Protect? Or Control?
I am not sure what the response will be to this post…but here we go…
My friend @edfromct posted a link to an article via Twitter tonight. A town hall meeting was held in New Hampshire and it was attended by President Obama. No biggie, there are protestors at most all political events. So what was the deal? This man was carrying a 9mm pistol. Strapped to his leg. And it was legal. He was allowed to stand in the open with a 9mm strapped to his leg, while President Obama and others were discussing health care reform.
Here is the link to the article…
First of all, this is not a discussion over gun control. If you want to make it that…fine. but that’s not the point here.
This man was exercising his legal right to own and bear arms and to do that in a legal manner and he respected the weapon and did not to use it in an illegal way. In this day and age, we obviously have concerns over the misuse and danger of guns. But I am very grateful that this occasion did not turn out to be another blunder by our government officials. No doubt he made a bold statement today. But, it was treated as nothing more than that.
Don’t get me wrong. Our President and others need to be safe, but we cannot take freedoms away (as our country is doing) in hopes of controlling a person or persons from doing something dumb or dangerous. I am actually very grateful that this man was allowed to do what he did. He proved his control and maturity. He exercised his legal rights. It gives me a vote of confidence in the officials that regulated and protected this event. This speaks volumes to me.
What bums me out is the attitude of the media involved. Take this comment from the live reporter on MSNBC…
“You’re saying a guy has a gun in the open – where we already know there are concerns about every president’s safety, but certainly this president … and the guy’s just being allowed to stay there? Is that right”
This is an attitude that SCARES ME! This reporter felt it was better to control and restrict, illegally, a person for actions that might or might not happen. And to this reporter, that kind of enforcement seemed appropriate, even normal.
Whether you agree with gun control or not, is not the issue. If guns were not allowed, than this man would not have the right to do what he was doing and would have been arrested or removed. BUT, guns are legal, so we need to be cautious of becoming a people that feel, we know better, and in turn begin restricting freedoms, even if they are legal.
I am disappointed with the direction our country is going. And I refuse to blame only Obama or the Senate. It goes all the way to the chairs and couches of every house in America that chooses to take on this attitude. And so often we mask these issues of control with a fuzzy pink bow and say it is “for our protection”. Our country is no longer in the business of “protection”. It’s in the business of “fix – it”. The need to “fix” our problems is a control issue. We are not a country of control, but of freedom. Once we stop protecting our freedoms, we move on to “controlling” our rights. I am sure seeing a lot of this. The story today, gives me hope that some are still interested in freedom and not control.
Ok dude. I am sitting here. And I am applauding.
You nailed it. Absolutely nailed it.
My viewpoint on all of this is that as a nation, our culture has shifted from where we used to have a mindset where there was a healthy respect for firearms, to a mindset one of a where we have an irrational fear of firearms and the reaction by so many people to this man who was merely exercising his rights was evidence of that culture shift.
Jay Caruso´s last blog ..On Health Care Reform
And rightly so, the cocnern over guns and their use should continue to be discussed. But, I am grateful that today, freedoms were allowed to play out.
At the end of the day most Americans are busy fighting over loyalties to a party a an issue or two and incapable of seeing the big picture
Vince´s last blog ..Is this spiritual warfare or is it just me?
I would love to study the 2 party system and would love to know what happens if “parties” are completely deleted.
Move to Canada – we had all these fights about state health care generations ago when the firearms were much gentler
Chris from Canada´s last blog ..Review: Robin Mark – Year of Grace
Ha! Ya, you wouldn’t see this in Canada
Let me clarify something as well.
The statement on that sign is one of a cry for freedom. It is an extreme statement from Thomas Jefferson, but one that reminds us that people are willing to fight for the constitutions and their freedoms.
The moral? We have got to figure out how to find common ground or our country will be torn a part by idiots and crazy decisions.
…It’s also the slogan for a radical Neo-Nazi group.
joshua´s last blog ..Life is Art
Agreed. But we don’t know which he stands for.
Nope. Only that he’s got a gun.
joshua´s last blog ..Life is Art
I have always had a concern for guns, but more with the intent. guns in the hands of someone with evil intent scares me.
I don’t know what his plan is or was. What we do know is that he wanted to make a statement. He sure did!
Now, I am grateful that his gun was public and noticed and accounted for. Like Joe Louthan said, I am sure the secret service was all over him. Hopefully. But I would be much more concerned about the weapons, if any, that were hidden. those are the ones that scare me the most. The secret.
Now, obviously, the Feds would had a set of eyes or 3 on him at all times.
He brought a firearm to same location as the President. Would he not expect Secret Service to be a might twitchy?
Joseph Louthan´s last blog ..Oh, Don’t You Dare Tease Me!
I agree. I am sure the President was well protected. In this case, I would be more worried about the general public.
Let us remember too, that this man was a couple blocks away from the courthouse. Not at the courthouse. He was on private church property, not on public property.
Brother awesome post.
Hope this isn’t to far off topic.
I long ago stopped really listening to this stuff. I now focus on my faith and hope in Christ.
We will not fix this unless we stop relying on Man made ideals.
Man seems to just screw things up. The only way this is fixed world wide is through Christ.
Our Hope can not be in a man this side of heaven. If we do that we lose.
Don’t get me wrong we need to be concerned and act. But I would rather act by introducing people to Christ and letting Christ fix the person. Jesus preached to crowds but he heals, and forgives one on one.
Peace Bro
Oh and true freedom is found in Christ. But you know that, many don’t.
Peace
Absolutely Carl. I believe that this goes hand in hand.
Should we be imposing our opinions and concerns on others. Other freedoms and rights? I believe that we would say we don’t have that right in living out our faith either.
Hands down, nothing is more important than our true freedom in Christ. I just don’t want to be a part of an attitude that forces opinions on others so as to limit or strip away freedoms. Spiritually or socially.
I agree.
I’m surprised that we don’t see red dots all over him from the snipers that were probably aiming at him. haha
Emery´s last blog ..Finished
I would be very curious to know what the secret service was doing during this. The protection of the President intrigues me.
Who knows, in 10 years we may see a Discovery show on the happenings of this day.
You wouldn’t see this sort of thing here either…but as you say, it’s not the point.
If something is legal, let it be legal. And if you don’t like what’s legal, lobby to change it.
Simple (ish)
i agree with your brent.
but part of me is also thinking…”who wears on a gun on their leg just to make a point.” it seems very childish to me.
like the new blog look.
Tyler´s last blog ..Early Marriage
I love the simplicity of the new format Brent…. I’d echo what ckroboth said. I was in a book club last year that read through Jesus for President by Shane Claiborne. The book tore me apart for about three months- as a Christian how do I relate to the culture of the nation that God has placed me in? Are there times that being obedient to Christ makes me a bad American,Canadian,Britain…? I’ve recently been wrestling with this idea of fighting for my rights, and its not something that I have been seeing in the NT. I see Christians who live their lives out in the freedom of Christ regardless of what rules or laws the culture imposes on them, not to bring attention and glory to themselves, but to our King…. Jesus. Our supreme leader.
Most times when I watch the news I see Americans fighting for their rights as they see it, for the glory and honor of America, functionally as nation worshipers( idolatry?). A nation that is only a drop from a bucket in Gods eyes( Isaiah 40:15)…
Maybe I am a little off base here. If so, I plead your forgiveness.
But what pains me is to see Christians (including myself) who let there faith and identity get all wrapped up in a political system or social grouping, and leave Christ on the bench. Something Peter did (Galations 2) when he let his racial identity dictate his behavior; there-by maligning the gospel… if Peter stumbled with it I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that we all may from time to time.
May Gods grace and the saving work of Christ define the life and identity of those who call upon His name.
I think I’ll be reregistering as an independent this year…
donnytop5´s last blog ..I am a Reader.
Not everyone with a 9mm strapped to their leg would leave it on his leg. Not everyone is stable. So, do we discriminate against those we “think” are NOT stable or just lay a restriction across the board? I just love the line of thought that says…”take the guns from the crazies, but leave us good huntin and fishin people alone.” Who are the crazies?? Should we let people get shot while we figure it out?
Not a fan of guns…never have been….not a fan of gun control either…I’d support gun elimination.
Guns don’t kill people….People kill people. HA! Put two folks together with the intent to kill and give ONE of em a gun….let’s see who dies faster.
All that said, not in my hands….God has His own way of Gun control….I just need to have faith that His plan is much better and more intricately designed that mine.
Toby´s last blog ..Compassion Thursday
I wonder how many of the commenters on this post have spent much time in New Hampshire. It’s a different world up there. They take their Constitutional freedoms quite literally, and much more seriously than most folks do. They take great pride in their part of the political process as well.
One of the scariest moments in this event is the fact that one of the “educated” news commenters suggested that a someone find a lawyer to get an emergency injunction to stop this guy from excercizing his legal rights! I couldn’t even believe it.
I don’t think I’d have the stones to show up at a presidential event wearing a gun. But I applaud this guy for doing it. Why? Because he gets it.
He understands that government should not be about trampling our rights easily. I have no doubt that he would not have been allowed within sight of the president so armed – and I agree with that.
There are times that call for the reasonable restriction of an individual rights. Making the descision when is a very delicate balancing act. I’m glad I don’t have to do it.
I’m sure the reaction would have been different had the man been carrying a sign that said “Jesus Loves You.” or “Abortion is Murder” (and no gun) and the press had the same reaction. The question is why?
Mike Mahoney´s last blog ..They Just Don’t Get It, Do They?
I completely disagree. To paraphrase this guy’s reference — that “the Tree of Liberty needs to be watered by the blood of tyrants” is a none-too-veiled threat. He is saying that now is the time to draw blood. The fact that he is showing his gun while saying this, shows that he means to intimidate others not defend himself.
I would also like to point out that when Timothy McVeigh blew up the Oklahoma City Federal Building, he was wearing a t-shirt saying “Sic Semper Tyrranis” — translated “Thus Always to Tyrants”. The very words John Wilkes Booth said after killing Lincoln. Seconds before McVeigh killed all those innocent people, he was merely exercising his Constitutional rights by renting a truck and buying fertilizer. It wasn’t until he ignited the bomb that he was doing something illegal. But by then hundreds of people were dead.
Every year about 10,000 people die of gun shots in this country — that’s 3 times more people that died in 9/11 every year. That means in the 8 years since 9/11 80,000 people have been killed by guns. I’m not allowed to bring a gun on plane. Why should someone be allowed to threaten to kill people whom he alone has declared a “tyrant”.
Bro, this guy didn’t threaten anyone.
All he did was excercize his legal rights under New Hampshire law. If you don’t like those laws, then I would suggest you don’t move to New Hampshire.
The “Tree of Liberty” quote is not threatening, actually. Jefferson was pointing out that occaisionally sacrifices needed to be made – on both sides – to ensure that the government is kept accountable to the people, and that individual sacrifices pale in comparison to the greater good they achieve.
This man was not “taking the law into his own hands.” What he did was perfectly legal where and when he did it.
People who support excessive gun control fail to realize two important things: First, the bad guys don’t care. They’re not turning in their guns because the gov’t tells them to. Second, even if you magically took away every gun on the planet today, people would still kill each other. They would just do it with hammers and knives and whatever else was handy.
Mankind has been killing one another far longer than there were firearms around, and will continue to do so even if they were gone. What’s next? What does the government take away from you (to protect you) next?
BTW, I do not advocate “no” gun-control. I believe that licensing and registration are reasonable and necessary, and I think it is reasonable to restrict certain types of firearms. But an outright ban? Fortunately, I can’t see that happening in my lifetime.
Mike Mahoney´s last blog ..Sunday Setlist – August 16th
Thanks for another great discussion topic.
First let me say my concern with the gun carry the gun was that it was a protest rally where the President is making an appearances. I don’t know how near he was to the President. If he was in sight of the President the Secret Service should have the right to protect the President, and disarm him.
I think there is a Supreme court case coming up on to what degree states can restrict the ownership of handguns.
Every society will place restriction on the behaviour of it’s citizens. The opposite of that is anarchy. The issue for me is when is my behavior sufficiently harmful to my neighbor to justify restricting it.
Our countries laws start with our Constitution, the 2nd amendment, as I understand it, guarantees citizens the right of bear arms. I do believe the government, federal and state, can place some restriction on what kinds of arms a person can own, for public safety, I am thinking of automatic weapons.
I also want our society to evolve into a more peacefully own. I would prefer to live in a society where no one is allowed to own, or carry a gun. I would support a Constitutional amendment that would eliminate the right of it’s citizens to bear arms.
The guy in the picture has the legal right to carry his weapon in public. As long as people have this legal right I don’t think we in the US can claim to be as civilized as we seem to think we are. I want to see future generations grow up in a gun free country. The only way to do that however is to change existing laws.
Ed´s last blog ..People Making a Difference – Mohammed Salifu
Ed made the point that the only true freedom results in Anarchy – no rules, no ‘control.
Carl pointed out That True Freedom for man can only come through Christ.
God/Christ knew of the need for, and set, Boundaries – Controls over mankind that were never to be exceeded or we would suffer for it.
The boundaries that the US set for it’s citizens in the Eighteeth century under their constitution while under threat of the UK soldiers and Native Americans have little in ‘common’ with the life Americans live today – with respect to the ‘right’ (need to) bear arms.
Ziboskwitz pointed out the result of this particular ‘freedom’ – 10,000 less Americans alive now than last year.
Having the right to drink yourself into a stupour is NOT a right i would like to see concurrent with the ‘right’ to own a semi-automatic for all citizens in an over-stressed community.
Particularly not in a world where people believe they have the right to take the law into their own hands (much as their government frequently does in other countries) when all that namby-pamby ‘protectionist’ talking didn’t give me the result or the satisfaction i wanted.
Time to re-set or review our ‘boundaries’ yet, i wonder?
<B
love´s last blog ..Success vs Failure
Loving the conversation. Just a reminder that this is not a post on whether we should own guns or not. This is a post to determine if the American government officials appropriately protected rights. I say yes. Although, this guy made a very questionable decision.
From what I have read the guy with the gun was anywhere near where the President spoke. If he been within range of Obama the Secret Service would have disarmed him. There was another protest rally where a guy had assault rife, but he was also not near the President.
I have to wonder what will happen when one of these guys does try to get close to the President, and the Secret Service tries to take his gun. Will there be a shootout?
States rights versus Federal law is an important issue. In this case both men had the legal right under the laws of their state to carry their guns in public. However I will guess that safety measure taken by the Secret Service to protect the President supersede state law.
As of today I don’t think, overall, the US Government is placing too many restrictions the rights of it’s citizens.
I agree however that in some areas, such financial control over businesses, the seemingly unlimited power given the Dept. of Homeland Security, the trend is towards more government control then there should be.
Ed´s last blog ..Food Deserts In America
Ed, I agree with what you’ve said here.
And, yes, this man was a couple blocks away. Still a bit foolish and I am positive that secret service were taking every measure to watch him and secure the president.
I also agree with your last two paragraphs and it seems to me, as you, that government is getting way too involved with private business. Heck…we own car companies and banks now…
Apparently this has happened again, in Phoenix this time, where upwards of a dozen men were walking around with various firearms. No one was arrested, because this is legal in Arizona.
I guess this is the new fad.
Mike Mahoney´s last blog ..In the Studio – Take 14
What part of “the right to keep and bear arms” don’t the politicians understand? Nothing wrong with reminding the politicians they work for us, we don’t work for them.
Amen to that! What part of “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” don’t people understand:)
What worries me about the gun debate is that too many people are willing to sacrifice the unsustainable promise of security for giving up their freedom. No politician can guarantee security, which is why we should never give up our right to keep and bear arms.
And politicians in other countries have confiscated guns prior to implementing sweeping political changes. The reason politicians want to restrict access to guns is becuase they know that an armed citizenry can keep them honest alot better than a bunch of citizens armed with nothing more than rocks.