Spidey understands perfectly what I was getting at. Bee has played the race card when ever Obama was critised, yet when she herself fall into the race trap she trys to deflect her racism by accusing the messenger of the very same thing.
How do we know Bee, you never saw a picture of the black man in question?
Would you please be so kind as to explain to me how my comment about the person with the assault weapon was racist. Right now I'm big time confused because you seem to think I am and I still don't. You're the only forum member I want the answer from.
I cant believe I'm saying this, but I have to side with Bee on this one I've read and re-read her comment and I can find no racist overtones in it. while I am not fan of Bee's stance on just about any issue, BUT
He wasn't thinking because he, and those who support him, don't have a brain.
this seems to me that she was referring to the guy carrying the GUN or PRO NRA people. not the race of the person carrying said gun.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Will Robinson wrote:Maybe someone was letting you see how it feels to be accused of being a racist because you had done the same to them...
I agree Will, both she and TC float the racist tag waaaay to often, but I don't feel that is the case in this particular incident
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
There's nothing racist in Bee's comment. She was commenting on the guy's lack of common sense.
It's as if this guy decided to yell fire in a crowded theatre and then once caught, try and excuse that behaviour by saying that he was using his right to free speech.
CUDA wrote:...I agree Will, both she and TC float the racist tag waaaay to often, but I don't feel that is the case in this particular incident
My take on it is dependent on there not really being anything racist within her statement...she didn't mean anything racist but there was a black man at the crux of her comments, other people didn't mean anything racist when they spoke about a black man, she called them racist anyway so now someone has done the same thing to her....
Just a guess on my part.
bettina wrote:Would you please be so kind as to explain to me how my comment about the person with the assault weapon was racist
It was NOT. Spidey was quoting something from ANOTHER thread. That's why I said:
Kilarin wrote:Ah! different thread, no wonder I was confused. Totally unacquainted with the original context, I shall quietly withdraw
I don't KNOW what was said in some other thread, and didn't have time to go digging into it. I firmly stand by the statement that NOTHING you said here was playing the "Race" card in any way. I didn't mean to leave that in any doubt. My comment was strictly to state that I could not argue about what had happened in any OTHER thread. I was withdrawing from the DEBATE, if it was actually about something I hadn't read. NOT withdrawing from my stance that nothing you said here had anything to do with race.
I will also say that attacking you here over something that may or may not have happened in some other thread seems odd, misplaced, and very vulnerable to confusion. It STILL just doesn't make any sense to me.
Lothar wrote:I think it's stupid to take a gun to meet the president. There are better ways to protest
So far I'm the only person that says if it's legal, carry.
I don't even own a gun, however, it IS your right, under law, AND, the constitution, to have and to hold. All men should be married to their side arm. It is your right to keep and bear arms that keeps people like Barney Frank in check.
It is up to you, the PATRIOTS, to keep this country free. Either LEAD, FOLLOW or get the hell out of my way!
It's never good to wake up in the shrubs naked, you either got way too drunk, or your azz is a werewolf.
Spidey wrote:Boy, talk about a twisted fairy tale.
Instead of the moral of the story being…what goes around comes around or if you don’t like being accused of something, you shouldn’t accuse others.
It became…it’s alright if some people do it, but not others…
Please kill me now.
spidey Maybe I'm a little slow tonight. It has been a long day, But I don't get your point. PM me if you want, or say it in open forum.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
AlphaDoG wrote:So far I'm the only person that says if it's legal, carry.
I don't even own a gun, however, it IS your right, under law, AND, the constitution, to have and to hold. All men should be married to their side arm. It is your right to keep and bear arms that keeps people like Barney Frank in check.
It is up to you, the PATRIOTS, to keep this country free. Either LEAD, FOLLOW or get the hell out of my way!
Would you feel the same way about a man bringing an assault weapon to a childrens playground because he has the right?
All this man did was give ammunition to the people who advocate gun laws and they should use that ammo. The fact that the NRA didn't call this man out as being stupid just supports my theory of the NRA and it's members.
AlphaDoG wrote:So far I'm the only person that says if it's legal, carry.
I don't even own a gun, however, it IS your right, under law, AND, the constitution, to have and to hold. All men should be married to their side arm. It is your right to keep and bear arms that keeps people like Barney Frank in check.
It is up to you, the PATRIOTS, to keep this country free. Either LEAD, FOLLOW or get the hell out of my way!
Would you feel the same way about a man bringing an assault weapon to a childrens playground because he has the right?
All this man did was give ammunition to the people who advocate gun laws and they should use that ammo. The fact that the NRA didn't call this man out as being stupid just supports my theory of the NRA and it's members.
Bee
SO because of the actions of one man not being called out by the NRA. EVERYONE that belongs to the NRA is now stupid so tell me how do you feel about your party in congress not calling out the actions of their members when they do something stupid. which is just about everyday. and I say YOUR party so you will not throw it back on the RNC because they do it too.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I answered your question LONG before you ever asked it. as a matter of fact it was the first response in this thread.
I said wrote:stupid, just because you have the right, doesn't make it right
Bee wrote:]I read about party members calling each other out all the time. Both parties.
REALLY???? I find it such a rare occurrence that its almost shocking when it does happen.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Bet51987 wrote:
Would you feel the same way about a man bringing an assault weapon to a childrens playground because he has the right?
All this man did was give ammunition to the people who advocate gun laws and they should use that ammo. The fact that the NRA didn't call this man out as being stupid just supports my theory of the NRA and it's members.
Bee
Actually I would. The children wouldn't HAVE to worry about being abducted by Chester the Molester, if every RESPONSIBLE citizen carried.
It's never good to wake up in the shrubs naked, you either got way too drunk, or your azz is a werewolf.
Bet51987 wrote:
Would you feel the same way about a man bringing an assault weapon to a childrens playground because he has the right?
All this man did was give ammunition to the people who advocate gun laws and they should use that ammo. The fact that the NRA didn't call this man out as being stupid just supports my theory of the NRA and it's members.
Bee
Actually I would. The children wouldn't HAVE to worry about being abducted by Chester the Molester, if every RESPONSIBLE citizen carried.
Not all gun owners are responsible so we have to drop that part.
So, what about my rights as a mother to feel unthreatened by the man in a childrens playground carrying an assault rifle. Whether the man is standing there with an assault rifle, or trenchcoat and candy, I would feel threatened and call the police.
Only in America would someone who sees logic in carrying assault rifles to children's playgrounds; accuse another of \"walk[ing] around feeling threatened all the time.\"
I'd prefer the weapon and KNOWING that as long as that responsible card carrying citizen was around I'm totally safe.
I'll just look to see if the name plate over their head is red or green. Hopefully friendly fire is turned off.
There are very few places I can think of using an AK for defense in the country today. All of them are rural and under extreme/unusual circumstances like riots, grizzly bear attacks, foreign invasion forces, etc., playground and children don't fit anywhere into the description.
Just because I think the weapon is not very practical doesn't mean we should ban it but if someone takes one to town to a gathering of people not engaged in rioting then that someone has a priority problem at the very least.
The shock value of being seen with it doesn't serve his cause at all unless he thinks he has too much freedom.
In fact the only way it makes sense is if he's really an anti-gun nut and wants to perpetuate the gun nut stereotype.
Bee-the NRA doesn't need to make a comment every time some loon does something. This guy is in no way representive of the whole population of NRA members. And if you think everyone in the NRA is brainless, then that is just beyond stupid.
Ferno wrote:what was this guy thinking.. taking a gun into a debate? what does he expect to happen?
I'm surpised he didn't get swarmed by the secret service.
That's exactly what I was thinking Ferno. I mean, yes the guy has the right to do what he did. It may or may not have a smart thing. That is up for debate. But, out of a good ole sence of self preservation, why would anyone in his right mind make a point of visibly carrying a firearm near the President? Like Will said, one little thing could very well lead to a dead protester at the hands of the SS. It's like Clevon Little walking into the KKK rally and asking "where are all the white women at?" Within his rights? Absolutely! Smart? Probably not so much.
Stroodles wrote:Bee-the NRA doesn't need to make a comment every time some loon does something. This guy is in no way representive of the whole population of NRA members. And if you think everyone in the NRA is brainless, then that is just beyond stupid.
Stroodles, Not all gun owners are stupid, but some are.
The issue I have with the NRA is that they believe the gun owner is never wrong so the only time they become vocal is when they think someone is infringing on a gun owners rights...no matter how smart or how stupid that gun owner might be. You can call them a band of brothers.
The NRA could have made enormous gains with the anti-gun people by growing a miniscule brain and making a simple statement that although no laws were broken and no rights were infringed, they don't condone bringing an assault rifle, or any other weapon, that close to the President of the United States. But it will never happen because of who they are.
Bee
Ferno, what Kilarin said. The secret service was as nervous as a mother would be. I'm sure some sniper had him targeted... just in case.
Kilarin: Parents panic from a lot more than the secret service.
Her analogy was akin to 'releasing a known pedophile into public'. It's merely designed to evoke a response with little objectivity.
And let's not forget, a person with any kind of rifle wouldn't get near a playground without the police intercepting them well before they arrived at their destination. No one would even know until it hit the 6:00 news.
Ferno wrote:Kilarin: Parents panic from a lot more than the secret service.
Her analogy was akin to 'releasing a known pedophile into public'. It's merely designed to evoke a response with little objectivity.
And let's not forget, a person with any kind of rifle wouldn't get near a playground without the police intercepting them well before they arrived at their destination. No one would even know until it hit the 6:00 news.
But that's the point. In the state that the man in question was walking around with an assault rifle, he has the same right to enter a playground.
That freaks out the mothers that are there with their children... Just as much as he freaked out the secret service.
So, should there be limits to where you can open carry?
Ferno wrote:A question came to mind. Bet: are you a mother?
Ferno wrote:
so you're entire argument about playgrounds is now rendered irrelevant.
No it's not. Though not a mother I worked for the park department for four years teaching kids how to swim. I felt enormous responsibility and if a gun toting jerk came into the playground, legal or not, I would call the police in a heartbeat and order everyone out of the pool and inside the building.
He can pretend to be a man somewhere else.
I'm not going to press the issue with you because of this....
woodchip wrote:I like the knee jerk reaction. Man with gun, must be NRA member. ...
Kinda like:
Bet51987 wrote:He can pretend to be a man somewhere else.
Obviously if a man is exercising his right he's just "trying to be a man" What if it was a woman? Well, she couldn't really be accused of "pretending to be a man," could she? Why is it that a man with a firearm is suddenly trying to prove his sex and not just exercising his rights?
More importantly, Why is it that our right to bear arms at any venue is questionable?
I doubt the mainstream would disapprove of law officers bearing firearms.. so what is up with this prejudice against citizens being able to? Are law officers any more qualified as human beings?
Oh wait, we MUST not know what's good for ourselves i guess, since this is a government spoonfed media ring circus america.