Protestor with gun allowed in Obama's town hall meeting.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2009 9:07 PM GMT
    Now just suppose..

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/12/barack-obama-new-hampshire-gun
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2009 9:58 PM GMT
    Twisted to say the least that any armed man would be allowed to be anywhere near a public figure. I' need to see the written law that allows a civilian to carry a weapon concealed or not in presence of the president of the united states. Who did this sheriff vote for anyway?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2009 1:40 PM GMT
    Hillie saidTwisted to say the least that any armed man would be allowed to be anywhere near a public figure. I' need to see the written law that allows a civilian to carry a weapon concealed or not in presence of the president of the united states. Who did this sheriff vote for anyway?


    I was trying to find it myself and couldn't. Perhaps one who is involved in this area professionally can provide us the info
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2009 2:30 PM GMT
    I love it.

    Reminds me of the black panthers. Can't do anything if its legal.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2009 2:59 PM GMT


    erm, did anyone see this at the end of the article?

    "• This article was amended on 13 August 2009. The original referred to a protester shouting at Barack Obama, when in fact the target was Senator Arlen Specter. This has been corrected."


    Quite frankly, regardless of whether it's legal or not, we're pretty sure civilians carrying unconcealed weapons, on someone's private property or not, would be subject to the influence of the President's Security. We're both pretty sure a 'bubble zone' of no weapons would be a pre-req.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2009 3:15 PM GMT
    From what I've read, the guy was outside the security perimeter and under constant surveillance. He was making a perfectly legal political statement using a firearm for shock value. People were shocked by it, so in that regard, it worked.