| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Other News |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 9/4/08 6:20:28 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jerry is a heretic.
Ok, I'm kidding about the heresy. But I really don't agree with him here. I don't have a problem with the Secret Service defining a "gun free zone" around a candidate... When there is an event like this, there are plenty of police on hand, and I honestly wouldn't feel a need or desire to carry inside of the limited "sterile" area. But outside the metal detectors, rights are rights. What if John Noble had been another 500 yards away? What if he had been in a building across the street? What if he was in a private residence with a line-of-sight to the place where a candidate was giving a speech? What about on the other side of town? Where can you draw the line and say "you have no right to carry a weapon here"? As far as I'm concerned, that line is, and must be, no more than the gates and metal detectors surrounding the immediate event.
Jerry says it makes responsible gun owners look bad. Perhaps. But I think it makes gun owners look bad when they sit back and allow their rights to be abused. John Noble seems to be a responsible gun owner. A lot of people open carry solely for the purpose of startling people, and that may have been the case here. But I still fail to see why anyone feels justified in damning another person for exercising their rights in a way that harms nobody.
Remember, the police can't charge him with any real crime, so they use the catch-all "disorderly conduct" which can be used to criminalize "any conduct we don't like." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
|
|
|
| < "Home Run" | | "Quick Thought: Palin vs Obama" > |
|
|
|
|
