EXCLUSIVE: Journalist Accosted By Security Over Mayor Bloomberg Gun Control Question

Originally posted by spacedog1973

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

No, it is not a flawed argument. These people are hypocrites and their policies are a double standard. One set of human beings doesn't get to have more rights than others, it doesn't work that way. If government gets guns, we get guns. If we disarm, they disarm, it's that simple. Even then, we won't disarm.

You failed to even point out any flaws in the argument. Please, explain to everyone how this is not hypocrisy and a double standard.

edit on 28-1-2013 by Merlin Lawndart because: (no reason given)

I don't need to point to a flaw in an unoriginal argument

Case and point.

reply to post by Merlin Lawndart


Lord this exhausting....Is it an either or choice? Either both the Secret Service and Joe Wacko who wants to shoot kids get access to the same guns or no one does? Either I get my own Nuclear Weapon or the US Military has to disarm thiers? Technically it's called a binary fallacy of logic. I just call it BS. Can the NRA and Alex Jones minions cease with the BS and engage in rational debate?

Joe Wacko shouldn't have his own Nuclear Weapon...and we shouldn't ban kitchen knives.

And President Obama is the Commander and Chief of the US Military and has the nuclear launch codes. I am OK with affording his kids more armed guards than my own.

Let me know when sanity comes back to the discussion and then maybe we will get some sane answers.

Cuz the idea that we should just become Somalia, where kids wear AKs like a fashion statement, doesn't work for me. Let me know when the Gun Lobby is interested in rational debate.

reply to post by spacedog1973

We've gone over this before; security is mandatory for certain positions and also common sense. This is the same flawed argument used against Obama and his children's school. This type of journalism is basic, fundamentally flawed and pointless. It is no way compares to civilians and anyone who tries to make the comparison is a fool.

Maybe you missed the part where a New York Police Dept cop followed the reporter down the street in Washington, DC harassing the man, asking him for ID and even asking for his date of birth. What reason did the pig have to ask that of the man?

What jurisdiction does an NYPD goon have in gun-free DC?

reply to post by Indigo5

And President Obama is the Commander and Chief of the US Military and has the nuclear launch codes. I am OK with affording his kids more armed guards than my own.

Where does Bloomberg keep his launch codes?

Do you doubt that richie rich Bloomberg had armed security before he became Super-Nuke Bloomberg?

Does Rosie O'Donnell rate armed gunmen protecting her just because she is rich and famous?

Originally posted by butcherguy

What jurisdiction does an NYPD goon have in gun-free DC?

Again..WTF? NYPD is assigned to the NYC Mayoral security detail. Authority is not derived from a gun or lack there-of. It is wild-west fantasy...and idealized fantasy for anyone that has read genuine history of that time.

If I was working security and this idiot was shouting that stupidity outside of a press conference, I'd want to know who he was too. Cuz, in case you haven't noticed, there are wacko's in the world with guns...maybe we could discuss that sometime.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by butcherguy

What jurisdiction does an NYPD goon have in gun-free DC?

Again..WTF? NYPD is assigned to the NYC Mayoral security detail. Authority is not derived from a gun or lack there-of. It is wild-west fantasy...and idealized fantasy for anyone that has read genuine history of that time.

If I was working security and this idiot was shouting that stupidity outside of a press conference, I'd want to know who he was too. Cuz, in case you haven't noticed, there are wacko's in the world with guns...maybe we could discuss that sometime.

Most wacko's don't have a cameraman with them.

reply to post by rockymcgilicutty

I beg to differ,any move against the 2nd Amendment set's precedence for furter moves against it.To ensure our right to bear arms,we need to draw a line.Well the line starts at it's current point.The attempt to ban assualt weapons.

There are already restrictions and bans on certain types of firearms.

So according to your logic, the line has already been passed, the precedant is already there...and you have lived this long with the current bans and look...you can still own a gun.

It's a flawed and ignorant argument.

reply to post by Indigo5

Again..WTF? NYPD is assigned to the NYC Mayoral security detail. Authority is not derived from a gun or lack there-of. It is wild-west fantasy...and idealized fantasy for anyone that has read genuine history of that time.

Hmmmm, so a security details job is to protect. Being that they are NYPD out of their jurisdiction, they had no legal right to ask for ID. These are rogue cops period! They have a right to detain, if in fact the reporter broke a law, which he didn't, and hold the perp until the DC police showed up!

Also, as to you mentioning history................have your ever read about Mao or Stalin???? Guess not!!!


Keep trying though. I love how you progressives, given enough rope, always manage to hang yourselves!!!

reply to post by Merlin Lawndart

You did not refute any flaws, just like the other poster and resorted to childish name calling, personal attacks and insults. You gun control advocates only have baseless, emotional arguments which is why you always have to resort to personal attacks, it's pathetic.

You are flat out lying when you say they aren't trying to ban guns, that or you're just very ignorant.

She hasn't proposed any current legislation to ban the guns she admits to carrying...so it is wrong to call her hypocritical.

There is legislation to ban certain firearms...laws like that already exist...there are certain guns you already can't own. Which is why people flipping out over assault weapons bans just displays their ignorance.

I'll say it again...there is no legislation that is calling to ban all guns...if you wish to continue to use it as your premise for your argument, then you are just showing you really don't understand the entire issue.

Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by butcherguy

What jurisdiction does an NYPD goon have in gun-free DC?

Again..WTF? NYPD is assigned to the NYC Mayoral security detail. Authority is not derived from a gun or lack there-of. It is wild-west fantasy...and idealized fantasy for anyone that has read genuine history of that time.

If I was working security and this idiot was shouting that stupidity outside of a press conference, I'd want to know who he was too. Cuz, in case you haven't noticed, there are wacko's in the world with guns...maybe we could discuss that sometime.

Most wacko's don't have a cameraman with them.

And verified press credentials!

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Indigo5

 

And President Obama is the Commander and Chief of the US Military and has the nuclear launch codes. I am OK with affording his kids more armed guards than my own.

Where does Bloomberg keep his launch codes?

Do you doubt that richie rich Bloomberg had armed security before he became Super-Nuke Bloomberg?

Does Rosie O'Donnell rate armed gunmen protecting her just because she is rich and famous?

Yes...Anyone whose day job it is to talk to Millions of folks and give opinions, needs security...cuz statistically a portion of those they reach are wacko and own guns.

Shall we list Presidents shot? Celebrities?

In Israel and other countries you need to Demonstrate NEED to own a gun. Here is the USA, the ATF had to release a "suggestion" video...cuz they legally aren't allowed to "demand"...that gun dealers don't sell to people that appear drunk or on drugs.

Not looking to ban all "guns"...but a conversation with the gun lobby that didn't involve someone screaming about tanks and hitler would be great.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by butcherguy

What jurisdiction does an NYPD goon have in gun-free DC?

Again..WTF? NYPD is assigned to the NYC Mayoral security detail. Authority is not derived from a gun or lack there-of. It is wild-west fantasy...and idealized fantasy for anyone that has read genuine history of that time.

If I was working security and this idiot was shouting that stupidity outside of a press conference, I'd want to know who he was too. Cuz, in case you haven't noticed, there are wacko's in the world with guns...maybe we could discuss that sometime.

I couldn't help but notice that you completely bypassed the question.

What jurisdiction does the mayor's goon squad have to demand the ID of the man?

Especially when he has already shown them his press pass.... and at that point was not within close proximity of the mayor??? Blocks away!

Hey ATSer's, can you count how many times these authoritarian control freaks used the terms "wacko", "moron", "idiot", "gun-nut","stupid", "militants"? They just bust out insulting labels and expect it to be taken as informative information and facts.

How long until we hear the ol' comparing gun ownership to penises?

Dianne Feinstein said it herself, she wants to BAN ALL GUNS. Did she say that or not? She did. Liars.

Did the reporter have an "assault"-drink in his hand at the time of confrontation ?

If so, how many ounces was it ?

Was he cleared to be carrying that kind of "assault"-drink ? Especially when Bloomberg outlawed them in NY ?

No wonder his bodyguards were antsy ! You can't just pull out a 32-ouncer and not expect panic !

reply to post by Indigo5

Shall we list Presidents shot? Celebrities?

What??
Are you saying that non-celebrity civilians don't get shot?
Or are you saying that a citizen only deserves the protection of firearms when they are rich and or famous???

Yes...Anyone whose day job it is to talk to Millions of folks and give opinions, needs security...cuz statistically a portion of those they reach are wacko and own guns.

I hate to break it to you, but I am neither rich or famous. I don't have to talk to millions.... and I have run into a portion of those 'wacko' ones... that owned guns. Some of them were holding down a job...
As cops.

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
Hey ATSer's, can you count how many times these authoritarian control freaks used the terms "wacko", "moron", "idiot", "gun-nut","stupid", "militants"? They just bust out insulting labels and expect it to be taken as informative information and facts.

Dianne Feinstein said it herself, she wants to BAN ALL GUNS. Did she say that or not? She did. Liars.

Yup the game is old. It's all part of the tactic to turn people against something. "I don't want to be associated with 'wackos'!"

reply to post by xedocodex

I will agree that restrictions have been made.But since I was not old enough to have protested them I had no chance to act.By your very point you have proven that restrictions lead to further restrictions,So enough is enough.On this point many Americans are making theirself heard.We view this as a line that should it be crossed, and could lead to futher weapons bans.Since the President won't do it we are saying "the buck stop's here"

If the ban on assualt weapon's is passed because of mass shootings.When the next mass shooting happen's and a pistol is used (which is the type of weapon used in the most mass shootings) what type of weapons do you think the Anti-Gun (aka the victims) will be calling for.They will say .see a assualt weapon wasn't used.That ban must have worked now we need all pistols.

Originally posted by seeker1963

Also, as to you mentioning history................have your ever read about Mao or Stalin???? Guess not!!!

Alex Jones is that you? Thanks for highlighting my issue with the Gun Lobby being unable to have a debate that doesn't involve red-dawn fantasy or Nazis.

Originally posted by seeker1963

Keep trying though. I love how you progressives, given enough rope, always manage to hang yourselves!!!

"you progressives"??...Hmmm...And you think that "Alex Jones" is doing the 2nd Amendment good? Or weakening it? Again there is a rational debate to be had and as long as one aprty shouts about Hitler and asks retarded questions like...why does the President have guards?...I see that as damaging the 2nd Amendment, which Istrongly support.

reply to post by Indigo5

Not looking to ban all "guns"...but a conversation with the gun lobby that didn't involve someone screaming about tanks and hitler would be great.

I have spoken of neither here.

You, on the other hand, used nuclear weapons and their associated launch codes to try to give Mayor Bloomberg a reason to have an armed goon squad.

I have to honestly say that if Mayor Bloomberg was shot on a street today, it would have zero effect on my life. The same effect it would have on him if I was gunned down today.

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
Hey ATSer's, can you count how many times these authoritarian control freaks used the terms "wacko", "moron", "idiot", "gun-nut","stupid", "militants"? They just bust out insulting labels and expect it to be taken as informative information and facts.

How long until we hear the ol' comparing gun ownership to penises?

Dianne Feinstein said it herself, she wants to BAN ALL GUNS. Did she say that or not? She did. Liars.

edit on 28-1-2013 by Merlin Lawndart because: (no reason given)

Good point,I prefer to call the anti-gun people,Victims,or potential victims.