The guy that is packing a gun for everybody to see is not the one you should be worried about, the one you should worry about is the one that conceals such a weapon. He has every right to hold that unconcealed weapon so the media should shut the hell up. By your reasoning anyone who wants to do some serious damage should carry openly, because that somehow means you're no threat. "Hey guys look at me carrying this firearm, I'm not here to use it in any way, that's why I'm carrying in the first place. Please go search for the other people who conceal theirs, go now go and find them while I'll stand here... waiting... to not use the gun I brought to this gathering, for no reason at all. No sirree!". I'm sure no one would think of this... Your not getting the point, if that man ever decided to get down on one knee and pull the weapon he would have several snipers shooting him at the face before he could even pull the weapon. A concealed user however, may be packing the pistol in a place that may not seem threatening, and thus, he may be able to get a shot off before either being tackled or simply sniped. The issue is not whether or not the man is allowed to carry openly, the law is pretty clear cut in the states when it comes to this... The question is whether he is allowed to carry it near the president of the united states, and I postulate that in this situation the enemy you know is far less deadly then the enemy you don't know.
Mr Reason	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:15:00 - [27] Originally by: Bestofworst Worstofbest Even if not, they are gonna keep an eye on him no matter what. They know where it is, so if he reaches for it they will know when to stop him. Are you willing to bet your own personal life or that of a loved one on the reaction time of some official against someone who is willing to commit a murder? Again, I don't have issues with people keeping guns for personal safety at home or because they find them fun. But out in public is just dumb, you simply can't justify that.
goodby4u Valor Inc. Cosmic Anomalies	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:20:00 - [28] Originally by: Mr Reason Originally by: Bestofworst Worstofbest Even if not, they are gonna keep an eye on him no matter what. They know where it is, so if he reaches for it they will know when to stop him. Are you willing to bet your own personal life or that of a loved one on the reaction time of some official against someone who is willing to commit a murder? Again, I don't have issues with people keeping guns for personal safety at home or because they find them fun. But out in public is just dumb, you simply can't justify that. That is their job, so the president must trust the fact that they can stop somebody that is obviously a threat. The amount of time it takes to get on one knee and pull the weapon would be about the same amount of time it would take him to pull a knife and stab him.... If they cannot stop him then they deserve to be fired. Even though I am sure there are those that wish to assassinate him, he must abide by the clear cut laws in place by the state or country he resides, especially if it is in such a document like the constitution which was to be the backbone of our government.
Bestofworst Worstofbest Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:21:00 - [29] Originally by: Mr Reason Originally by: Bestofworst Worstofbest Even if not, they are gonna keep an eye on him no matter what. They know where it is, so if he reaches for it they will know when to stop him. Are you willing to bet your own personal life or that of a loved one on the reaction time of some official against someone who is willing to commit a murder? Again, I don't have issues with people keeping guns for personal safety at home or because they find them fun. But out in public is just dumb, you simply can't justify that. Except it will be multiple officials and a single jerk of his hand will cause retaliation. But then again, did the news clip even say the gun was loaded? Maybe he brought an unloaded gun (forgive me for not being all knowing about guns) to be a part of his protest, if not unloaded, maybe it is still a part of his protest. ________________________________________________ My Music Posts slowly rising in quality to the decline of my dignity.
Grathar	Posted - 2009.08.15 01:23:00 - [30] Originally by: Mr Reason Originally by: Bestofworst Worstofbest Even if not, they are gonna keep an eye on him no matter what. They know where it is, so if he reaches for it they will know when to stop him. Are you willing to bet your own personal life or that of a loved one on the reaction time of some official against someone who is willing to commit a murder? Again, I don't have issues with people keeping guns for personal safety at home or because they find them fun. But out in public is just dumb, you simply can't justify that. So are you saying you want the government to make everything safe and tell you what you can and can't do? You are a perfect european. Keep it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.