Exercising Freedom? Hardly. Arrest the Gun Toters!

Here is a video of the moron who brought an assault rifle to a Town Hall Meeting attended by President Obama. This was a publicity stunt, coordinated with local police.

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.

The second group of laws allows the Secret Service to establish “Free Speech Zones” around the President. This was done extensively during the Bushit Administration to hide and suppress protesters. Now, there is a lot of argument about the Constitutionality of such, especially if it is utilized as the Bushit Administration did to suppress political opponents rights to Free Speech. And I agree, the sort of suppression of Free Speech done during the Bushit Administration more closely resembled a Fascist or Communist dictatorial regime than American ideals.

BUT… A valid argument can also be made that when a person brings a gun to a Public Meeting, that such is an actual threat against the Free Speech of people who disagree with them. A cornerstone of Law Enforcement Authority in this country is the implied threat of an Officer carrying a weapon. As such, a protester carrying a loaded gun to a Town Hall style meeting of opposing viewpoints is inherently doing so to suppress the Free Speech Rights of those speaking out against that person’s position.

As such, serving the Constitutional guarantee of Free Speech would be either arresting and charging these bozos illegally carrying guns under Federal Law, or locking them away in “Free Speech Zones” out of possible range of physically threatening or harming other protesters.

Unarmed protesters should be allowed to yell at each other to their heart’s content, and should not be subject to cloister or suppression by placing them in isolated Free Speech Zones as the Bushit Administration did.

more about “Exercising Freedom?“, posted with vodpod
About these ads

3 Responses

  1. The folks in AZ did an exceptionally clever job of staging this media hack.

    It signifies on a whole lot of levels and it was not competently or proactively addressed by the federal protective services.

    In the wake of the Crowley-Gates fiasco, and the limp-wristed response from the administration, I believe that strapping this kneegrow was a masterpiece of libertarian agitprop.

    Put it this way, it was so far beyond the capacity of the typical porche to imagine, much less successfully execute, that it goes without saying that you’re not looking at that particular element in the backdrop of this event.

  2. It’s going to be needlessly complicated to proact as you’ve indicated in your post. I don’t think the administration has the requisite testicular fortitude to respond appropriately.

    Whattaya bet?

  3. I agree with you. They appear to believe they can accommodate these folks, much a Neville Chamberlain did Hitler.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 146 other followers

%d bloggers like this: