More on gun registration, and guns at POTUS speeches:

[tombogan03884]

I wasn't going to post this because the writer doesn't say, "They are with in their rights and if you don't like it to bad."
But then I read ALL the way through it and decided it struck straight to the heart of our cause.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_16-2009_08_22.shtml#1250902014

  Over at at the CBS News blog site, Declan McCullagh has a [1]new
   article on the constitutionality of gun registration. He has input
   from Volokh, Kopel (we disagree), and many others.
   Also in relation to a topic that I blogged about yesterday, my
   iVoices.org [2]podcast on guns at presidential speeches is now
   on-line.
   On the one hand, I think that the some folks in the MSM are being
   self-indulgently paranoid in mis-interpreting these legal displays as
   threats. And some media have been even worse, in trying to impose a
   racial narrative on the whole thing.
   On the other hand, as I eleboate in the podcast, I think that this
   form of protest is probably harmful to the Second Amendment cause.
   It's sort of a Second Amendment version of the gay rights people
   chanting "We're here, we're queer. Get used to it." This kind of
   self-expressive demonstration can sometimes be helpful for a cause,
   and sometimes harmful, depending on the context. In the context of a
   presidental visit, I think it is harmful.

Thing is, 30 years ago queers were arrested just for being queer. It was an offense against morals. Now, after getting out into the streets, they are mainstream. We may not approve, but churches are now required by law to marry them in the many states that have passed SSM legislation. In other words, regardless of what this law professor may think, or approve of, the tactic works !

[Michael Bane]

You know, Tom, I once sat down with some of the top media strategists for the gay movement in the critical years of the 1970s & '80s, and it was eye-opening. They told me that if they had the sheer numbers we had, they would "own the country." They also said if they could give me a single piece of advice, it would be, "OUT OF THE CLOSETS AND INTO THE STREETS!"

You're right...the comparison in the Volokh piece is hugely incorrect, since the gay movement is one of the most successful social change  movements in history...it worked...

Michael B

[tombogan03884]

You know, Tom, I once sat down with some of the top media strategists for the gay movement in the critical years of the 1970s & '80s, and it was eye-opening. They told me that if they had the sheer numbers we had, they would "own the country." They also said if they could give me a single piece of advice, it would be, "OUT OF THE CLOSETS AND INTO THE STREETS!"

You're right...the comparison in the Volokh piece is hugely incorrect, since the gay movement is one of the most successful social change  movements in history...it worked...

Michael B

You've mentioned that before which is why this caught my eye. I would have commented at the VC site but they only allow comments when they have the time to moderate them.

[palmbay lou]

Hello to you Tom and to Michael, I would like to add in something to this, "wearing guns when POTUS comes to town."
We all agree that it is legal for these people to wear their guns in Open Carry and I would do the very same if I lived in a state that allowed open carry (I live in Florida).  I would wear openly to one of these POTUS events simply because I have seen the footage of the gentleman from Louisiana who was attacked by SEIU people, the ones in the purple shirts, and I would not want to be accosted by them or ACORN activists.  While I am not wanting a show down of sorts with anyone I would also take steps to let others know that I will defend myself should they decide to lay hands on me or my wife.

Why is it that Fox News and others directly in the gun culture only see the protesters as protesting about gun restrictions?  Why is it that the only motivation considered for wearing openly is to protest Obama's bent on removing all forms of guns?  Why hasn't anyone from the gun culture interviewed people from New Hampshire or Arizona and asked them what their motivations were to open carry at a presidential event?  I would like to know and I would like for you Michael or Tom Gresham or any of the gun culture insiders to expose the flip side to this, that SCIU people or Acorn people are disrupting and sometimes violent to us, "Mob crowds."

I believe it is doing a great disservice to fellow gun owners who legally exercise their right to carry.  Why is it in poor taste to carry at a POTUS event?  It's perception thats why, and while the MSM uses this episode to put down gun owners and supporters of the Second Amendment the gun culture, to my view, seems to be following lock step with them in condemning instead of opting to support these brave people who attended these events, allowed their pictures to be taken, interviewed by CNN and mocked, face possible alienation by their neighbors, friends and family.  For me I salute them and as I say, if I could do it I would too.  Can we not remember why we carry for protection to begin with?  It's to defend and not to attack.  To enable us to hopefully back out of a dangerous situation, to get clear of a bad thing going down, to protect me, myself and I as well as our family members so we can go home at the end of the day and love one another as family and friends. 

I do not see the actions of the protesters as damaging but an opportunity to speak out as the gun culture and say, "Hey, I would too!  Who wants to be attacked by ACORN for exercising our First Amendment?  I wouldn't do it to provoke but to defend.

Your Thoughts?

palmbay lou.

[Hazcat]

Excellent post, Lou!

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

 Hi  Lou, glad to see you still dropping in.
The People you mention ARE trying to get the message across that it ISN'T JUST gun rights, it's about the governments entire attitude toward the people and their blatant ignorance of the Constitution.
MB and Tom Gresham have both commented on this in the past, and there is You Tube video of interviews of the guy who was carrying in NH. I don't have time to search for it right now though.
I will comment that I was quite surprised that the deal for him to stand on Church property (private ) to aviod the 1000 foot from a school regulation was set up by the Chief of Police. The city government of Portsmouth has long been notorious for their liberal policies and anti 2A stance.