Taking normalization too far?
Black man with a gun not breaking the law. Press panics. Says the man:
In Arizona, I still have some freedoms
Last night, I read Glenn’s and Brannon’s Heller High Water(Mark?) Lower Courts and the New Right to Keep and Bear Arms which noted the gun control movement’s failure to denormalize gun ownership and Heller was a testament to that. I would say an incident like this may, in the views of some, go too far. Sure, it’s their right but I think it may be a poor marketing decision.
Update: Meanwhile, the black gun-toting libertarian speaks.
August 18th, 2009 at 10:01 am
I will have to agree with most of the people. Taking a gun to a political debate is not the best idea. It makes every gun owner look bad. We REALLY don’t need this kind of publicity.
August 18th, 2009 at 10:04 am
I thought the Youtube was great ….. granted it was ‘friendly’ press, but he was reasonable and rational (mostly!).
His answers to questions from other rally-ers were spot on, and his demeanor was what (I think) it should have been …. I have a gun, big deal.
Yes, he was trying to make a point …. he did, and his group alerted law enforcement prior to going. He even had a liason officer with him. And rest assured, if the Secret Service had any inkling that he was dangerous, we’d have never seen him.
August 18th, 2009 at 10:12 am
“Man carrying assault weapon attends Obama protest”
Technically true, but highly misleading. From the article you linked in yesterday’s post, he wasn’t a protestor.
He was a supporter.
But that would ruin the narrative.
August 18th, 2009 at 10:20 am
CNN was VERY careful to not interview the guy, though the anchor and reporter had many questions about WHY, WHY, WHY would a black man ever take an AR to an Obama rally?
Youtube: Doing the job the press wouldn’t do. I’m mildly impressed. Nice folks.
August 18th, 2009 at 11:16 am
A strategy taken straight from Rules for Radicals. Take them out of thier comfort zone and make them fight there. The collectivists aren’t used to being on the defensive in the media. So now we have them on the run, having them burn through that list of 10 soundbites that they have so fast they sound like a broken record. People will get tired of it, and go to the sexy “new” thing, Pro-Self Defense.
They painted themselves into a corner during the election, let them stomp in that corner waiting for the paint to dry while we are out there showing the public how wrong the collectivists have ALWAYS been.
I say more like this, not less. Let’s bring the Pro Self-Defensers “out of the shadows” to steal one of the collectivist phrases.
August 18th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
We lost the right to open carry a rifle in Washington State when the Black Panthers were doing their thing and actually intimidating people. I think they were doing it down in California, and our legislature didn’t want to see Black Panthers occupying the steps of the capitol building with rifles.
This guy is doing the opposite. He didn’t grimace once. He was talking like the black cops in “Beverly Hills Cop” “Yeah, and we’re not gonna fall for a banana in the tailpipe.” If you’re gonna do it, that’s the way to do it.
August 18th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
I am by no means anti-gun, but as much as possible I try to live up to my father’s wish that I would not be a person who carries a gun but instead a person who has people to carry guns for him. It’s not really a philosophical question, it’s how you want to live your life and what perception you want others to have of you.
One of my favorite Old West figures is John Chisum of Lincoln County War fame. He never carried a gun. He is quoted as saying, roughly, “Only #$%^& greenhorn would shoot a man of substance [such as Chisum considered himself to be]”. He had no problem, however, with having 100 armed vaqueros around him.
August 18th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
“Taking a gun to a political debate is not the best idea. … We REALLY don’t need this kind of publicity.”
Except, as a matter of fact and record, nobody took a gun _to_ a political debate. These guys took guns to a public space down the road from a political event, outside the security perimeter, after arranging ahead of time for a police liason.
Now, maybe you’re right and that in itself is bad politics and bad publicity. But on the off chance these kinds of activists have any kind of shot at plowing through the negative coverage and proving it wrong with their good behavior, why would anyone on our side of the issue throw their effort away by accepting the gun-fearing wussies false characterization of the event?
August 18th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Once more protestors and supporters start showing up with weapons, we’ll be able to test that adage “An armed society is a polite society.” If both sides come heavily armed, perhaps they’ll be able to accomplish something instead of just screaming at each other.
August 18th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
How long will it be before the public starts to think, “Wow, this is about the tenth/hundredth/millionth time somebody wore a gun to an event……AND NOTHING HAPPENED!!! It’s news because it’s unusual. Once it’s usual, it will stop being news.
sv, III
August 18th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Wanda – are you actually saying you want people to DIE?
August 18th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
No. I think she’s saying they won’t scream, they will actually talk stuff out due to fear/respect of the other side’s armaments.
August 18th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
I love living in Arizona.
August 19th, 2009 at 1:13 am
And how many of those people on the fence will come down on our side because they have seen “They were telling the truth, it isn’t the gun, it’s the character of the person carrying it.”
How ever many or few, it will be more than we would have gotten if we did not demonstrate the rights lawfully, peacefully and most importantly openly.
August 19th, 2009 at 3:23 am
Reading news stories after the fact: I think Obama supporters are going to have to start carrying guns if they want to talk about healthcare. Otherwise, the media is just fixated on the idea of people carrying guns to these events.
August 19th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Inter armes, silent leges. When weapons talk, the laws are silent. An old Roman saying. I don’t know that I want that. Outside our borders maybe, but not inside.
August 19th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Nate, the story says he was walking around at the pro-reform rally, not that he was a supporter. It does not give that information. It is entirely possible he was, but it is also entirely possible he is opposed and listening to the other side, or making a larger statement because he figured there were anti-gunners in the pro-reform crowd.
Anyway, I think it’s great to see someone peacefully exercising their rights. More need to start doing it.