« A Grownup Weighs in on Chairman Zero's Historic Hubris | Main | The Constitution Reduced to Two Words »

The only thing they understand is violence. It's time to start cracking their heads for a change.

If they are supporters and enforcers for Obama, you can bet your ass they are communist and cowards.

This is the Obama tactical response team that only beats up the elderly.

To create a struggle between the BOURGEOIS AND PROLETARIANS is the goal of the ruling oligarchy. Rather than creating an expensive Gestapo like force to destroy the nation the existing population is turned upon itself so that later on the oligarchy appears to be the only solution....

Communism at work ta da!

Typical Leftist / Union / Community Organizer / Black Panther / Acorn style thuggery.

Nancy Pelosi feigns outrage at people who come to town hall meetings and ask tough questions - but yet she turns a blind eye to this - and so does Big Media.

The police are reluctant to step in because the Lefties will scream bloody murder that their rights are being violated. They actually train their people to claim police brutality / civil rights violation at the slightest provocation.

Time for floradans be allowed to excerse the 2nd amendment rights and send a few of those dirty illegal alien supporters to a new perimate residence THE CEMETARY

"Time for floradans be allowed to excerse the 2nd amendment rights and send a few of those dirty illegal alien supporters to a new perimate residence THE CEMETARY

Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER at November 16, 2009 9:14 PM"

That is exactly the plan but what you are likely to see is the arming of the proletarians sooner than the constitutionally abiding Citizens. This is how the purges will start in the street.

I've been to several tea parties in FL.

Ganging up on a conservative Floridian is a horrible, horrible idea. Gang assaults with a large disparity of force, age, and/or strength may constitute an aggravated assault. Floridians have no duty to retreat before using deadly force to stop the commission of a forcible felony.

Consider that demographic - conservative, patriot activists in the state with the nation's most 2A-friendly laws.

If Marxist goons continue to play Russian roulette by committing these savage assaults, they're bound to eventually be on the business end of the Second Amendment.

From what I saw in the video, a group of people is ganging up on an older man, and doing so in the middle of the street. That is an extraordinarily obvious example of aggravated assault, due to the disparity of force and chance of serious bodily harm.

Stupid does not even begin to describe these actions.

"ANSWER is a communist front group"

Self defense against fascist thugs should have been the story. Teabaggers don't foment violence; teabaggers don't pick the fights.

If you are a Tea Party Patriot and you are attacked, treat it like any common mugging.

If the fight starts, guarantee your win. Period.

At your next tea party, I suggest everyone packs the .45 ACP (Anti-Communist Projectile). The G21's 13+1 capacity should be enough to stop serious assaults.

Patriots, if you don't have your concealed carry license, then learn the law and get one.

The left continues to be responsible for 100% of the recent political violence against those who want to peacefully speak out against the Marxist agenda. The violence has been increasing. Everyone, whether conservative or liberal, has the right to self-defense against those who would feloniously squelch their right to speak.

"Anonymous Countermoonbat"

Appears to be a troll.
Because the phrase: "everyone packs the .45 ACP" is incongruent to conservatism.

This author intends to draw commenters down a violent path, only to hold it against folks who also share your opinion. It is an attempt to create embarrassment by bullshit.

To Joe Lender - I loath the term "teabagger" - it is a liberal homosexual slur of the lowest order used against heterosexual patriots.

Back on topic -
That is a demonstration of the typical liberals' answer to free speech - those pussy-thugs are doing what all liberals wish they could do.

That's why I detest liberalism. It is an ideology of thuggery at its absolute lowest.

But I expect the resident liberal dumbasses to show up at any second to defend their comrades.

I'm not yet 62, but I damn sure wish a few of those lowlife punks would try that with me.

"Joe Lender"

Appears to be a troll.

Between the Freudian slip "teabagger" and the inability to understand that encouraging people to exercise their natural right to not be the victim of a potentially deadly group assault in the middle of the street is not the same as encouraging violence, you are obviously here to stir up trouble.

Since you seem to neither know or care about the right of self-defense, it is not shocking that you missed the joke referencing the long-standing debate over caliber. Liberal trolls like you certainly wouldn't pick up on a 2A community shibboleth.

If you can't see the difference between an incitement to violence and a call for people to not be victims of a gang assault in the middle of the street, then take off your moonbat-tinted lenses and come back to reality.

Everyone has the right to peaceably assemble. When a group of people, regardless of their affiliation, chooses to administer a savage beating in the middle of the street to an outnumbered political opponent, that opponent should exercise their Second Amendment rights to be sure that nobody infringes the exercise of their First Amendment rights.

That is one reason why we have the Second Amendment.

So what kind of gun is best for your neighborhood?
Potential of attack?
Defense value beyond one's own life?
Costs of bullets?

Common not Common: Interlopers as Hamburgers: lol

I could totally picture spineless Leftist (yet I repeat myself again) trolls like Andy Zipcode, GoW, Lao, Meh, brs, paget, ad nauseaum attacking a defenseless old man and kicking them while they're down.

Coward, cowards, cowards every last one of them as well as our resident scumbag trolls.

What is a Freudian slip?

I presented: "You are an idiot."
YOU: Play with your own feces.

In the State of Arkansas we are preparing to embark on a petition drive to limit benefits to illegal aliens - yes, we're all prepared for the worst. I feel extremely sorry for the people who deem to believe we're not serious.

Now we see how Communism operates first hand. Posters here are destablised and confront each other. The call to arms was given up by the population and replaced by police forces and military operations. On the one hand you should protect yourself but when it comes to protests if you bring a gun to a "Peaceful Assembly" you can expect the police and military to turn you into a greasy spot. First we must protest in mass and remain fixed on the prize. If at some point the subversives arm themselves and the government supports it than you can take off the gloves. At the moment though you are being baited and in this way patriotic Americans will be made the villains.

That is how Communism works through the instigation of a bloody revolution.

Yep. JL is a troll alright. Rather that attempting to clarify, it attacks.

LOL! Silly liberal. Kicked any old men in the face today, little joe?

Alpha - Americans have the Constitutional right to self defense anywhere! Even at "peaceful assemblies". Don't try to tell us when and where we may defend ourselves.

On the one hand you should protect yourself but when it comes to protests if you bring a gun to a "Peaceful Assembly" you can expect the police and military to turn you into a greasy spot.

The problem with that lies in the definition of "peaceful assembly."

When peaceful people show up to protest peacefully, there is no guarantee that the assembly will be peaceful. By definition, all it takes is one instigator to turn a peaceful assembly into a brawl, regardless of how many people came to that assembly with good intentions.

Therefore, the existence of a "peaceful assembly" (as a matter of definition) is completely dependent on the will of those most opposed to it.

As we have seen here, the ability of a militant group to spoil the peace for everyone else requires that good people be perpetually vigilant against aggressors.

As they say, there is no such thing as a "safe neighborhood", only "safer neighborhoods." The same thing could be said of order at assemblies.

RE: Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 16, 2009 9:29 PM

AC recommends the "....45 ACP (Anti-Communist Projectile)."

I've always been a huge fan of John Moses Browning and his masterpiece, the M1911A1. By the time I was in the Army and carrying a sidearm, we had gone over to the M9, but when I feel the need and can find a discreet way to carry it, the big old military-style .45 is my "weapon of choice", as the popular saying goes.

Can't say I've ever heard the .45 Automatic Colt Pistol (ACP) round referred to as an "Anti-Communist Projectile" before - but I like it! HA!!

BTW, my local police department just went seriously against the grain and switched over to the Glock in .45 ACP. Gotta love it!

"Alpha - Americans have the Constitutional right to self defense anywhere! Even at "peaceful assemblies". Don't try to tell us when and where we may defend ourselves.

Posted by: Jimbo at November 16, 2009 10:32 PM"

Anywhere? So in my state one must obtain a permit to carry but those are no longer issued. We must also obtain an ID card in order to buy both long and short guns. So is it your contention that we should break our local, county and state laws to shoot people in the streets? Are you suggesting that protestors should ARM themselves at marches and events through the open or conceal carry method? Do you understand what communism really is?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Here is the rub...
The government is no longer "ABRIDGING" anything should the peaceably assembled folks start shooting. Essentially, the government can and will use force if you do. Are you protesting or are you intent on an armed conflict?

The goal is to instigate an armed conflict between any available groups and so many simply take the bait. They get your ire up with ease and they are unarmed, organized thugs who in this goal succeeded in their mission.

So in my state one must obtain a permit to carry but those are no longer issued. We must also obtain an ID card in order to buy both long and short guns. So is it your contention that we should break our local, county and state laws to shoot people in the streets?

The unconstitutional moonbattery in your state doesn't change the wisdom and necessity of being armed - it only makes it less than practical in this situation, and something to be avoided.

It sounds like you have another reason to protest. Namely, the moonbats in your state who seem to have forgotten the meaning of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Do you understand what communism really is?

Communism is a totalitarian ideology that grinds the individual under the iron heel of statist thuggery. Communism is antithetical to human liberty. In this video, Communism showed its willingness to deliver a group beating to an elderly political opponent based solely on his political beliefs.

If that doesn't necessitate the right of the people to keep and bear arms, then what does? (your state choosing to infringe that right is another matter entirely)

“Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 16, 2009 11:03 PM”

The 2nd Amendment is not the 1st Amendment. Armed protestors will be met by force and so the communists will win. Your rhetoric is silly since it will get you dead! Then I do believe I was directing the Communist question to another poster. The simple truth is the USA is an Oligarchy already and what is worse it is leaning directly into Global Communism and World Government. Communism is in short “Demand Destruction”

or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

"Peaceably" is a modifier describing the actions of those assembling to air their views. It is not a limiter allowing government to strip the rights from all those assembled because one person there against the original assembly chose to break the peace.

People have the right to peaceably assemble, as the Tea Party Patriots have done. People also have the right to keep and bear arms for their self-defense, as the Tea Party Patriots should do if they come under felonious assault.

The self-defense component is not fundamentally dependent on politics. Nobody here is suggesting that a commie be shot under circumstances that a would-be mugger or rapist wouldn't. Would-be violent felons should be stopped with equal opportunity, using whatever force is legal and necessary to do so.

Have you ever heard the phrase, "Shoot to stop, not to kill."? That is the cornerstone of the self-defense ideology. The goal is to end the aggressor's assault on the personal liberty of another.

The government is no longer "ABRIDGING" anything should the peaceably assembled folks start shooting. Essentially, the government can and will use force if you do. Are you protesting or are you intent on an armed conflict?

You are missing the point entirely.

The government does not have the right to abridge the rights of those who come in peace to air their grievances.

It also does not have the right to disarm citizens and deny them their right of self-defense, even though some moonbat states frequently do so.

Nobody here is advocating the initiation of violent conflict. The Communists in the video began the violence. They had no right to savagely beat that man in the middle of the street.

He should have defended himself.

What you are missing is that armed patriots who peaceably assemble are armed because it is their right to be, not because they came to the protest to cause trouble. Why should somebody who is licensed to carry, and who carries everywhere else, disarm themselves at a protest that has already drawn violence initiated by the left?

Once again, YOUR right to peaceably assemble is not abridged if SOMEONE ELSE initiates the violence.

If you want to complain about rights being abridged, you should contact your local NRA chapter to help bring about a restoration of the Second Amendment in whatever Peoples' Republic of a state you live in, that is currently violating your rights by choosing to license firearms as though they were a privilege.

The 2nd Amendment is not the 1st Amendment. Armed protestors will be met by force and so the communists will win. Your rhetoric is silly since it will get you dead! Then I do believe I was directing the Communist question to another poster. The simple truth is the USA is an Oligarchy already and what is worse it is leaning directly into Global Communism and World Government. Communism is in short “Demand Destruction”

If anything has the potential to bring about Communism, it is an under-armed citizenry. Maoist revolutionaries would not have been able to exterminate 70 million people in China were the people of China armed like citizens of the USA.

Yes, the forces of global Marxism are trying to make a power grab here, as they have in the past, and have elsewhere, albeit through political means. That is all the more reason to exercise your Second Amendment rights.

If anything will get us killed under the iron heel of Communism, it is the same passive mentality taken by the victims of Communism throughout history.

What puts the Second Amendment on different footing than the First Amendment? What part of the Constitution says that, and what exactly are the details? Right, that isn't in the Constitution. The bias against the Second Amendment comes from progressive/Marxist politicians backed up by an activist judiciary.

By the way, it might come as a surprise to you, but many of the pro-liberty assemblies, in the free states, are packed with citizens carrying lawful concealed weapons.

You probably heard about some of the tales of open carry at protests. Nothing happened. Nobody got shot, because there were no dangerous threats in need of shooting.

Most states don't allow OC, and most gun owners who carry don't OC. You might be shocked, SHOCKED if you knew how many citizens actually exercise their rights.

Concealed means concealed.

Do you realize that, at some of these rallies, there were literally hundreds or thousands of people carrying concealed weapons? They were "armed protesters", as you say, but they were not met with force, nor was there anything the law could do to stop them.

Why? They weren't there to initiate violence. They were there to peaceably make their views known. Their choice to be prepared for self-defense at a protest is no different than being prepared at a grocery store, at the bank, or at any other public location in which they have the lawful right to carry.

"Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 16, 2009 11:14 PM"

An issue that you fail to understand is that the goal of the Communists or any other subversive group is to get you to go home and get your 45 or whatever and then They Win. They hope to portray Americans as hot headed rednecks who need to be disarmed since they will even shoot unarmed protestors who got into a fist fight.

Your vigilante thinking that shooting people you disagree with helps to make "THEIR POINT" and so you lose. They win and you lose!

Let's end with this:

"One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that ‘violence begets violence.’ I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure—and in some cases I have—that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy." - Lt. Col. Jeff Cooper, USMC

"Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 16, 2009 11:27 PM"

What I realize is that starting with the Red Amendment all of the Rights were converted into mere Privileges. Beyond this all you are doing is helping the Communists or subversives or whatever you choose to call them to WIN. How I feel about guns and if I own guns is not at issue. The issue is that if you want to gain support than by all means get your troops together and go town to town and kill all the Communists you like! If on the other hand you choose to go to a protest then the protection you seek must come from the police!

An issue that you fail to understand is that the goal of the Communists or any other subversive group is to get you to go home and get your 45 or whatever and then They Win.

Go home and get my .45? I would be changing my behavior if I didn't have it. With the exception of a few restricted places I never go anyway, it is as ubiquitous as my cell phone, my keys, or my wallet.

Should I change my behavior so that some Commies aren't offended by a lawful concealed weapon they can't see anyway? What sort of deranged, politically correct garbage is that?

They hope to portray Americans as hot headed rednecks who need to be disarmed since they will even shoot unarmed protestors who got into a fist fight.

They will portray anyone as anything if that is what it takes to bring about totalitarian Communism in this country.

Patriots who wish to see this not happen must exercise their rights, the PC ramifications of doing so be damned.

Your vigilante thinking that shooting people you disagree with helps to make "THEIR POINT" and so you lose. They win and you lose!

Where is the vigilante thinking? I suggested that a Floridian not be the victim of a felonious gang beating, because Floridians have the right to defend themselves from group beatings that constitute aggravated assaults.

Are you not aware of the concept of "disparity of force"? This was not a simple fistfight.

You better read up on Florida law:

FS 776.013(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

That isn't vigilantism according to the law, nor do I see any reason to blame a citizen for using whatever force is necessary to stop a group assault, with an extreme disparity of force, in the middle of the street.

What do you want them to do? Submit to the Communist beating, and hope not to die, because that is the PC thing to do?

If on the other hand you choose to go to a protest then the protection you seek must come from the police!

You mean like how the police failed to protect Kenneth Gladney from a racially-charged beating at the hands of the SEIU. How about how the DA has dithered on bringing those who assaulted Gladney to justice?

The police cannot be everywhere at once. In the vast majority of crimes, the police show up afterward to take a report. A police report does not undo victimization.

What is your plan for dealing with some crack-addled mugger who would stab you over $20? Should that plan be any differently than some adrenaline-addled Commie who would stab you over a differing opinion?

The reason doesn't matter. Good people who do not meet unlawful force with lawful force of their own are victims, and will have to bear the consequences of becoming victims.

A stab wound or brain damage from a severe beating does not care why the criminal landed the potentially lethal or life-changing blows.

"Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 16, 2009 11:30 PM"

End?
At the center of “this” you must at some point realize that there is a time and place for everything. You condone weapons at protests and that is foolish. The question that comes to mind is, "Why protest than?" If you are looking for armed conflict than you do not want to go to a protest. You want to fight and you want revolution. The Communists have WON since they with only a few members in view of a camera have destabilized all that view it. You are calling for an armed incursion with your army of one! I wish you all the luck in the world!

"The police cannot be everywhere at once. In the vast majority of crimes, the police show up afterward to take a report. A police report does not undo victimization.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 16, 2009 11:45 PM"

Sad and true, however largely irrelevant to the topic at hand since the citizens have in fact employed a police force. An armed protest by definition is called a BATTLE. Once again they win since they met their goals with no guns!

Florida Carrying

Unless covered under the exceptions, it is unlawful to openly carry on or about the person any firearm, or to carry a concealed firearm on or about the person without a license.

Exceptions:

•Persons having firearms at their home or place of business.

•Enrolled members of clubs organized for target, skeet, or trapshooting, while at, or going to or from shooting practice.
•Members of clubs organized for collecting antique or modern firearms while at or going to or from exhibitions.

•Persons engaged in fishing, camping or hunting and while going to or from such activity.

•Persons engaged in target shooting under safe conditions and in a safe place or while going to or from such place.

•Persons who are firing weapons for target practice in a safe and secure indoor range.

•Persons traveling by private conveyance if the weapon is securely encased, or in a public conveyance if the weapon is securely encased and not in the person’s manual possession.
•Persons carrying a pistol unloaded and in a secure wrapper from place of purchase to their home or to a place of repair and back.

•Persons engaged in the business of manufacturing, repairing or dealing in firearms.

•Military, law enforcement personnel and private guards while so employed.
It is lawful to possess a concealed firearm for self-defense or other lawful purposes within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use.

A firearm other than a handgun may be carried anywhere in a private conveyance when such firearm is being carried for a lawful use.

This exemption does not authorize the carrying of a firearm concealed on the person.

At the center of “this” you must at some point realize that there is a time and place for everything. You condone weapons at protests and that is foolish.

What makes a protest so special that citizens who are already armed should disarm themselves for it?

I condone law-abiding citizens having the means to protect themselves where ever they go.

Violence happens everywhere. You can either choose to be prepared to confront it, or you can choose to be a victim of it.

The mugger is no different than a Marxist with a tire iron. Both can kill you, and it doesn't matter to a dead man what it was that killed him, specifically.

The question that comes to mind is, "Why protest than?" If you are looking for armed conflict than you do not want to go to a protest. You want to fight and you want revolution.

I know I speak for myself, and I believe I speak for virtually all patriots when I say that I don't want armed conflict, I don't want a fight, I don't want revolution, and I don't want any violence. I would prefer to go on with my peaceful, free life, without any interruptions from violent political thugs or revolutionaries.

For the last 100 years, it has been the radical left that has wanted to overthrow the government and bring a whole lot of violence and misery to the American people (Remeber Bill Ayers? He said that 25 million might have to die to bring about the SDS goal of Communism.) The patriots want none of that.

This is why we protest Marxism and call it out before it can fester and take hold.

The Communists have WON since they with only a few members in view of a camera have destabilized all that view it.

Political correctness and appeasement will not stop Communist revolutionaries. If you haven't noticed already, ANSWER is a front group for the WWP, which exists to advance a revolutionary Communist agenda.

You are calling for an armed incursion with your army of one! I wish you all the luck in the world!

I'm calling for law-abiding citizens to be ready to protect themselves and their families from unlawful violence, regardless of what starts the violence.

Union goons and violent Communists are simply one flavor of threat that has re-emerged in 2009, to compliment the pre-existing array of burglars, muggers, rapists, crackheads, drunks, thieves, and other lowlifes.

Your chances of being killed in a violent burglary far outweigh your chances of dying at a protest - plus, the protest is completely avoidable, whereas burglary is not.

If you aren't already armed, you are either asleep or under the influence of the liberal Kool-Aid. With all of the danger in the world, the only person who can hope to protect you is you. The police are usually not there, and will only show up afterward to sketch your chalk outline.

Posted by: AlphaOmega at November 17, 2009 12:09 AM

In Florida, it is lawful to carry a concealed firearm on the person almost everywhere, upon obtaining a license which the state is obligated by law to issue to any citizen who isn't a felon, hasn't been DD'ed, hasn't been convicted of certain DV offenses, isn't a mental incompetent, and has satisfied the basic training requirement.

If you are an upstanding citizen, the Florida licensing process is simply going through the motions. The law prohibits the state from denying it but for some very narrow exceptions, unlike in places like MA and NJ where moonbat judges retain the right to say no and so so almost always.

This is why my post @9:29 PM encourages citizens to learn the law in their state, and obtain the appropriate licensing to carry.

Political violence is just one of the many reasons to be armed. Statistically, a crackhead in need of a quick fix is a much, much more likely threat than a violent Communist.

We are lucky to live in a country which allows citizens to protect themselves against violence, including politically-motivated violence, unlike the many banana republics where citizens are brutalized for dissent by opposition groups, and have no way to legally defend themselves against it.

Sad and true, however largely irrelevant to the topic at hand since the citizens have in fact employed a police force. An armed protest by definition is called a BATTLE. Once again they win since they met their goals with no guns!

Quit masturbating over pointless definitions. Peaceful citizens have the right to express their views without being beaten for it. They also have the right to use reasonable force against reasonable force, and deadly force against force which is deadly or capable of producing serious bodily injury.

The police force employed by the citizenry did nothing to protect Kenneth Gladney's right to not be beaten.

The difference between the patriots and the Communists is that the Communists are out looking for a fight, whereas most of the patriots hope never to see any violence whatsoever, for whatever reason.

"Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 17, 2009 12:11 AM"

Your pontification skips over the reality that this is not a discussion of ideals. You want people to pack at protests!

Your pontification skips over the reality that this is not a discussion of ideals. You want people to pack at protests!

It is very telling of your stance on liberty that you consider concealed carry to be inherently confrontational, even though the whole point of concealed carry is: 1) not to confront anyone unless absolutely necessary, 2) never to expose your weapon unless your life is at risk, and 3) if necessary, draw only to prevent yourself or your family from being a victim of a violent or forcible felony.

RE: Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 17, 2009 12:35 AM

AC reinforces some important points with: "It is very telling of your stance on liberty that you consider concealed carry to be inherently confrontational, even though the whole point of concealed carry is: 1) not to confront anyone unless absolutely necessary, 2) never to expose your weapon unless your life is at risk, and 3) if necessary, draw only to prevent yourself or your family from being a victim of a violent or forcible felony."

I can name several instances from my personal experience (including a female friend who confronted a rapist that literally broke her door down) where the presence of a firearm actually brought about a de-escalation of the conflict and resulted in NO ONE getting hurt.

With all that said, it is incumbent upon anyone who carries to avoid potential conflict if possible. In the case of my friend who had her door broken down, trouble came to her and it was unavoidable. If you go looking for a fight, or the law can offer up an argument that you are, then you are opening up a whole can of worms....and worms don't taste so good.

This whole issue of carrying at protests is walking a fine line. What's legal is not always prudent, and there is a lot of backlash and negative things that can come from it.

But if some ACORN thug is beating an old lady over the head, a firearm could save her life.

Whichever side you are viewing this from, let's all be careful out there.

Amnesty IS racism.
So I agree... racist's go home.

These violent confrontations are becoming more and more frequent, with the SEIU/ACORN agitators goading those who oppose them into physical altercations. I just hope that after the November 2010 politcal bloodbath enough demonstration-inducing legislation can be stopped so as to ramp down the demonstrations. Failing that, the 2012 election, when the messiah loses will result in massive riots and street violence. Remember, the Democrats never lose elections - they're always stolen from them.

Again folks, I repeat myself but whenever you go to a protest, come armed. Whenever a parent, especially an elder, goes to a protest, come along or have a friend go with them. Do you see what you, or your parents are up against? Thug tactics. Defend yourself, that is your RIGHT. This country is being taken over in the most insidious way and the liberals are getting bolder each time. Do. Not. Go. Unarmed.

"Posted by: TonyD95B at November 17, 2009 5:28 AM"

What is another name for an ARMED PROTEST?

What's the term??

AZ, you fail to see the distinction between an overtly armed action and an assembly where some but not all may or may not be armed but you would never know it unless you hit the wrong one with a stick. The ability to protect oneself or others does not equate to incitement of violence.

The comment against open carry is riddled with FALSE information.

Only Seven(7) states and the District of Columbia totally ban open carry. Of the fifty (50) states 42 allow "open carry."

The majority of states in the US support "open carry."

Visit www.opencarry.org to learn more, then load up, holster up, and carry on.

Posted by: Support The 2nd at November 17, 2009 8:07 AM

42 states nominally allow some form of OC, although the 42 number is not an accurate portrayal of the OC in America.

Of those 42, some are like MA and NJ, where OC is licensed, but the license is virtually impossible to get.

Others put annoying restrictions on OC.

The worst among them fail to protect OC as a right, and allow citizens engaging in OC to be booked for DTP for nothing more than some loony soccer mom phoning in an MWAG.

As far as CC is concerned, 39 states have either ironclad shall-issue laws, or require no license at all. In CA and NY, permits are shall-issue in practice in the conservative counties.

Strong CC is in almost as many states as nominal OC, and CC doesn't bring about the thousands of stories of annoying restrictions or anti-liberty MWAG incidents like OC does.

"Posted by: Mr Evilwrench at November 17, 2009 8:04 AM"
I see clearly that an "Armed Protest" is simply a War Party. It would be better if you and the other poster skip protests altogether and go directly into battle. If you follow the thread, the idea is to "PRACTICE" the 1st Amendment and then posters turn it into a second amendment issue.

The common thread here is the development of a "Lynch Mob Mentality" that promotes deadly force in the face of lesser force. Judge, jury and executioner all balled up into one.

I simply realize what you do not and that is that the Communists or subversives had a goal and clearly accomplished their mission. This is in contrast to the typical American protestor and concerned citizen who is oblivious to what is actually happening around him. He does not see that the majority of the youth of the nation have all gone to the other side and have abandoned the rest of us to our old fashioned, bourgeois way of thinking.

They represent the proletarians and this if you did not realize is the goal of the controlling oligarchy. They sit back and watch America destroy itself. Later on, the oligarchy will appear as the only true salvation for those not already purged.

In other words you are going to show up armed while the nation’s youth show up with only fists and the public perception will paint any armed patriot movement as "The New Terrorism" from the 2nd Amendment crazy people who shoot protestors.

You are already defeated when you play their game but your false pride causes you to sink even deeper into oblivion. You need to realize that your enemy in this is likely to be your own kids who we have all sent to the Communist programming centers (public school) in hopes that they were going to be upstanding Communists?

See what I am saying?

Looks like a setup to me, Everyone is friends now after the fight. Where's the police there mentioning arriving.

"AlphaOmega at November 17, 2009 2:32 PM"

Yeah, you're saying that we should LET THE BASTARDS BEAT US HALF TO DEATH.

Learn the diffrence between carrying a weapon (Not just a gun) and USEING it. I suggest that you look at footage of NRA protesters and SEIU thugs beating political rivals and compare.