People are carrying weapons to Obama events in both Arizona and New Hampshire. These weapons include an AR-15 and various loaded handguns.

One of the New Hampshire men was arrested because he was not licensed to be carrying a loaded handgun. A different man was not arrested because he had a license in NH to be carrying the weapon. He also carried a sign expressing the sentiment:   “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” (Thomas Jefferson)  (See video for exact quote.)

Arizona has less restrictive gun laws. About 15 different people attended the VFW Obama event walking around with various loaded weapons. The reason? Because they could. Perhaps the reason for bringing weapons to an event is to intimidate Obama/health care supporters. How do we seperate these knuckleheads from someone who means to do harm to the President or others?

Just because you can do something, does that mean it is advisable, smart, or wise to do? I have not heard Obama on the subject of guns. I believe walking around with a loaded gun at a presidential event is just asking for trouble, dangerous, and frankly, asking for more restrictive gun laws to to be enacted. This behavior is tantamount to yelling fire in a crowded building.

Time to slap a new federal law into place that outlaws guns within a certain distance of any president of the Unitied States except military and secret service. This behavior truly pushes the envelope way too far and it proves nothing.  This behavior is extremist, in my opinion.

38 Thoughts to “Why Are People Stupid?”

  1. Slowpoke Rodriguez

    Freedom is the WORST! We should take away everyone’s freedom, then nobody would act stoopid anymore! See what happens when you give the common people freedom? They just do the dumbest things with it.

  2. Second-Alamo

    Ah, where is the ACLU when you need them! ; ) It’s our right to Bear Arms. Says so right in the Constitution…….or have they changed that already? So you can take away my prayer, but you can’t take away my guns. Be careful what you wish for. Isn’t the uninterpreted Constitution great!

  3. Moon-howler

    Slow, I don’t see how your comment fits with bringing weapons to an Obama rally. Enlighten me. Security is already on steroids. I came of age in an era when attempted political assassination ruled the day. JFK, RFK, MLK killed. Gov. Wallace permanently crippled and wheel chair bound. Ford, Reagan, the Pope all had assassination attempts.

    To me, anything that makes the secret service’s job more difficult endangers our political leaders and wastes the money of the American tax payer.

  4. Moon-howler

    And do both you guys think prancing around with weapons at an Obama rally is a good idea?

    So how do you reconcile the fact that you cannot bring a weapon in a court house? Is that limiting your right to bear arms?

    Its a safety issue. Large crowds, loaded weapons, only so many resources to watch ever yahoo who has a gun.

    ACLU would probably defend you.

  5. Second Alamo


    No, it doesn’t make good sense, but neither does a lot of the other actions people take simply because it’s their ‘right’.
    For once the liberals have something to complain about, and they can’t do anything about it. I just have to sit back and smile!

  6. Moon-howler

    I think I just want a common sense party to win for once. I am complaining about it and I don’t see myself as a liberal.

    If you were at a local meeting of gun enthusists or 2nd amendment folks, what would you say to them? I am speechless that anyone would think this is a good idea, for all the reasons stated. Some things just seem so obvious.

  7. Jack Frazier

    You actually quote the NH protester’s sign incorrectly. It read, “It is time to water the tree of liberty.”

  8. Censored bybvbl

    I think bringing guns to an Obama rally is a bad idea. (I’ll bet that locally the Red Specks would be nervous if a bunch of lefties showed up at their meetings or their children’s piano recitals carrying assault weapons.)
    I’d venture to say that the majority of people in this country, particularly urban areas, don’t like to see public firearm displays. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they don’t support gun rights but that they have enough sense to know when carrying a gun publically (whether concealed or openly)is inflammatory.

  9. Carrying guns around in crowds is a bad idea all around unless you are a cop. To do it in front of Secret Service and all the other security guys is stupid, dangerous, intimidating and threatening.

    These people are nuts, and I hope I never run into them.

  10. ShellyB

    The “blood of tyrants” quote was on Timothy McVeigh’s shirt the day he murdered hundreds of innocent people in the worst domestic terror attack in American history. I wonder if there is something in the Founding documents that says ‘If you don’t like the results of an election, resort to violence, intimidation, and terrorism.” Why can’t these people accept the will of the people and try to have a happy life? There was no Supreme Court decision. No rent-a-mob to stop the vote counting. So what if the President has a tan? Get over it people.

  11. anona

    You don’t need a federal law because the Secret Service has the power to determine a radius around the president that weapons won’t be allowed. They can make that ring bigger to not only include inside the event locations but a perimeter around the event location. That way if some nutty person wants to display their weapon to get a little publicity, they’d be so far away from the event location that there would be no publicity. I wouldn’t be surprised if that is exactly what happens.

    I have no problem with the second amendment and the right to bear arms but to walk around with a gun strapped to your leg at a presidential rally that is about health care seems immature and whacky.

  12. Mando

    “Why Are People Stupid?”

    Because Barrack Obama is driving us down some bad roads. My guess is he’ll go down in history as one of the most hated presidents. Pity the reason will be blamed on his race rather then the real reasons.

  13. Moon-howler

    Strapping on guns at a presidential debate just shows incredibly bad judgement. Who wants someone who exercises bad judgement walking around with a gun anyway. Oh I know, just because they can.

    I agree anona. I have no problem with second amendment issues most of the time, except when some jackass pulls something like this, just because he can.

  14. Tell It Straight

    Ms. Moon Howler,

    While I agree that these (by all appearences) well-meaning patriots could have expressed their message without semi-auto protest signs, I have issues with your premise:

    “This behavior is tantamount to yelling fire in a burning building.”

    Er, what would YOU yell in a burning building? Water? I would be shouting “FIRE”.

    “Time to slap a new federal law into place that outlaws guns within a certain distance of any president of the Unitied States except military and secret service. This behavior truly pushes the envelope way too far and it proves nothing. This behavior is extremist, in my opinion.”

    I am sure they have that already, as I would bet that those armed individuals were not allowed within the sercurity cordon established by the Secret Service. Oh, perhaps you meant to say “more distance”? How far? 200 feet? A mile? 10 Miles? When is it far enough away from the President that it is OK to stop infringing on the Constitutional rights of Americans?

    While we are talking about restricting the peaceable exercise of a Constitutional right, namely the right to keep and bear arms, as protected by 2nd ammendment, why not a Federal law restricting free speech within a certain distance of the President?

  15. Mando

    “why not a Federal law restricting free speech within a certain distance of the President?”

    They’ve already done that without a federal law.

  16. Opinion

    What’s all this fuss about the right to bear arms? I just don’t understand the problem. I certainly defend the right to bear arms! I believe our 4th amendment right to privacy protects this critical and very personal right. I know Benjamin Franklin was a strong proponent of this and practiced it regularly (air baths).

    Every American has a right to a good tan with no tan lines. In fact, I believe we all should have the right to bear everything anytime we want! I strongly encourage you all to get naked now!

  17. Censored bybvbl

    I’ll bet the gun-toters just had their pictures and info added to an FBI or Secret Service file…another example of don’t do stupid things and you won’t have to worry about your name or those of your associates being added to some list.

  18. @Opinion
    Ironically, we have the right to carry guns, but we don’t have the right to be naked in public.

  19. Opinion

    @Posting As Pinko
    Perhaps we should loiter armed and naked in public to exercise two important constitutional rights: The right to free speech and the right to bear arms… or perhaps bear all!

    It’s interesting… people can walk around the president with assault weapons legally; however, they would be arrested if they walked around the president naked. The former is definitely a risk while the poses little risk… particularly regarding concealed carry.

    I got it! Let’s convince the folks with weapons to get naked… so we can arrest them!

  20. Moon-howler

    Thanks Jack and Tell it straight. Welcome. I made those corrections. I work late at night and sometimes things… know.

    In general:

    I was unaware of some of the restrictions. How do these rules get codified? As for distance, I wouuld think that would change as the need arose.

  21. Not Me, Bubba

    The Wingnuttery has gone ape*hit. YOu didn’t see Bush opponents carry weapons into his speaking engagements…he had his audiences specially screened so that all who were against his policies were kept out. Obama recognizes the rights of America’s people and what does the wingnuttery of the Reich do? They come armed hoping to stir up trouble….BECAUSE THEY CAN.

    Just goes to show there is no compassion in conservatism and that these so-called “moral values” folks lack both. They are in now way trying to come to common ground. Force is their method du jour…and every jour.

  22. Moon-howler

    I just can’t get past the bad judgement angle of these behaviors. Why would I want someone who uses very bad judgement to walk around with a gun?

    I though I was probably right of center on gun rights. After reading about these people, I have been catapulted back over the median strip. I think we need more gun control if this is what people think is wise firearms use.

  23. Tell It Straight

    Ms. Moon Howler,

    It would be a stretch to say these folks are representative of your average gun-owner. I am a gun owner, and a BIG proponent of the 2nd Ammendment. However, I would NEVER consider bringing a firearm into an area within a Secret Service Presidential Security Cordon. I wouldn’t want to be mistakenly shot if my intentions are misunderstood. So, I wouldn’t say you are out of the mainstream, if you believe that the 2nd Ammendment is an individual right, that it is fundamental to the continuance of a free society, that law-abiding citizens should be free to exercise that right as they go about their peaceable business, and that if you are going to be in the immediate vicinity of the President of the US, a firearm isn’t the best fashion accessory.

  24. ShellyB

    Obama Haters, let me just explain. With a democratic process that is supposed to respect the will of the people, we had thought that you would accept the results of the election and not take up arms. That is so 19th century. You know what I mean? The United States is supposed to have a peaceful transition of power.

    Even when the elections were very close and possibly even stolen like 2000 and 2004, you did not see acts of domestic terrorism and the use of fire arms to intimidate lawmakers and try to undermine our democracy. We just assumed that things like secession were off the table. That you all might hate Obama, but you love your country more. We are learning differently. And we will have to react differently. If terrorism is more influential on government policy than elections, we are all in trouble.

  25. ShellyB

    Also, I just have to laugh at people like that one Tea Bagger lady on TV who said she never cared about America’s future during the Bush years but now all of the sudden she’s upset. Was she asleep during the Bush years?

    There were REAL reasons to be angry during the Bush disaster. But we all said we’d make our voices heard at the polls. Not with guns.

  26. Moon-howler

    Tell it straight, what do we do about the fools though? You wouldn’t take guns to an Obama event nor would I. Isn’t that why most laws come into being? Because a few fools don’t know any better?

  27. Mando

    “Obama Haters, let me just explain. With a democratic process that is supposed to respect the will of the people, we had thought that you would accept the results of the election and not take up arms.”

    I suppose only Obama Haters carried guns to these events? Giant assumption you make there. Can’t say that I’m surprised.

  28. Moon-howler

    Obama haters, health care reform haters, 2nd amendment enthusiasts, people with other agendas, killers who want to off the president…how do we seperate them? How do we tell them apart?

    I see taking a gun to a presidential event as very intimidating and I believe that is the real reason it is being done. Just a hunch. Why else would anyone use such poor judgement? I don’t buy the ‘because I can’ line.

  29. Second-Alamo

    Good point Mando. To all, but how do you know they’re illegal…..I mean Obama Haters? Sorry, I’ve heard that line about how do you know they’re illegal so many times that it just comes out.

  30. Second-Alamo

    Hell, if everyone carried guns we could finally get rid of the bullet proof glass at the bank. How else would the clerks be able to shoot at the robber?

  31. Second-Alamo

    You see, all constitutional rights don’t always make sense in certain situations. I’d have nothing against banning guns near a presidential event yet someone would sue if they were prevented from doing so. The Constitution is a guideline. It doesn’t hold all the answers, and couldn’t possibly because modern society is so very different than that back in the colonial days. It all boils down to what people support and don’t support. You don’t get upset over defending day laborer’s constitutional rights, but you do over gun owners rights. There’s the problem.

  32. Moon-howler

    Second-Alamo :

    You see, all constitutional rights don’t always make sense in certain situations. I’d have nothing against banning guns near a presidential event yet someone would sue if they were prevented from doing so. The Constitution is a guideline. It doesn’t hold all the answers, and couldn’t possibly because modern society is so very different than that back in the colonial days. It all boils down to what people support and don’t support. You don’t get upset over defending day laborer’s constitutional rights, but you do over gun owners rights. There’s the problem.

    I totally agree with you about the Constitution being a guideline and that modern society is different. That is why I go in to orbit over hearing judicial activism which translates to ‘I don’t like the decision handed down.’

    I think most people here are taking the wait and see approach here. Mainly we are batting it around. I am not taking anyone’s side other than maybe the cops. I have a nasty habit of doing that.

    I don’t think anyone has expressed concern over gun owner rights, or at least not recently. I am a gun owner. And the last think I would do if I went to a political event of any sort would be to take a gun. I am concerned over the stupidity of doing such a thing in this day and age…back to modern society. 200 years ago, that might have been the norm but not now.

  33. Slowpoke Rodriguez

    Wow…WAY too much to respond to, here:

    MH, my comment this morning was specifically toward this: “Time to slap a new federal law into place”
    Not Me Bubba: After listening to the left comment on Bush and Palin, you should never, ever, for the rest of your life, see even a hint of compassion from conservatives. As it happens, you will see more (much, much more) than the left deserves. Oh, and I could explain to you why Bush opponents didn’t show up with guns, but I’d be banned from this blog for good, but I’ll give you a hint, it’s the same reason Barney Frank doesn’t carry a gun around.
    ShellyB: Taking up arms against the President? You watch too much TV. Oh, and you are the only one here that cares if Obama has a tan, because you’re a racist. You can’t comprehend anything that doesn’t center around race and/or hatred.

    Generally, bringing a gun to this event, was, of course, stupid, but we can be stupid in this country, can’t we? (some folks better hit their knees that thank God for that!) I never really liked the VCDL folks open-carrying around, either, but you know, the dude who is going to shoot a political figure isn’t going to carry his gun out in the open….he’s going to HIDE it. Obama has a very good option, here. If he doesn’t like folks showing up at his BS-spreading events, he could just stay out of the states where that is allowed! Everyone wins!! Dude, if Obama stopped going to states where folks showed up with guns, everybody would bring their favorite gun along!

  34. Moon-howler

    Slow, you know, while conservatives carry a grudge over Bush and Palin, many people carry a grudge over what was done to Clinton, from even before he took office. Conservatives don’t own grudge.

    Yes, we can be stupid but not stupid over something so serious. If people continue to bring guns to political events, then real killers will blend right in and never be noticed until it is too late.

    I am a moderate about gun regulation, even though I am a gun owner. I would rather than federal laws in place than have any president or SS person shot. Would someone please elaborate about the powers given to the secret service regarding this issue?

  35. Elena

    I am a believer in the 2nd amendment, but I am also a believer in common sense. HEALTH CARE debate requires you to feel the need to be armed? Ummm, sounds to me like maybe these guys feel inadaquete in other areas of their lives and maybe are hopeful that carrying their “weapons” around in plain site will make them appear more powerful 🙂

    Just curious though, where were these guys when the medicare prescription plan was being debated? Where were they when lobbyists from the drug companies were stinking up the capitol during the debate on the senate floor? Where were these guys when it became known that the actuary in charge of providing the REAL numbers for the prescription drug plan was threateded with being fired if he told member of Congress that the medicare overhall would cost much more than the 4 billion being estimated?

    Medicare Actuary Says He Was Muzzled

    March 13, 2004
    In the latest uproar over the new Medicare law, the chief Medicare actuary says he was threatened with dismissal if he disclosed his actual cost estimates to Congress. Richard S. Foster told Knight Ridder newspapers his cost estimates were much higher than those given to Congress.

    Thomas A. Scully, who was the Medicare administrator at the time, denied threatening to fire him Foster though he acknowledged that he had had “disagreements” with him.

    “I never told Rick he would be fired,” said Scully, who quit to become a lobbyist a short time after the Medicare law was passed.

    Congress barely approved the controversial new Medicare law, which provides a prescription drug benefit beginning in 2006. The House passed it by only one vote, 216-215, under heavy pressure from the Republican leadership.

    Numerous Congressmen said that if Foster’s true estimates had been provided, the measure would probably not have passed. Foster has said only that his estimates were “much higher” than the $400 billion figure provided to Congress.

    The Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle of South Dakota, said the withholding of the actuary’s cost estimates was “reprehensible.”

    “We ought to bring this bill back for another vote” because it was passed on the basis of “untruthful misrepresentations,” Daschle said.

    Knight Ridder newspapers reported that in an e-mail message to colleagues on June 26, Mr. Foster wrote, “I’m perhaps no longer in grave danger of being fired, but there remains a strong likelihood that I will have to resign in protest of the withholding of important technical information from key policy makers for political reasons.”

    Read more:

  36. Moon-howler

    Obviously not prancing around with guns strapped on them. [Rolling eyes]

  37. Pat.Herve

    The ME mentality at work. I can do it, so I will – it does not matter about respect for any other individuals or what is appropriate behavior.

  38. Moon-howler

    Great point, Pat. Well put!

Comments are closed.