• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

So the Storm Trumper armed threats begin....

Deuce said:
I called this ages ago. When black guys stood near a polling place with clubs, it was intimidation. But a gun is just exercising your rights.

We'll see this on election day.
Click to expand...

LOL really


One is legal and the other is not
 
Sietske22 said:
Only in America would we just blindly trust someone to walk around with gun and assume they mean no harm.

Possession of guns may be a right, but they can also be very intimidating.

Same as walking around carrying a knife, or an axe, or a baseball bat.

These guys may have the legal right to walk around with an exposed firearm, but the second they put a finger on that gun while loitering outside a Clinton campaign office, they should be charged with menacing.
Click to expand...

really? why is that? now its true that professional firearms trainers such as myself tell those we instruct that you don't put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to shoot.

but if the weapon is not pointed at anyone, the menacing charge isn't going to stick
 
Ganesh said:
This is a case of a loser who feels the need to display some authority, but does not know how. So he hangs about with a gun in his belt, too afraid to use it, and not capable of making a more intellectual defense of his chosen one. Lurking about with a gun outside a storefront is his default position, no doubt with distant images of Marshal Dillion, or John Wayne in his head. Too bad he doesn't have any more substantial items in that cavity.
Click to expand...

interesting analysis. what backs it up?
 
volsrock said:
LOL really


One is legal and the other is not
Click to expand...

You going to say this when people are "exercising their 2nd amendment rights" at polling locations?
 
TurtleDude said:
really? why is that? now its true that professional firearms trainers such as myself tell those we instruct that you don't put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to shoot.

but if the weapon is not pointed at anyone, the menacing charge isn't going to stick
Click to expand...

If someone in public legally carrying a gun is approached by a police officer, and that person grabs the pistol grip of his gun, such person will likely be charged with something and will certainly be arrested.

Actions have consequences. Holding a gun in a way that can be easily & quickly fired, even if pointed at the ground, surely could warrant a menacing charge and conviction. Especially if argued by a good Prosecutor.
 
Sietske22 said:
If someone in public legally carrying a gun is approached by a police officer, and that person grabs the pistol grip of his gun, such person will likely be charged with something and will certainly be arrested.

Actions have consequences. Holding a gun in a way that can be easily & quickly fired surely could warrant a menacing charge and conviction. Especially if argued by a good Prosecutor.
Click to expand...

have you ever handled a menacing case? Now if you grab a gun in your holster when approached by a cop you might well get SHOT.

anyway you hold a gun allows you to quickly and easily fire it
 
TurtleDude said:
have you ever handled a menacing case? Now if you grab a gun in your holster when approached by a cop you might well get SHOT.

anyway you hold a gun allows you to quickly and easily fire it
Click to expand...

Yes if you are approached by a police officer and grab the grip of your gun you are likely to die of acute lead poisoning. Which only proves the point that open carry of guns can be considered threatening and putting your hand on the action of such gun while protesting someone, could be seen as a real act of menacing.

If I was carrying a gun while participating in a protest, I'd keep my hands far away from that trigger. I would never carry it openly, especially at a public protest where tensions can get high and angry words can be spewed.

When in public you should only touch your gun when you plan on shooting somebody.
 
Sietske22 said:
Yes if you are approached by a police officer and grab the grip of your gun you are likely to die of acute lead poisoning. Which only proves the point that open carry of guns can be considered threatening and putting your hand on the action of such gun while protesting someone, could be seen as a real act of menacing.

If I was carrying a gun while participating in a protest, I'd keep my hands far away from that trigger. I would never carry it openly, especially at a public protest where tensions can get high and angry words can be spewed.

When in public you should only touch your gun when you plan on shooting somebody.
Click to expand...

you are wrong in the second sentence: carrying a gun is very different than appearing to try to use the weapon when a police officer approaches.

the rest of your statement makes sense
 
MrPeanut said:
I don't really see a problem with what these guys are doing. I did get annoyed by his claim that he would be facing at least 10 years if he did a quarter of Hillary had done. I've seen this on facebook from some of my old military buddies and it just isn't necessarily true. Punishments vary from person to person and the level of classification. Was the FBI softer on Hillary because of a combination of her status and the actual danger her emails posed on national security? Possibly, but at the end of the day they had more evidence than anybody else and decided not to charge her.
Click to expand...

The only thing this proves is that our legal system is flawed and makes big mistakes.....and is no longer a trustworthy guardian of Justice.
It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Hillary is guilty.
 
volsrock said:
LOL really


One is legal and the other is not
Click to expand...

Yeah, we've heard this tune ever since forever from the usual source: Whatever the white man does is legal and the black man isn't, right? Those two NBPPers broke no law. The Bush DoJ determined that and the Obama DoJ looked at again and came to the same conclusion.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
why are progressives so afraid of anyone but the government being armed? I thought you progressives were all about the rights of citizens?
Click to expand...

Then why weren't these two "patriots" standing outside the FBI HQ or the local police station. If your sort were really concerned about the threat of armed government that's where the armed government is. This was all about intimidation and you know it and you cheer for it.
 
volsrock said:
Nothing personifies a Obama and Clinton supporter like a large group trashing and burning cars etc for days..don't these people have jobs under Obama?

View attachment 67208650
Click to expand...

Oh, here's the guy who likes the Trump criteria for what women he'd like to rape. He should really be lecturing us on bad behavior.
 
volsrock said:
He was not in charge when charges were decided to be placed or not
Click to expand...

False, as usual. The Bush DoJ looked at that case and found no reason to file charges. The Obama DoJ looked at it again because of all the republican screeching about it and found the same lack of evidence.
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
The only thing this proves is that our legal system is flawed and makes big mistakes.....and is no longer a trustworthy guardian of Justice.
It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Hillary is guilty.
Click to expand...

I guess this really is the way some people look like at the world. If they get the decision they want it was perfect justice. If not, the system is corrupt. Trump's peddling a version of this by claiming the election is rigged only if he loses. If he wins this is the best electoral system in the universe. It is the stuff of hilarious satire but for the fact that it's got a very dark motive and potential for very bad behavior from his fanatics, which is to say just about every single supporter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom