The Right to Bear Arms (and Protest)

As if protesters complaining about their country being taken away from them by the ubiquitous (though not really specified) 'they', now comes news that there are a growning number of protesters outside health care reform town halls and rallies who are choosing to stand outside armed. Now I agree that there is a lot of pent up tension surrounding the health care debate but is it so tense that it justifies the need to attend the protests outside with assault rifles? The gentleman in the photo accompanying today's blog seemed to think so. Last week outside a rally in Arizona arrived carrying an assault rifle and although he didn't identify himself or even state explicitly which 'side' of the debate he was on, nonetheless he was allowed to more or less freely wander the designated protest area.

What I find a little more disturbing (from a certain point of view) is the fact that the White House is not protesting or complaining against this fact. Now before gun-nuts get into a tizzy about how their rights to carry assault rifles and the like is protected by the Constitution and their state's laws (and Arizona does by the way allow for open carry of registered weapons) the issue isn't about whether or not they be allowed to carry their guns with them but rather whether it is right. We look at the situation in Iraq or Afghanistan where people (who most of us imagine to be thugs or members of the Taliban or al-Queda) wander about with AK-47's on their back and we shake our heads condemning them for being violent and brutal people. What makes this fellow any different?

In New Hampshire last week a man holding a sign reading "It's Time to Water the Tree of Liberty" also had a handgun strapped to his leg. Again there's no reason that he shouldn't be able to but don't these guys think that someone might find it a little inappropriate? Like him or not, President Obama is the President and has been legally elected to the post. As such the post does have a certain aura and deserves a certain degree of respect. That being said isn't it a bit wrong to bring such heavy weaponry to a rally or town hall? Well let me ask you this another way. If you were to show up tomorrow at the library or at the mall wearing your assault rifle, don't you think people would look at you funny?

Maybe in some states or areas it is completely normal but I'm saying in general. What then would set 'normal' citizens apart from deadly criminals with violent intent. Not a whole lot. How would I know that the guy walking around the library isn't ready to open up and kill a whole bunch of us. I don't. But then again I don't think anyone doubted the purpose of the shooter in the gym in Pennsylvania earlier this month either. They knew what he was doing and responded accordingly. I don't think a different standard should be enforced when it comes to the President making a speech but I can very near guarantee that had this happened at a rally outside of a speech being given in defense of the War in Iraq a few years ago, there would have been arrests galore.

It's almost like a double standard is being applied. The White House doesn't want to insist the public not carry guns because it is their constitutional right but nor do they want to make the situation difficult or dangerous for anyone at these rallies either. Some people argue that if more of us had ready access to guns, in the cases of incidents like Columbine and Virginia Tech, we could defend ourselves. By the same token I wonder if that would apply to defending ourselves from threats (perceived or otherwise) at political rallies and meetings as well. All I would say is that if you feel that strongly for or against a particular debate topic and you feel that you would be physically threatened to the point that you require an assault rifle for protection, you probably shouldn't be going anywhere in the first place.