Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul V. who wrote (109004)	7/28/2011 7:28:29 PM
From: d[-_-]b	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224744

"Why use anything that can be used as an intimidation tool?" Ask dumbo why he scared seniors about SS checks. Ans: to intimidate R's

To: Paul V. who wrote (109004)	7/29/2011 10:22:28 AM
From: TimF	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224744

Notice that none of those people used their weapons, not even to draw and point without shooting. A real crazy can get a weapon in to a crowd. If you ban weapons then only the crazies (and maybe armed security or police, but they can't be everywhere, and cover everything) will have weapons. Actual intimidation (pointing guns at people, making threats, having groups of openly armed people surround their political opponents, physically confronting people while openly armed, all without good reason) should not be allowed, but the mere presence of a gun (esp., but not only, in an area where people hunt frequently and carry routinely) isn't a threat. If those openly carrying where also acting in a threatening or intimidating, or even just rowdy and aggressive manner, that should be dealt with (which can be as simple as asking them to leave, or check their weapon, all the way up to arrests and criminal charges, depending on what they where doing). But I haven't heard any stories of any such actions at the tea party rallies.