Alabama Gun Dork Is Asked To Leave Polling Place, Comes Back With Members Of Gun Rights Group
A member of the gun rights group “BamaCarry” got to vote in Shelby County, Alabama, while wearing a holstered pistol, but police later asked him to leave while he stood in front of the polling place.
According to WKRG, Robert Kennedy showed up with his gun on Tuesday at the Pelham First Baptist Church Annex. There was a sign which stated that firearms were prohibited, but election officials opted to allow Kennedy to vote while wearing his gun.
Later on, Kennedy and members of his group stood outside the polling place until Pelham police asked them to leave at the request of a poll official.
The executive director of the Alabama Sheriffs Association, Bobby Timmons, says this was the only case he’d heard about in Tuesday’s runoff.
The gun nut not only intentionally loitered in front of a polling place, but he came back with other members and stood there defiantly while ignoring the sign which specifically states that guns are prohibited.
These people simply want attention. If you look at some of their faces, their expressions just scream,”I need a hug.”
This is before he returned to the polling place/church.
Watch:
H/T: An actual good guy with a gun, @ComgenKDT.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Anomaly100
274 responses to Alabama Gun Dork Is Asked To Leave Polling Place, Comes Back With Members Of Gun Rights Group
« Previous 1 2 3Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Darrell Harbin July 22nd, 2014 at 14:18
You all should be grateful that he only voted once.
Darrell Harbin July 22nd, 2014 at 14:18
You all should be grateful that he only voted once.
Ranger July 22nd, 2014 at 14:43
WOW! So, I see that here the law means nothing, the rights of average citizens means nothing, that calling a man exercising his rights a “dork” is okay but calling those who disagree “libtards” is wrong. If we lived in a Utopia, guns would not be necessary. However, we don’t and those who act like we do end up being victims of crime. A “no guns” sign is not law in Alabama and the Attorney General has already stated that according to the laws of AL what he was doing was perfectly legal. As far as the “small penis” jokes go, it’s funny that only those who say it only refer to armed citizens that way. They never refer to the police, the military or armed criminals that way. The other thing is there is no difference in AL law between an armed citizen and a cop. Cops have no special law that allows them to carry a gun any more than any citizen. Plus, the citizen has arrest powers, under the law, that are equal to those of the police. The anti-gun attitude exists because some citizens are too lazy or scared of guns to protect themselves and their families. They demand cops risk their own lives to protect them and the courts, at several levels, have already stated that cops are not here to protect individual citizens but society as a whole. You can live in your protective bubbles and think that crime happens to other people or you can act like the Americans who founded this country and take responsibility for your own protection.
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:43
Isn’t it funny how the anti-gun liberals now seem to support the police when they used to scream “F__ the Pigs”?
Ranger July 22nd, 2014 at 14:43
WOW! So, I see that here the law means nothing, the rights of average citizens means nothing, that calling a man exercising his rights a “dork” is okay but calling those who disagree “libtards” is wrong. If we lived in a Utopia, guns would not be necessary. However, we don’t and those who act like we do end up being victims of crime. A “no guns” sign is not law in Alabama and the Attorney General has already stated that according to the laws of AL what he was doing was perfectly legal. As far as the “small penis” jokes go, it’s funny that only those who say it only refer to armed citizens that way. They never refer to the police, the military or armed criminals that way. The other thing is there is no difference in AL law between an armed citizen and a cop. Cops have no special law that allows them to carry a gun any more than any citizen. Plus, the citizen has arrest powers, under the law, that are equal to those of the police. The anti-gun attitude exists because some citizens are too lazy or scared of guns to protect themselves and their families. They demand cops risk their own lives to protect them and the courts, at several levels, have already stated that cops are not here to protect individual citizens but society as a whole. You can live in your protective bubbles and think that crime happens to other people or you can act like the Americans who founded this country and take responsibility for your own protection.
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:43
Isn’t it funny how the anti-gun liberals now seem to support the police when they used to scream “F__ the Pigs”?
Concerned Vegas Citizen July 22nd, 2014 at 15:55
When did polling places become some magical safe place where crime never would occur? Is this the same thought process that criminals always obey laws?
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:41
More crime takes place there than anywhere else: it is called vote stealing and vote fraud.
Concerned Vegas Citizen July 22nd, 2014 at 15:55
When did polling places become some magical safe place where crime never would occur? Is this the same thought process that criminals always obey laws?
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:41
More crime takes place there than anywhere else: it is called vote stealing and vote fraud.
Timothy Hull July 23rd, 2014 at 01:20
I just wish to God that before something serious happens to you or your family that you realize that all your talk about not wanting law abiding people with guns around you is STUPID AS HELL!!!!
Timothy Hull July 23rd, 2014 at 01:20
I just wish to God that before something serious happens to you or your family that you realize that all your talk about not wanting law abiding people with guns around you is STUPID AS HELL!!!!
Barry Fitzgerald July 23rd, 2014 at 01:37
Why is the 2nd Amendment the only one of the Bill of Rights that Liberals don’t respect? SCOTUS held in the Heller case and in the McDonald case that we have a right to keep and bear arms without being a member of an organized militia. In McDonald, SCOTUS incorporated the 2nd Amendment against state and local governments.
With the 2013 Alabama Firearms Act, a polling place is not “off limits” to firearms possession. For some reason these little old ladies that run these polling places have a phobia about civilians carrying firearms. They should be more concern about the unchecked growth of the police/paramilitary forces around the nation and their belief that they have a monopoly on the use of force and violence. Legally, the police don’t even have to respond to the old ladies 911 call as they are under no obligation to protect individual members of the public.
Our forefathers, who expelled the British, never gave up their Natural Right to keep and bear arms to the individual states and certainly, a review of the state ratification conventions makes it crystal clear that the states never gave up those rights to the central, federal government.
What is this with the name calling? Why not refer to those who called the police as “gun wusses” and the police who responded as “gun grabbers?”
American Supreme Court Justice and Constitutional scholar Joseph Story wrote:
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the
palladium (a statue of Pallas whose preservation was believed to ensure the safety of Troy) of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and it will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
2 Story, Commentaries at 607.
Why not report the fact without libeling those in the story. It would improve your publication immensely.
Anomaly 100 July 23rd, 2014 at 01:44
Because you have no respect for the public, your neighbors or parents out trying to have a meal with their children. You do not care about consequences. You do not care about whether you frighten kids. You don[t care about the deaths from irresponsible gun ownership. You simply look the other way.
You underestimate us. You think liberals don’t own guns.
We do. We just respect those around us.
Ranger July 23rd, 2014 at 11:08
Guns don’t frighten kids. Kids are fascinated by guns. It’s adults who are scared by inanimate objects and think that somehow guns are only good if they are paired up with a badge or uniform. If you truly respected and cared for your neighbors, you would carry a gun to protect yourself and your fellow man. Somehow, you think it’s the cop’s or military’s job to carry guns and lay down their lives to protect you while you do absolutely nothing about it. That isn’t caring, that’s stinginess and ego.
Anomaly 100 July 23rd, 2014 at 11:13
Guns do frighten people. Read. Listen to others. And mostly, have some damned respect.
“If you truly respected and cared for your neighbors, you would carry a gun to protect yourself and your fellow man.”
My neighbors would not appreciate that. I would not appreciate it if they open carried long guns. But you see, I care about others. Big difference between us!
Ranger July 23rd, 2014 at 12:53
Guns do not scare people. People are around armed cops all the time and do not go running off hysterically. What scares you are armed citizens dimly because they don’t have a badge or uniform. People are carrying concealed around others all the time and because the gun is concealed, “it’s out of sight, out of mind!” I’m not scared of armed citizens because I’m armed. You are scared of armed citizens because you are not armed and instead of sticking up for yourself, protecting yourself and arming yourself, you prefer to disarm everyone else so you won’t have to be bothered with self-defense.
Anomaly 100 July 23rd, 2014 at 13:21
I’m sorry that you can’t read what I wrote. I’ll type slowly for you. Guns scare people. You have issues, my friend. For example, your blatant disrespect for the firearms you own. They were created as weapons, therefore, if I see some dork walking around with a long gun, I’m going to call the police because I don’t know him. I don’t know who the hell he is. He could be anyone at all.
We are not afraid of police because they are doing their damned jobs which we as taxpayers pay them for.
Stick your gun in my face and I’m gonna stand my ground. I respect what a weapon can do and god dammit, they are intimidating to others. The 2nd Amendment is not about bravado. It’s about self-defense.
I don’t respect you or your gun humper friends.
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 11:41
Love the profanity taking God’s name in vain there genius. You’re clearly NOT winning your argument….and never will.
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:39
Liberals (who are actually Progressives as I am an 18th Century Liberal) always use profanity when they start loosing.
Concerned Vegas Citizen August 18th, 2014 at 14:35
“Guns scare people” Why? unless they were taught to be.
So if a black person is intimidating you (solely because they are black), they should not be around you? You don’t like it, leave.
Does the little school bus pick you up directly in front of your house or do they come in and get you?
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 12:11
You say: Guns do frighten people.
Well, some people are afraid of the dark, people with tattoos, horses, dogs, spiders, and list goes on.
Yeah, some are afraid of guns (although I suggest that this usually based in ignorance). Most aren’t afraid but either way, SPEAK ONLY FOR YOURSELF and let everyone else speak for themselves free from your liberal clap trap influence.
To actually exercise a God-given, Constitution-protected right, does not mean actually it’s a bad thing just because someone is, or claims to be, afraid. Moreover, our rights are NOT to be violated because of this minority. These people just need to find a way to deal with their irrational phobia.
P.S. I would carry a cop concealed but they’re a little too heavy and hard to draw when a situation arises.
arc99 July 23rd, 2014 at 11:44
this liberal gun-owner would like to inform you that when you initiate a post with a blatant falsehood
“Why is the 2nd Amendment the only one of the Bill of Rights that Liberals don’t respect?”
you have no moral standing to lecture anyone about improving our publication.
instead of jumping to unfounded conclusions why not take the time to understand that many of your fellow citizens do own firearms, do support sensible gun control laws and want absolutely nothing to do with the zealots running the NRA.
the fact is that no right is absolute. recognizing that fact in no way inidicates lack of respect. critics of gun control demonstrate zero understanding of that basic concept.
no matter how fervently you believe that your first amendment religious beliefs entitle you to take a 12 year old bride, or go the city park on the sabbath at high noon and pray absolutely nude, the law disagrees. those laws are not a lack of respect for the first amendment, they are common sense protections for public safety.
perhaps when anti gun control advocates demonstrate some understanding of that concept it would improve the credibility of your opinions.
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 13:12
Using the U.S. Constitution to justify the gun “controls” you liberals want, define “sensible gun control laws.” Just how will they reconcile with the Constitution?
And if you somehow succeed in getting this “control” or that “control”, what’s the next one gonna look like?
In other words, where or when will you be satisfied?
Considering that we all know the liberal is the only one who “cares” and that we all know that liberals’ policies are aimed at keeping the masses safe, healthy, free from failure and all things bad (even though these policies are so good that they must be mandated or FORCED upon us by the strong arm of the law), just when will we have obtained this utopia you’re so desperately trying to get us to?
You see, the law has no emotion nor should it.
Just know this:
MY view of gun control consists of hitting ONLY what I aim at.
Barry Fitzgerald July 25th, 2014 at 15:06
To ARC 99
When you disparage one open carrier, in many way you disparage us all. Thus, my response to your post to Ranger.
No respect for the public. You don’t even know me or Ranger.
I carry a black FNP in a black, Black Hawk, level 3 retention
holster (so a “criminal” can’t snatch it).
If I am at a dinner table next to you and you or your kids
are starring at me you can see it, but it doesn’t jump out at you. If we are at a “nice restaurant”, probably not because I will have a suit on. But, I am not going to wear a sport’s coat when it is 95 degrees just to “conceal carry” because somebody might be scared.
Why do I carrying a firearm and mostly openly? I am a government official whose position has put myself and my family in danger, all for “serving the public.” Why don’t I wear the badge I have in my wallet on my belt so you won’t be “scared?” Because when I have done that people have come up to me and reported a fellow diner is too drunk to drive, that their husband is abusing them, and asked for help on an assortment of apparent crimes. That’s not in my job description.
I have had more firearms training than 75% of police officers. Why do I prefer to open carry? Because, even with the retention holster, I can draw and fire 2 shots in 1.5 seconds. If I have to dig the FN out of a concealment holster, I’d probably be dead, as would my family.
There lot of us that work in various positions for states
and I suppose counties and cities that have put ourselves and families in very dangerous circumstances because of
our service to the public. You probably have no idea what happens in the “real world” but I do. I don’t carry an AR-15 over my shoulder, but I am going to protect myself and family and try to do it the best way possible. I am sorry if it scares you but the real world should scare you too, if you dealt with it,
As to your comments about the Constitution, they are
bizarre. I think you are still reading Laurence Tribe’s old Constitutional Law textbook on the Constitution.
Frankly, I am not a particularly a fan of the NRA, as they
tend to fear monger in order to raise money.
I often give lectures on Constitutional Law, especially the
Bill of Rights and the relation to the English Bill of Rights of 1689, It is your holier than thou attitude that is insulting. 12 year old brides, how ridicules. I am surprised you didn’t bring up the smoking Peyote case you didn’t say “Shouting fire in a
crowded theater” (The actual quote from Justice Holmes is “Shouting fire in a theater”).
Being a “gun owner” gives you no bona fides, if you
do not understand the reason for this inalienable right.
Supreme Court Justice and Constitutional Scholar Joseph
Story wrote in his 1833 edition of Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§1890–91
“The importance of this article will scarcely be
doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
Both the Heller and McDonald cases have endorsed the individual rights argument. So, while you may give lip service ti the 2nd Amendment, let some two bit judge issue a gag order in a trial, and I bet you would go crazy.
As to morals, I am amazed to hear a liberal use the word,
when our liberal president is murdering people by drones, two of which were U.S. citizens, in direct defiance of the 5th Amendment: “No person…shall be deprived of live liberty or property without due process of law.” Yet, Al-Awarki and his son sure were, based on “secret information.” Do your liberal moral values approve of the NSA shredding the 4h Amendment? What the NSA is doing would make J. Edgar Hoover drool. That’s what I mean about not respecting all Amendments.
I will end by stating that, frankly, you are qualified to
debate me on the Constitution, the history behind it, the English origins, or the Roman underpinnings. But it is amusing to watch you try.
mea_mark July 25th, 2014 at 16:15
If you want to conceal carry or open carry and do it the right way then perhaps you should push for more regulation and not less. It is time to make sure those that are carrying know what they are doing. To many people now want to carry just because. When rights get abused, they get taken away. You really should consider working toward more sensible gun laws to keep the rights you have and want. Those abusing those rights are hurting your position more than anybody else is.
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:37
Don’t you understand our government is one of certain enumerated powers only and the purpose of the United States Government is to preserve, protect, and defend the Liberties of the people? That is hat I do 24/7.
Barry Fitzgerald July 25th, 2014 at 13:49
No respect for the public. You don’t even know me.
I carry a black FNP in a black, Blackhawk level 3 retention holster (so a “criminal” can’t snatch it).
If I am at a dinner table next to you and you or your kids are starring at me you can see it, but it doesn’t jump out at you. If we are at a “nice restaurant”, probably not because I will have a suit on. But I am not going to wear a sport’s coat when it is 95 degrees just to “conceal carry” because somebody might be scared.
Why am I carrying a firearm? I am a government official whose position has put myself and my family in danger, all for “serving the public.” Why don’t I wear the badge I have in my wallet on my belt so you won’t be “scared?” Because when I have done that people have come up to me and reported a fellow diner is too drunk to drive, that their husband is abusing them, and asked for help on an assortment of apparent crimes. That’s not in my job description.
I have had more firearms training than 75% of police officers. Why do I prefer to open carry? Because, even with the retention holster, I can draw and fire 2 shots in 1.5 seconds. If I have to dig the FN out of a concealment holster, I’d probably be dead, as would my family.
There lot of us that work in various positions for states and I suppose counties and cities that have put ourselves and families in very dangerous circumstances because of our service to the public. You probably have no idea what happens in the “real world” but I do. I don’t carry an AR-15 over my shoulder, but I am going to protect myself and family and try to do it the best way possible. I am sorry if it scares you but the real world should scare you too if you dealt with it,
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 12:19
All emotion and opinion….no substance whatsoever
Anomaly 100 July 24th, 2014 at 12:39
Oh lookie, a fake patriot weighs on to say that my points are not relevant because he has the right to disrespect We The People.
Barry Fitzgerald July 25th, 2014 at 14:46
REPLY TO ANOMALY 100
No respect for the public. You don’t even know me.
I carry a black FNP in a black, Black Hawk level 3 retention holster (so a “criminal” can’t snatch it).
If I am at a dinner table next to you and you or your kids are starring at me you can see it, but it doesn’t jump out at you. If we are at a “nice restaurant”, probably not because I will have a suit on. But I am not going to wear a sport’s coat when it is 95 degrees just to “conceal carry” because somebody might be scared.
Why do I carrying a firearm? I am a government official whose position has put myself and my family in danger, all for “serving the public.” Why don’t I wear the badge I have in my wallet on my belt so you won’t be “scared?” Because when I have done that people have come up to me and reported a fellow diner is too drunk to drive, that their husband is abusing them, and asked for help on an assortment of apparent crimes. That’s not in my job description.
I have had more firearms training than 75% of police officers. Why do I prefer to open carry? Because, even with the retention holster, I can draw and fire 2 shots in 1.5 seconds. If I have to dig the FN out of a concealment holster, I’d probably be dead, as would my family.
There lot of us that work in various positions for states and I suppose counties and cities that have put ourselves and families in very dangerous circumstances because of our service to the public. You probably have no idea what happens in the “real world” but I do. I don’t carry an AR-15 over my shoulder, but I am going to protect myself and family and try to do it the best way possible. I am sorry if it scares you but the real world should scare you too if you dealt with it,
As to your comments about the Constitution, they are bizarre. I think you are still reading Laurence Tribe’s old Constitutional Law textbook on the Constitution.
Frankly, I am not a particularly a fan of the NRA, as they tend to fear monger in order to raise money.
I often give lectures on Constitutional Law, especially the Bill of Rights and the relation to the English Bill of Rights of 1688, It is your holier than thou attitude that is insulting. 12 year old brides, how ridicules. I am surprised you didn’t bring up the smoking Peyote case you didn’t say “Shouting fire in a crowded theater” (The actual quote from Justice Holmes is “Shouting fire in a theater”).
Being a “gun owner” gives you no bona fides if you do not understand the reason for this inalienable tight.
Supreme Court Justice and Constitutional Scholar Joseph Story wrote in his 1833 edition of Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890–91
“The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
Both Heller and McDonald cases have endorsed the individual rights argument. So, while you may give lip service ti the 2nd Amendment, let some two bit judge issue a gag order in a trial, and I bet you would go crazy.
As to morals, I am amazed to hear a liberal use the word, when our liberal president is murdering people by drones, two of which were U.S. citizens, in direct defiance of the 5th Amendment: “No person…shall be deprived of live liberty or property without due process of law.” Ye Al-Awarki and his son sure were, based on “secret information.” Do your liberal moral values approve of the NSA shredding the 4h Amendment? What the NSA is doing would make J. Edgar Hoover drool. That’s what I mean about not respecting all Amendments.
I will end by stating that quit frankly, you are qualified to debate me on the Constitution, the history behind it, the English origins, or the Roman underpinnings. But it is amusing to watch you try.
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:30
Your are my kind of guy. I have an FNP-9
Concerned Vegas Citizen August 18th, 2014 at 14:30
Sorry to hear you kids were brought up in a sheltered, closed life, (sounds like mental illness candidates) Maybe you should be teaching your kids better about guns?
Barry Fitzgerald July 23rd, 2014 at 01:37
Why is the 2nd Amendment the only one of the Bill of Rights that Liberals don’t respect? SCOTUS held in the Heller case and in the McDonald case that we have a right to keep and bear arms without being a member of an organized militia. In McDonald, SCOTUS incorporated the 2nd Amendment against state and local governments.
With the 2013 Alabama Firearms Act, a polling place is not “off limits” to firearms possession. For some reason these little old ladies that run these polling places have a phobia about civilians carrying firearms. They should be more concern about the unchecked growth of the police/paramilitary forces around the nation and their belief that they have a monopoly on the use of force and violence. Legally, the police don’t even have to respond to the old ladies 911 call as they are under no obligation to protect individual members of the public.
Our forefathers, who expelled the British, never gave up their Natural Right to keep and bear arms to the individual states and certainly, a review of the state ratification conventions makes it crystal clear that the states never gave up those rights to the central, federal government.
What is this with the name calling? Why not refer to those who called the police as “gun wusses” and the police who responded as “gun grabbers?”
American Supreme Court Justice and Constitutional scholar Joseph Story wrote:
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the
palladium (a statue of Pallas whose preservation was believed to ensure the safety of Troy) of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and it will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
2 Story, Commentaries at 607.
Why not report the facts without libeling those in the story? It would improve your publication immensely.
Anomaly 100 July 23rd, 2014 at 01:44
Because you have no respect for the public, your neighbors or parents out trying to have a meal with their children. You do not care about consequences. You do not care about whether you frighten kids. You don[t care about the deaths from irresponsible gun ownership. You simply look the other way.
You underestimate us. You think liberals don’t own guns.
We do. We just respect those around us.
Ranger July 23rd, 2014 at 11:08
Guns don’t frighten kids. Kids are fascinated by guns. It’s adults who are scared by inanimate objects and think that somehow guns are only good if they are paired up with a badge or uniform. If you truly respected and cared for your neighbors, you would carry a gun to protect yourself and your fellow man. Somehow, you think it’s the cop’s or military’s job to carry guns and lay down their lives to protect you while you do absolutely nothing about it. That isn’t caring, that’s stinginess and ego.
Anomaly 100 July 23rd, 2014 at 11:13
Guns do frighten people. Read. Listen to others. And mostly, have some damned respect.
“If you truly respected and cared for your neighbors, you would carry a gun to protect yourself and your fellow man.”
My neighbors would not appreciate that. I would not appreciate it if they open carried long guns. But you see, I care about others. Big difference between us!
Ranger July 23rd, 2014 at 12:53
Guns do not scare people. People are around armed cops all the time and do not go running off hysterically. What scares you are armed citizens dimly because they don’t have a badge or uniform. People are carrying concealed around others all the time and because the gun is concealed, “it’s out of sight, out of mind!” I’m not scared of armed citizens because I’m armed. You are scared of armed citizens because you are not armed and instead of sticking up for yourself, protecting yourself and arming yourself, you prefer to disarm everyone else so you won’t have to be bothered with self-defense.
Anomaly 100 July 23rd, 2014 at 13:21
I’m sorry that you can’t read what I wrote. I’ll type slowly for you. Guns scare people. You have issues, my friend. For example, your blatant disrespect for the firearms you own. They were created as weapons, therefore, if I see some dork walking around with a long gun, I’m going to call the police because I don’t know him. I don’t know who the hell he is. He could be anyone at all.
We are not afraid of police because they are doing their damned jobs which we as taxpayers pay them for.
Stick your gun in my face and I’m gonna stand my ground. I respect what a weapon can do and god dammit, they are intimidating to others. The 2nd Amendment is not about bravado. It’s about self-defense.
I don’t respect you or your gun humper friends.
Again, you just suggested that we “liberals’ do not own weapons. You’re a special kind of stupid and you are the reason I don’t waste my breath with extremists.
Conversation over.
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 11:41
Love the profanity taking God’s name in vain there genius. You’re clearly NOT winning your argument….and never will.
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:39
Liberals (who are actually Progressives as I am an 18th Century Liberal) always use profanity when they start loosing.
Concerned Vegas Citizen August 18th, 2014 at 14:35
“Guns scare people” Why? unless they were taught to be.
So if a black person is intimidating you (solely because they are black), they should not be around you? You don’t like it, leave.
Does the little school bus pick you up directly in front of your house or do they come in and get you?
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 12:11
You say: Guns do frighten people.
Well, some people are afraid of the dark, people with tattoos, horses, dogs, spiders, and list goes on.
Yeah, some are afraid of guns (although I suggest that this usually based in ignorance). Most aren’t afraid but either way, SPEAK ONLY FOR YOURSELF and let everyone else speak for themselves free from your liberal clap trap influence.
To actually exercise a God-given, Constitution-protected right, does not mean actually it’s a bad thing just because someone is, or claims to be, afraid. Moreover, our rights are NOT to be violated because of this minority. These people just need to find a way to deal with their irrational phobia.
P.S. I would carry a cop concealed but they’re a little too heavy and hard to draw when a situation arises.
arc99 July 23rd, 2014 at 11:44
this liberal gun-owner would like to inform you that when you initiate a post with a blatant falsehood
“Why is the 2nd Amendment the only one of the Bill of Rights that Liberals don’t respect?”
you have no moral standing to lecture anyone about improving our publication.
instead of jumping to unfounded conclusions why not take the time to understand that many of your fellow citizens do own firearms, do support sensible gun control laws and want absolutely nothing to do with the zealots running the NRA.
the fact is that no right is absolute. recognizing that fact in no way inidicates lack of respect. critics of gun control demonstrate zero understanding of that basic concept.
no matter how fervently you believe that your first amendment religious beliefs entitle you to take a 12 year old bride, or go the city park on the sabbath at high noon and pray absolutely nude, the law disagrees. those laws are not a lack of respect for the first amendment, they are common sense protections for public safety.
perhaps when anti gun control advocates demonstrate some understanding of that concept it would improve the credibility of your opinions.
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 13:12
Using the U.S. Constitution to justify the gun “controls” you liberals want, define “sensible gun control laws.” Just how will they reconcile with the Constitution?
And if you somehow succeed in getting this “control” or that “control”, what’s the next one gonna look like?
In other words, where or when will you be satisfied?
Considering that we all know the liberal is the only one who “cares” and that we all know that liberals’ policies are aimed at keeping the masses safe, healthy, free from failure and all things bad (even though these policies are so good that they must be mandated or FORCED upon us by the strong arm of the law), just when will we have obtained this utopia you’re so desperately trying to get us to?
You see, the law has no emotion nor should it.
Just know this:
MY view of gun control consists of hitting ONLY what I aim at.
Barry Fitzgerald July 25th, 2014 at 15:06
To ARC 99
When you disparage one open carrier, in many ways you disparage us all. Thus, my response to your post to Ranger.
No respect for the public. You don’t even know me or Ranger.
I carry a black FNP in a black, Black Hawk, level 3 retention
holster (so a “criminal” can’t snatch it).
If I am at a dinner table next to you and you or your kids
are staring at me you can see it, but it doesn’t jump out at you. If we are at a “nice restaurant”, probably not because I will have a suit on. But, I am not going to wear a sport’s coat when it is 95 degrees just to “conceal carry” because somebody might be scared.
Why do I carrying a firearm and mostly openly? I am a government official whose position has put myself and my family in danger, all for “serving the public.” Why don’t I wear the badge I have in my wallet on my belt so you won’t be “scared?” Because when I have done that people have come up to me and reported a fellow diner is too drunk to drive, that their husband is abusing them, and asked for help on an assortment of apparent crimes. That’s not in my job description.
I have had more firearms training than 75% of police officers. Why do I prefer to open carry? Because, even with the retention holster, I can draw and fire 2 shots in 1.5 seconds. If I have to dig the FN out of a concealment holster, I’d probably be dead, as would my family.
There lot of us that work in various positions for states
and I suppose counties and cities that have put ourselves and families in very dangerous circumstances because of
our service to the public. You probably have no idea what happens in the “real world” but I do. I don’t carry an AR-15 over my shoulder, but I am going to protect myself and family and try to do it the best way possible. I am sorry if it scares you but the real world should scare you too, if you dealt with it,
As to your comments about the Constitution, they are
bizarre. I think you are still reading Laurence Tribe’s old Constitutional Law textbook on the Constitution.
Frankly, I am not a particularly a fan of the NRA, as they
tend to fear monger in order to raise money.
I often give lectures on Constitutional Law, especially the
Bill of Rights and the relation to the English Bill of Rights of 1689, It is your holier than thou attitude that is insulting. 12 year old brides, how ridicules. I am surprised you didn’t bring up the smoking Peyote case you didn’t say “Shouting fire in a
crowded theater” (The actual quote from Justice Holmes is “Shouting fire in a theater”).
Being a “gun owner” gives you no bona fides, if you
do not understand the reason for this inalienable right.
Supreme Court Justice and Constitutional Scholar Joseph
Story wrote in his 1833 edition of Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§1890–91
“The importance of this article will scarcely be
doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
Both the Heller and McDonald cases have endorsed the individual rights argument. So, while you may give lip service ti the 2nd Amendment, let some two bit judge issue a gag order in a trial, and I bet you would go crazy.
As to morals, I am amazed to hear a liberal use the word,
when our liberal president is murdering people by drones, two of which were U.S. citizens, in direct defiance of the 5th Amendment: “No person…shall be deprived of live liberty or property without due process of law.” Yet, Al-Awarki and his son sure were, based on “secret information.” Do your liberal moral values approve of the NSA shredding the 4h Amendment? What the NSA is doing would make J. Edgar Hoover drool. That’s what I mean about not respecting all Amendments.
I will end by stating that, frankly, you are not qualified to
debate me on the Constitution, the history behind it, the English origins, or the Roman underpinnings. But it is amusing to watch you try.
mea_mark July 25th, 2014 at 16:15
If you want to conceal carry or open carry and do it the right way then perhaps you should push for more regulation and not less. It is time to make sure those that are carrying know what they are doing. To many people now want to carry just because. When rights get abused, they get taken away. You really should consider working toward more sensible gun laws to keep the rights you have and want. Those abusing those rights are hurting your position more than anybody else is.
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:37
Don’t you understand our government is one of certain enumerated powers only and the purpose of the United States Government is to preserve, protect, and defend the Liberties of the people? That is what I do 24/7.
Guest July 25th, 2014 at 13:49
No respect for the public. You don’t even know me.
I carry a black FNP in a black, Black Hawk level 3 retention holster (so a “criminal” can’t snatch it).
If I am at a dinner table next to you and you or your kids are starring at me you can see it, but it doesn’t jump out at you. If we are at a “nice restaurant”, probably not because I will have a suit on. But I am not going to wear a sport’s coat when it is 95 degrees just to “conceal carry” because somebody might be scared.
Why do I carrying a firearm? I am a government official whose position has put myself and my family in danger, all for “serving the public.” Why don’t I wear the badge I have in my wallet on my belt so you won’t be “scared?” Because when I have done that people have come up to me and reported a fellow diner is too drunk to drive, that their husband is abusing them, and asked for help on an assortment of apparent crimes. That’s not in my job description.
I have had more firearms training than 75% of police officers. Why do I prefer to open carry? Because, even with the retention holster, I can draw and fire 2 shots in 1.5 seconds. If I have to dig the FN out of a concealment holster, I’d probably be dead, as would my family.
There lot of us that work in various positions for states and I suppose counties and cities that have put ourselves and families in very dangerous circumstances because of our service to the public. You probably have no idea what happens in the “real world” but I do. I don’t carry an AR-15 over my shoulder, but I am going to protect myself and family and try to do it the best way possible. I am sorry if it scares you but the real world should scare you too if you dealt with it,
As to your comments about the Constitution, they are bizarre. I think you are still reading Laurence Tribe’s old Constitutional Law textbook on the Constitution.
Frankly, I am not a particularly a fan of the NRA, as they tend to fear monger in order to raise money.
I often give lectures on Constitutional Law, especially the Bill of Rights and the relation to the English Bill of Rights of 1688, It is your holier than thou attitude that is insulting. 12 year old brides, how ridicules. I am surprised you didn’t bring up the smoking Peyote case you didn’t say “Shouting fire in a crowded theater” (The actual quote from Justice Holmes is “Shouting fire in a theater”).
Being a “gun owner” gives you no bona fides if you do not understand the reason for this inalienable tight.
Supreme Court Justice and Constitutional Scholar Joseph Story wrote in his 1833 edition of Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890–91
“The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
Both Heller and McDonald cases have endorsed the individual rights argument. So, while you may give lip service ti the 2nd Amendment, let some two bit judge issue a gag order in a trial, and I bet you would go crazy.
As to morals, I am amazed to hear a liberal use the word, when our liberal president is murdering people by drones, two of which were U.S. citizens, in direct defiance of the 5th Amendment: “No person…shall be deprived of live liberty or property without due process of law.” Ye Al-Awarki and his son sure were, based on “secret information.” Do your liberal moral values approve of the NSA shredding the 4h Amendment? What the NSA is doing would make J. Edgar Hoover drool. That’s what I mean about not respecting all Amendments.
I will end by stating that quit frankly, you are qualified to debate me on the Constitution, the history behind it, the English origins, or the Roman underpinnings. But it is amusing to watch you try.
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 12:19
All emotion and opinion….no substance whatsoever
Anomaly 100 July 24th, 2014 at 12:39
Oh lookie, a fake patriot weighs on to say that my points are not relevant because he has the right to disrespect We The People.
Guest July 25th, 2014 at 14:46
REPLY TO ANOMALY 100
No respect for the public. You don’t even know me.
I carry a black FNP in a black, Black Hawk level 3 retention holster (so a “criminal” can’t snatch it).
If I am at a dinner table next to you and you or your kids are starring at me you can see it, but it doesn’t jump out at you. If we are at a “nice restaurant”, probably not because I will have a suit on. But I am not going to wear a sport’s coat when it is 95 degrees just to “conceal carry” because somebody might be scared.
Why do I carrying a firearm? I am a government official whose position has put myself and my family in danger, all for “serving the public.” Why don’t I wear the badge I have in my wallet on my belt so you won’t be “scared?” Because when I have done that people have come up to me and reported a fellow diner is too drunk to drive, that their husband is abusing them, and asked for help on an assortment of apparent crimes. That’s not in my job description.
I have had more firearms training than 75% of police officers. Why do I prefer to open carry? Because, even with the retention holster, I can draw and fire 2 shots in 1.5 seconds. If I have to dig the FN out of a concealment holster, I’d probably be dead, as would my family.
There lot of us that work in various positions for states and I suppose counties and cities that have put ourselves and families in very dangerous circumstances because of our service to the public. You probably have no idea what happens in the “real world” but I do. I don’t carry an AR-15 over my shoulder, but I am going to protect myself and family and try to do it the best way possible. I am sorry if it scares you but the real world should scare you too if you dealt with it,
As to your comments about the Constitution, they are bizarre. I think you are still reading Laurence Tribe’s old Constitutional Law textbook on the Constitution.
Frankly, I am not a particularly a fan of the NRA, as they tend to fear monger in order to raise money.
I often give lectures on Constitutional Law, especially the Bill of Rights and the relation to the English Bill of Rights of 1688, It is your holier than thou attitude that is insulting. 12 year old brides, how ridicules. I am surprised you didn’t bring up the smoking Peyote case you didn’t say “Shouting fire in a crowded theater” (The actual quote from Justice Holmes is “Shouting fire in a theater”).
Being a “gun owner” gives you no bona fides if you do not understand the reason for this inalienable tight.
Supreme Court Justice and Constitutional Scholar Joseph Story wrote in his 1833 edition of Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890–91
“The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
Both Heller and McDonald cases have endorsed the individual rights argument. So, while you may give lip service ti the 2nd Amendment, let some two bit judge issue a gag order in a trial, and I bet you would go crazy.
As to morals, I am amazed to hear a liberal use the word, when our liberal president is murdering people by drones, two of which were U.S. citizens, in direct defiance of the 5th Amendment: “No person…shall be deprived of live liberty or property without due process of law.” Ye Al-Awarki and his son sure were, based on “secret information.” Do your liberal moral values approve of the NSA shredding the 4h Amendment? What the NSA is doing would make J. Edgar Hoover drool. That’s what I mean about not respecting all Amendments.
I will end by stating that quit frankly, you are qualified to debate me on the Constitution, the history behind it, the English origins, or the Roman underpinnings. But it is amusing to watch you try.
Anomaly 100 July 25th, 2014 at 15:54
“You don’t even know me.”
I know you’re name is ‘Guest.’
I don’t read comments from unregistered Disqus users.
Thanks!
Barry Fitzgerald August 16th, 2014 at 12:30
Your are my kind of guy. I have an FNP-9
Concerned Vegas Citizen August 18th, 2014 at 14:30
Sorry to hear you kids were brought up in a sheltered, closed life, (sounds like mental illness candidates) Maybe you should be teaching your kids better about guns?
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 12:17
Wow, after reading only a few comments here, it’s blatantly and sickeningly clear that what I’ve been told many times is actually true…..liberalism IS actually an illness….a mental illness. I didn’t need the confirmation but…….
P.S. the liberalism I speak of is NOT in any way, shape, or form the “classic” liberalism of our Founders.
Individual Patriot July 24th, 2014 at 12:17
Wow, after reading only a few comments here, it’s blatantly and sickeningly clear that what I’ve been told many times is actually true…..liberalism IS actually an illness….a mental illness. I didn’t need the confirmation but…….
P.S. the liberalism I speak of is NOT in any way, shape, or form the “classic” liberalism of our Founders.
searambler October 29th, 2014 at 20:14
“There was a sign which stated that firearms were prohibited, but election officials opted to allow Kennedy to vote while wearing his gun.”
White man’s privilege, of course. Had he been black, he’d still be in jail today…
searambler October 29th, 2014 at 20:14
“There was a sign which stated that firearms were prohibited, but election officials opted to allow Kennedy to vote while wearing his gun.”
White man’s privilege, of course. Had he been black, he’d still be in jail today…