Armed citizens force officials to back down

[Solus]

Armed citizens force officials to back down

A group of 160 citizens, many if not most of whom were armed, confronted government officials Tuesday who had attempted to have a wounded Army veteran kicked out of a meeting due to the fact that he carried a gun. The veteran has a state license for concealed carry, which means that he was carrying the gun to the meeting within the boundaries of the law.

And, as if scripted by Tom Bogan, and shared by all of us...

"Government entities need to know that the 100 million citizens who own 300 million guns are not going to back down and that we will hammer them every chance we get to prove our resolve," he said.

http://www.examiner.com/article/armed-citizens-force-officials-to-back-down

[brushmore]

And so it begins.  I don't think the stateists/leftist will not back down so easily.  Watch for new laws preventing firearms with a certain distance from all government locations, at public gatherings, etc.   

[TAB]

my only question is( and is generally the case)   was he kicked out becuase he had a gun or becuase he was an ass?    if its the 1st I will support him, if the 2nd he can pucker up and kiss mine.    I hold vets in the highest reguard, but that does not mean you have a pass on acting like an ass.

[usmcdadx2]

Even if he was an ass, so what! If he was not endangering or threatening anyone he has as much right to be an ass as Obama, Pelosi, Morgan and the rest of the "enlightened" ones. The idiots that wanted him kicked out are supposed to answer to the people not the other way around. Also if they wanted him out because he was an ass then have the balls to say so don't blame it on the gun he was legally toting.

[tombogan03884]

To many examples to list where the simple fact of legally carrying a gun draws liberal hatred, like that city council meeting in Washington State that was posted earlier this year.

[Sponsor]

[MikeBjerum]

It appears to me, please correct me if I'm wrong, that this is at the following meeting.  Why don't we see the actual information from the meeting where the event took place?  This article does not even explain the basics of the previous meeting.

[TAB]

which has my wtf meter pegged.

[Solus]

There was a link to the previous story in the second paragraph of the story posted above.

Check it out here.

http://mynorthwest.com/?sid=2186281&nid=646

[MikeBjerum]

I watched the video, and overall it was a perfect situation and outcome.  I don't know what the discussion was prior, but the gentleman spoke politely and respectfully.  When the council member made the motion and the motion was seconded, everything was handled very professionally.  I also didn't see the issues I expected on either side from the way I read the article that started this.  I respect the Mayor for the way he handled everything.

My only complaint in the end is the way the gentleman expressed his qualifications to carry.  Our qualification to carry a firearm is that we are law abiding citizens of the United States.  Veteran, active military, highly trained, etc. are not qualifications that needed to be included.