Armed gun-rights advocates rally at Washington state capitol
Source: Associated Press
Armed gun-rights advocates rally at Washington state capitol
By DERRICK NUNNALLY, Associated Press | February 7, 2015 | Updated: February 7, 2015 3:54pm
[font size=1]
Photo By Elaine Thompson/AP
Marie McFadden holds her daughter, Faith, 6, as she prays with armed demonstrators as the group
concludes a gun-rights rally at the state capitol Saturday, Feb. 7, 2015, in Olympia, Wash.
Approximately 50 demonstrators, including a half-dozen small children, protested rules that prohibit
openly carrying guns into the House and Senate viewing galleries.
[/font]
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) A gun-rights rally drew about 50 people, mostly armed, to the steps of the Capitol on Saturday morning for a demonstration they hoped would end with their arrest. To raise money for bail, some protesters hawked caps with "Fight Tyranny Shoot Back" printed on them and sold out.
The plan was to walk into the Capitol after a few speeches and carry guns into the Legislature's viewing gallery, in defiance of rule changes made in January that banned the open carry of firearms there. However, the Washington State Patrol kept the gallery doors locked after the building opened to the public at 11 a.m. The crowd, including two state legislators, walked through the marble hallways, with some lining up to knock on the doors to the House gallery and Gov. Jay Inslee's office.
No one was arrested, and the State Patrol reported no disturbances. The protesters went instead to the closed gate of the governor's mansion and prayed.
"What's the world coming to when there are people who want to break the law and they won't let you do it?" said Dave Grenier, 58, of Tumwater, as his fellow pro-gun demonstrators began to file out of the Capitol.
Their complaints against state government stem from the 2014 passage of Initiative 594 by voters statewide. It imposed new background-check requirements on several types of gun transfers, including purchases and loans, and opponents say the new law infringes on firearm rights guaranteed in the state and federal constitutions.
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/us/article/Gun-rights-advocates-rally-at-Washington-state-6068480.php
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Should make for interesting water-cooler conversation.
Suich
(10,642 posts)alcina
(602 posts)And he -- along with several of the other pro-gun guys I know -- is taking heavy doses of anti-anxiety meds. I've often wondered if the gun obsession is a form of OCD for which the meds provide some mild relief, or if the meds are to offset their fears about having their guns taken away.
RKP5637
(67,109 posts)with their guns and all. IMO there's a lot more gong on than just gun rights with them.
alcina
(602 posts)An acquaintance was blathering on one time about his compound, bunker, stash of weapons, blah blah blah. And at some point, he asked me if I had a plan for when the "inevitable" happens. (Never did quite find out which "inevitable" he meant, but whatever.) I replied that, since I knew where he lived, my plan was to take him out first, and then survive on his stash.
For months afterward, he would periodically ask a mutual friend if I was serious.
Silly me. I never should have shown my hand.
riversedge
(70,239 posts)folks--esp. the one you are describing. Stay safe
alcina
(602 posts)Had I known how paranoid he was, I probably would not have made that comment to him. Thankfully, I now live thousands of miles away, so I shouldn't have to worry.
But now I need a plan B.
Skittles
(153,164 posts)they're paranoid idiots - they should be investing in therapy instead of guns
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Looking nuts.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)pnwmom
(108,978 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)on point
(2,506 posts)and their gun rights stripped.
These fools are terrorists and getting dangerous to the country.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)Paladin
(28,262 posts)The pro-gun crowd will nail you for it if it doesn't meet the NRA-approved definition......
I'm jesting, of course; "brandishing" is an accurate and legitimate description of what's going on. We need to quit ceding vocabulary control to the gun enthusiasts; we've allowed it to go on for way too long......
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Letting the gunners define the definitions and hence the laws is about as smart as allowing 'pro-lifers' to define what means life. Stop the madness already.
Amishman
(5,557 posts)everyone should follow the correct legal definition.
encouraging arrests when a crime is not being committed just wastes police resources, and potentially opens the door to wrongful arrest / imprisonment lawsuits.
Paladin
(28,262 posts)Imposition of hyper-detailed definitions online has been used by pro-gun types to stifle and intimidate pro-control advocates, and to avoid meaningful discussion of the actual issues at hand. This practice has gone on way too long and needs to stop. We don't allow our opponents to control the vocabulary on right-to-life and foreign policy matters; the same should be true regarding gun control.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)AND there have been some people on this site that link it to actually calling the cops whenever they see someone doing it.
So it matters in this context.
(brăn?dĭsh)
tr.v. bran·dished, bran·dish·ing, bran·dish·es
To wave or flourish (something, often a weapon) in a menacing, defiant, or excited way. See Synonyms at flourish.
n.
A menacing, defiant, or excited wave or flourish of something.
And that's not even a legal dictionary.
Paladin
(28,262 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I would probably fully agree with you, if 'brandish' was a softer definition in common use, along the lines of 'displaying' or 'visible'. Certainly when people open carry, it is visible.
Paladin
(28,262 posts)Better that, than definitions which are vetted, approved, and then forced into public discourse by the likes of Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent, on behalf of the pro-gun militancy movement.
But you too are welcome to your opinion.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)NYT sometimes uses pro-gun language, does it not?
Paladin
(28,262 posts)That was a compliment, by the way.....
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I try to keep my terminology tight (and point it out on same team conversations), because it makes it easier to call out the other side on disingenuous bullshit, when they can't point a finger back. Normally it doesn't matter though. They'll be disingenuous regardless.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)They claim it infringes on their right to have guns. And yet they all have guns and don't cite to one person who should have a gun who was denied a gun by that law. Considering 90% of Americans favor universal background checks, these idiots apparently have a big problem with Americans.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Seems much of the pro-gun supporters are in favor of barring people from the polls based on vague suspicions.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)Like the "right to fire arms." They and the right wing 5 on our Supreme Court overturned long standing Supreme Court precedent and disregarded historical fact, and the actual words in the Constitution, in interpreting the Second Amendment as enshrining some kind of individual right to guns, when it is and always has been about the right to maintain a public militia so as to avoid standing armies.
Right to vote? Promotion of the general welfare? Not respecting an establishment of religion? In other words, the HEART of our Constitution? They happily ignore it.
hack89
(39,171 posts)both say the 2A protects an individual right to own guns. It is not just the right wing you are fighting on this issue.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)The Dems are picking their battles until we get a progressive majority on the Supreme Court.
Dont worry, no one is coming after your precious guns.
hack89
(39,171 posts)I don't worry about anyone taking away my guns - haven't for a very long time.
You understand that the SC has said that the 2A allows the strict regulation of guns. Registration, AWBs, UBCs are all perfectly legal and constitutional. So stop blaming the SC and the 2A. Your problem is a lack of widespread popular support. If you had the votes you would have the laws you want.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)Popular support is not what is stopping common sense gun control. 90% of Americans want universal background checks, yet our so-called representatives didn't let it pass. Now that owning a gun has been elevated to a constitutional right by those 5 right wing idiots on the Supreme Court, the NRA has even more ammunition to bat down such reforms, particularly in court. Dems and Obama decided to just move on and deal with other problems.
hack89
(39,171 posts)remember that instead of showing some restraint they tried to pass every possible gun control law including an AWB - all at once in one big package. If they had tried to pass UBCs by itself it most likely would have passed.
And remember that it was Harry Reid in the Senate that killed it as he tried to protect Dems from pro-gun states as they ran for reelection.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)They will end up doing something stupid to each other.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)Oh my gosh...I'm always trying to come up with some witty, insulting post , when there are such stories but...losers.
I don't think I've thought of that in years. It's a perfect description.
(This also got me wondering how many of these losers, are getting some form of gub'ment help.)
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)where is it in the bible that Jesus went into the desert and prayed 40 days for guns.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Really, it's just the modern day Klan. They did the same thing.
freebrew
(1,917 posts)Nobel_Twaddle_III
(323 posts)Skittles
(153,164 posts)that is what is wrong with these people
paleotn
(17,920 posts)...get over it or get out.
Prison time for people that hand a gun to someone else is what we voted for.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)then correct the bad legislation.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)I agree with the open carry restrictions. They should arrest people for breaking it and let them have their day in court.
This is not something we should be happy about.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)...do it?"
I had to read that three times before I was sure I got it right.
I wonder what they would do if a black male child with Skittles and iced tea wanted to rally on their front yards?
Wait... I know...
rickford66
(5,523 posts)Please fill me in.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Just like signs and banners are banned.
The protesters wanted to take their guns into the viewing galleries and get arrested. Instead the cops just stopped them from entering the galleries with their guns.
old guy
(3,283 posts)15 minutes of fame in the local media and it's back under their rock. Sigh.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)louis-t
(23,295 posts)"Hey Senator, I don't think I liked the way you voted on that bill." Blam! Blam!
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)mentalslavery
(463 posts)Its called deterrence jack-ass.
jpak
(41,758 posts)yup
world wide wally
(21,744 posts)Any of them would just blend in with the population in "Idiocracy".
I wish I was joking!
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)own bad choices.
riversedge
(70,239 posts)SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)Judi Lynn
(160,542 posts)DiverDave
(4,886 posts)were black?
Entitled white lunatics, being treated with kid gloves.
Figures...they ought to be in jail.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Brigid
(17,621 posts)Where idiots like this ( or maybe it's the same idiots) who caused a ruckus recently by storming the state capitol building with their Precious?
rstanleyj2918ca
(8 posts)When will this country ever get some sense, and restrict access of these dangerous, murdering machines to these nutcases? Sheesh!
ileus
(15,396 posts)olddots
(10,237 posts)the threat of that potential catastrophe out weighs their dumbth .