OOOOPS! Brotha Aint Scared!An unidentified man was walking outside a veterans’ event with President Barack Obama today in Phoenix, Arizona with a pistol on his hip and an AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle strapped to his shoulder.
Why? “Because I can do it,” he said when asked why he was armed, according to a report in the Arizona Republic. “In Arizona, I still have some freedoms.”
The paper reported that local police were in close proximity to the man, and that his actions, while perhaps unnerving, are not illegal.
“What he is doing is perfectly legal,” Det. J. Oliver, of the Phoenix Police Department said. “We are here to keep the peace. If we need to intervene, we will intervene at that time.”
30 comments:
I really, REALLY hope brothas start exercising these rights.
Like Huey and Bobby did back in the day. Won't be long before the laws start getting changed after that.
Actually, it's a Black not White boy there who ain't scared..
They planted him.
Lew Rockwell or Ernest Hancock?
"White Boy Aint Scared"?
What white boy, DV? Dude with the guns isn't white.
___________
So um, Big Man and Makheru, is the guy who brought the gun to this event as noteworthy as the other guy?
You din't ask me magne, but imoho, this muhphuggah EXPONENTIALLY more noteworthy than that goober in New Hampshire....,
at least on a symbolic level, that is
BIG PROPS to the AZ Ron Paul contingent for executing the most significant political hack thus far this year.
is the guy who brought the gun to this event as noteworthy as the other guy?-- GC
Certainly twelve people outside of a forum being held by the POTUS carrying guns is more noteworthy than one person.
What’s next, an entire militia?
The guy with the AR15 was shadowing the pro-healthcare demonstration. At what point will the pro-healthcare people start bringing guns?
they wont.
it's already been very well established that progressives don't have that much brass.
the whole thing was a setup, however, in the post false arrest/contempt of cop punkout by Obama and Gates, it was a supreme bit of libertarian signifying and a very sweet moment of political theater.
So, when the white dude brings a gun to a POTUS event, y'all flip out like Chris Matthews, but when a black dude does it, he gets a pass?
Big Man said: "I really, REALLY hope brothas start exercising these rights.
Like Huey and Bobby did back in the day. Won't be long before the laws start getting changed after that."
What's the difference between the guy in New Hampshire and the guy in Arizona Big Man?
"So, when the white dude brings a gun to a POTUS event, y'all flip out like Chris Matthews" GC
Bra Gray. Who you mean by "ya'll"?
When the white dude brought a gun last week, I believe I celebrated it.
In fact, I didn't see a "white dude" with a gun at an Obama event.
I saw an American man with a gun at an Obama event. I believe I celebrated that moment.
As a matter of fact. I thought this cat was a white boy until one of you brothas pointed out it was one of us.
I believe the Hegelians have programmed Plantation Occupants to see "white" v. "black" even when it is not a "white" v. "black" issue.
but when a black dude does it, he gets a pass?
nah.
The staging gets a pass for savvy, planning, and execution. It's why I've referred to it as a superb media hack.
First of all, dood in New Hampshire was a singularity at the time he did it.
Second, his presentation was wack and poorly planned.
What happened in Phoenix definitely stood on New Hampshire's shoulders, but, it was carefully planned and executed and it signified on multiple levels in a way that the New Hampshire incident couldn't do.
New Hampshire is easily dismissed as a teabagging crackpot.
Is it anywhere near as easy to dismiss the Phoenix packing incident?
I think the answer is self-evident. I think the quickness with which Phoenix will be moved past in the media will be indicative of its game changing potential.
DV, y'all was referring to Big Man and Makheru.
CNu, how is the NH guy "easily dismissed as a teabagging crackpot" but the AZ guy isn't?
What was so different about their "presentations" that causes you to say this?
Gray Conservative
Yes!
Anybody bringing assault rifles and handguns to meetings with the President is noteworthy. I don't care what color they are, these bastards are a problem.
The simple truth is that its respect that prevents people from killing leaders. Once leaders lose respect, they lose their protection. These folks were already primed not to respect Obama, and now they are being encouraged to take things to the next level.
In CNu's bubble world, Black men are infallible and White men can do nothing right.
It's simple as that. Everything he argues can be boiled down to rationalization of this core racist bias.
GC
I responded to DV's words not the picture, because knowing him he could have pulled that picture from damn near anywhere.
But, the fact that this crazy bastard is black doesn't matter to me. Dumb niggers been doing dirt for white folks for generations. I got a problem with all these cats rolling up with guns to meet the President.
I remember when President Bush came through my city. We had to close down the damn interstate, nobody could drive near this clown. Now you telling me there was a danger to him from other cars, but ain't no danger to Obama from folks hanging out with gats at his appearances. Something is wrong here.
Yes, we can carry weapons by law. But the law prevents us from carrying weapons in certain places, and I would think that a meeting with the President qualifies as one of those places.
Calm down Big Man.
First off. You don't know me. Not like that.
If you did, you would be as skeptical of the Plantation Media as you pretend to be about the media you get here.
Dude with the gun ... DID NOT MEET THE PRESIDENT.
Probably didn't even see him.
The fact is we have a government that has wiped its ass with the constitution, yet they focus the attention of Plantation Occupants on a 2nd Amendment photo op.
President Obama gave a speech a few months back announcing the government can now arrest and detain people without probable cause. Under his administration intelligence agencies still torture. Many feel the government is gearing up to enforce dangerous mandatory H1N1 vaccinations.
An American citizen exercising his constitutional right to gather and to bear arms is far more valuable symbolically than it is an actual threat to the life of the president.
Truth is you had your lips poked out about Offiuh Crowley last week and that handkerchief head Plantation Negro "Skip" Gates.
At the end of the day, you need men with guns to keep shit from happening BECUZ YUZ AH BWAK MAN IN AMEWIKA.
Big Man, compare your statement about the white guy in New Hampshire,
"A kooky dude is important when circumstances are aligning to give his kooky butt a lot of power."
...with your statement about the black guy in Arizona:
"I really, REALLY hope brothas start exercising these rights."
Isn't there a notable difference in your reaction to these two near-identical incidents?
Also, why did you say that you "really really hope brothers start exercising these rights", but then soon afterward you turn around and say, "I got a problem with all these cats rolling up with guns to meet the President."
Erm, which is it?
CNu, how is the NH guy "easily dismissed as a teabagging crackpot" but the AZ guy isn't?
Right off the top? Homeboy in AZ coordinated with local popo before he came anywhere near that event packing like he was going to the shower. (little riff on his comment to the effect that he roles like that)
Everything about dood in AZ was staged as a pure media event. He WAS no threat and he made no threats - despite the fact that an AR-15 slung over his shoulder made him look mighty threatening.
Dood in New Hampshire - on the other hand - was simply a loose cannon making an implicit threat against the president with his sign.
He act was ill-considered and irrational by comparison.
What was so different about their "presentations" that causes you to say this?
Brah man and his cohorts scripted and executed their spectacle like they were working for a reality teevee show. Which is precisely why they cast the liberkneegrow in the starring role.
The symbolism of an urkle-ified libertarian Patriot is priceless. Surely that's obvious to you, or do you profess a deaf ear and a dull eye to the ergodic payload of the Arizona event?
Gray
I hope brothas start exercising their rights to bear arms in public places. When those public places are not occupied by the President.
The cats in Arizona were standing on that state's laws which allow folks to carry unconcealed weapons around without permits. Cool.
While I have a problem with this occurring when the president is present, I don't have a problem with it in general.
Unfortunately, it seems that black folks are often treated differently when they take advantage of their right to bear arms. Which was why I mentioned Bobby and Huey, who quickly saw California change its guns laws once a bunch of armed black cats starting doing police shadowing patrols in the hood.
I apologize if my point was not clear.
Guns are fine when the president is not around. Guns are even better when black people can carry them without getting hassled by the police.
I feel much safer with armed patriots like that nigguh patrolling our streets against domestic terrorists like our politicians than without them.
In fact, I hope we see more of these Libertarians showing out.
CNu,
So basically what you're saying is that because the dude in AZ went out of his way to coordinate his armed presence at the event with the local police (even though he didn't technically need to do so since what he did was perfectly legal), it made him look less kooky than the NH guy?
Okay, I guess if your standard for evaluating the effectiveness of a stunt comes strictly from a PR quality standpoint I can see what you're saying. But I don't get how the guy in AZ is any less of a spectacle because he was being actively supervised by the police and the other guy wasn't. Aside from the explicit purpose of creating a more clever PR stunt, why should you have to be surrounded by police if what you're doing is legal according to state law?
If you're comparing the methodology and execution of the two spectacles, then sure, the AZ guy had a superior approach—but the spectacles in-and-of-themselves were not fundamentally different.
Okay, I guess if your standard for evaluating the effectiveness of a stunt comes strictly from a PR quality standpoint I can see what you're saying.
wait....,
didn't you and I have a dialog just the other day about the efficacy of the Paul/libertarian messaging protocol?
I want to say it was on Friday.
and,
aren't you in process of grilling Bro. Vesey about his own peerless aims and methods when it comes to presentation on another thread?
Okay, I guess if your standard for evaluating the effectiveness of a stunt comes strictly from a PR quality standpoint I can see what you're saying.
PR stunts are precisely what these gun-toting excursions are intended to be. Given that fact, what other evaluative criteria might one even consider applying?
Matter fact, evaluated as anything other than PR stunts and pure political agitprop - neither instance of gun-toting at a presidential political gathering can be rationalized on the basis of perceived personal risk or threat.
On the contrary, both Jackasses involved with their respective stunts made themselves default targets for federal protective service snipers who would have been operationally compelled to blow their silly heads off had anything untoward jumped off at either event.
In addition, where the president goes, federal law supercedes all local statutes across a large municipal swath.
As a practical matter, I suspect both individuals were in violation of federal law with their open carry simply because they were geographically proximate to the president.
These events are likely to recur until such time as unthinking and uninformed imitators phuk up and get themselves anihilated - and ignorance of applicable federal law(s) will not serve as an excuse after they're dead.
DV said Calm down Big Man.
First off. You don't know me. Not like that.
If you did, you would be as skeptical of the Plantation Media as you pretend to be about the media you get here...
Truth is you had your lips poked out about Offiuh Crowley last week and that handkerchief head Plantation Negro "Skip" Gates.
At the end of the day, you need men with guns to keep shit from happening BECUZ YUZ AH BWAK MAN IN AMEWIKA.
First, I am just as skeptical of everything the "Plantation Media" says as I am of what you say. Both of y'all pushing messages for reason. You assume I take what I read in the Times or the Post on faith, you have no proof of that. You just like throwing around that accusation cause it allows you to deflect attention when folks challenge you on what you say.
Second, my lip wasn't poked out. I pointed out a simple fact about how you present different issues. Abortion is about race. Skip Gates getting arrested in his home is not.
Why? Because Denmark Vesey says so.
Check my first comment on this post when I erroneously went with your information about the cat at this rally being black. I encouraged black people to get guns and carry them. Just not around the president.
It's amazing that this simple distinction is being missed. I have no problem with guns, never have. I have a problem with these people having guns near the president. You think it's no big deal. So be it.
What you eat don't make me shit.
BT brings the applicable reading;
What is being missed here, is several Laws which have to do with the President. The first is – wherever the President is, is Federal Land temporarily during his presence. This is done such that the Federal Protective Services and the Secret Service have jurisdiction, and the authority to operate in the State. It also gives them precedence over State authorities in a protective zone around the President.
As such, the applicable law here is Federal… Not State.
The Secret Service is perfectly within the Law to arrest and lock up the bozos, and try them for violations of Federal Law.
CNu said: "wait....,
didn't you and I have a dialog just the other day about the efficacy of the Paul/libertarian messaging protocol?
I want to say it was on Friday.
and,
aren't you in process of grilling Bro. Vesey about his own peerless aims and methods when it comes to presentation on another thread?"
Erm, CNu, the Paul/libertarian messaging protocol is geared towards the realization of a self-described "freedom movement" and accepts monetary donations to that end, DV operates a personal blog which is a one-man operation.
so far as you know...,
otoh - hadn't it ever occurred to you that perhaps it's a measuring device of sorts?
What is the "it" which is perhaps a measuring device CNu?
And what does it measure?
What is the "it"
why the "blog" of course...,
And what does it measure?
why memetic supremacy of course...,
So, when the white dude brings a gun to a POTUS event, y'all flip out like Chris Matthews, but when a black dude does it, he gets a pass?--GC
DV, y'all was referring to Big Man and Makheru.—GC
GC, I don’t know what your definition of “flipping out” is, but I have not “gone berserk” (thank God) since my days of dealing with Dragon Horse on Blackprof.
I never mentioned black or white in anything I’ve written on this subject. My focus is on ethos.
The planners claim that that Phoenix event was a planned publicity stunt, but it’s really deeper than that.
[We worked with the Phoenix police department. They came down to our studio on Friday. We've gone through this with them for 15 years.
They have a squad - used to be called the confrontation prevention squad, now called community service. We told them that we're going to come down, I'm going to do the radio show live, we're going to be broadcasting it, and I'm going to have a firearm. I had a 9 millimeter on myself...
It was Thursday that I called and talked to Al Ramirez, the representative from the Phoenix police department, and we were discussing - we've been around this rhetoric that was building up around William Kostric, who did this in New Hampshire. We knew this from 15 years ago when Janet Napolitano was a U.S. Assistant Attorney and prosecuted the Viper Militia out of Arizona, and how that was generated into something it wasn't. We talked to Al and we were like, look, we know where this is going and we want to make sure, we come down, we're peaceful, and we demonstrate the right of the people to carry their firearms. And the police protected our right.
They wanted to help - they assigned him [a police officer] to me. He was never more than 4-5 feet away from me. We had law enforcement around us to protect our rights to protect this firearm
Sanchez: A lot of people are going to look at this and say it was a publicity stunt.
Hancock: Absolutely - you guys are so easy. What we wanted to do was make sure that people around the country knew that law enforcement in Phoenix, Arizona protects our rights. Oftentimes, the citizenry are better armed than law enforcement. They need us on their side. We know what we're up against.
Sanchez: You're the only ones there with weapons. What are you up against? Ladies with brooms?
Hancock: Oh no, no, no, we're up against a tyrannical government that will rob the next generation as long as they can get away with it. If you go to Freedomsphoenix.com, the top story is the interview I had with this young man. Quite simply, [Chris] understands that his generation is going to be plundered until there's nothing left to plunder. When you do that, at some point, there will be resistance.]
These reactionaries believe that healthcare has given them an opening to attack the Obama Dynamic in other area’s they consider vulnerable. They are throwing down the gauntlet on the 2nd Amendment because they believe that Barack Obama is a spineless punk.
Asante Bro.CNu for the BT connection, because that is a critical observation. These reactionaries are daring Obama, the same way George Wallace dared John Kennedy at the University of Alabama, to declare his forum space to be federal territory.
They believe that Obama doesn’t have the guts to challenge them, and I don’t see anything in his character that leads me to disagree with them.
Post a Comment