Sign Control
I got sidetracked but I wanted to talk about the man open carrying at the Obama protest thing in New Hampshire from the point made in this post. Insty sums up the press reaction nicely:
EEK! A GUN!
And it’s having an effect. However, you couple the gun with the whole blood of tyrants sign and I think the guy made a poor marketing decision. Of course, he was also a half a mile away and there two hours before Obama’s arrival.
One of the more interesting dynamics I’ve found in this debate is the reaction from folks. Some folks are none too happy here. Take Aunt B. for example:
Because the whole “gun nuts” thing aside, the biggest progress gun lovers have made is in convincing the rest of us that y’all are normal people we have no reason to be afraid of.
Unlike the press, Aunt B. is not all EEK! A GUN!. She takes issue with the sign. I really doubt Aunt B. would be concerned if the guy was protesting and did not have that particular sign. It is New Hampshire. You know, live free or die. And NH has had handgun carry for probably longer than anyone. So, if you’re going to open carry at a protest, probably ought to leave the signs that advocate violence at home. In fact, leaving those signs at home when not carrying is probably a good idea too.
Meanwhile, PDB is utterly outraged.
August 12th, 2009 at 11:28 am
In the immortal words of a noted twenty-first century thinker: “If the pants fit, wet them.”
A whiners below decks.
Onward.
August 12th, 2009 at 11:28 am
“All whiners…” etc. (I hate it when the radio distracts me mid-post.)
August 12th, 2009 at 11:34 am
I have no prob with his first and second amendment decisions.
But agreeing to participate on air in Chris Matthews’ PSH dog and pony show was weapon’s grade stupid.
August 12th, 2009 at 11:45 am
There are some states where you cannot protest or picket while wearing a firearm – in those states you are only entitled to use one amendment at a time… no double dipping on the Bill of Rights! NH is obviously not one of them – but if people are headed out to a rally, they should check first.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
I thought this is NH and good for him. But he may have the right and legal ability but I agree choosing that rig and that sign was bad marketing and bad show for pro gun.
I saw the video of Chris Matthews and I though how insulting Matthews was about implying Mr. Kostic is going to change into an assasin on the spot. It was obvious that that the man had no such intention.
There is a message in open carry and the sign that the Tree of Liberty needs the blood of tryants. Not a good choice on an Obama media event. Obama fits that too well.
Mr. Kostic handled himself well on Chris Matthews and showed that he was law abiding. I thought his comment that Matthews rant was irrelevent was perfect.
All OC are public ambasadors of a pro gun message, I just said he was unwise with using that sign and OC at the same time.
I personally like leg holsters I thought PDB post was very useful though on proper leg holsters.
August 12th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
I loved the sign! The gun was a non issue with me and had zero effect one way or the other. The thing I loved most was the media response, pure pant shitting madness!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f876GOd_CKM
Then to be so bold as to go on Mathews and nail this troll to the wall was GREAT! Mathews tried every trick in the book with zero success, and when he surrendered it was awesome!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XflE0RMiIiA
The statement he made with the sign was great. The gun was simply there as it would have been Obama or not, and he had permission to be there. When people finally stand up and exercise their rights and stop cowering to the left, I think many more will follow suit and we can once and for all tell the Brady Bunch to shove off. Trying to be politically correct is the majority of this nation’s problem, and when people stand up and start exercising their rights in their faces then more people can feel secure exercising said rights. To bow down to appease the spin main stream media that the majority no longer trusts will not push any idea forward. I guess if there was no open carry the media would turn pro gun? Grow a pair, OC everywhere it is legal, and the opinion of the sheep will certainly change for the better. An armed society is a polite society.
August 12th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
This may make me unpopular (not that I ever really cared about popularity). I can easily see where his sign could be viewed as a threat. In order to water the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants, you kinda have to kill some tyrants. Couple that with the fact that he was packing iron and you have a threat AND the means to carry out that threat.
It was a poor choice for him to carry that particular sign and a gun at that place and time. Sometimes just because it isn’t technically illegal doesn’t mean it is ok to do, and I’m still not convinced that it was 100% legal. You know, threat… gun… I’m just not sure (IANAL). Would it be legal to OC in NH while holding a sign that says “I GONNA SHOOT SOMEBODY”? How far is too far (legally speaking)?
s
August 12th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Mr. Kostic only had “the tree of liberty needs to be refreshed” on his sign, there was no reference to “with the blood of patriots and tyrants”. There are other ways to water the tree of liberty, like peaceful assemblies, voting, etc. It was the culls at MSNBC that were making a big deal out of something that WASNT there. (no surprise with that)
Why cant anyone practice their 1st and 2nd ammendment rights at the same time? Where in the Constitution does it say that these rights can only be practiced/enjoyed one at a time?
August 12th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
I would think the sign would only be a threat against tyrants. Unless they were included in the most recent hate crime legislation, I think that tyrants are still fair game for making fun of and decrying.
August 12th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
That the guy was carrying a gun doesn’t make it a 2A issue for me.
If he had been carrying a full gas can and a lighter while holding a sign which read “You sure got a nice place there.” (even if leaving off the implied “…be a shame if anything happened to it”) I wouldn’t say that he was just excersizing his rights to speech and property simultaneously.
August 12th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
“I can easily see where his sign could be viewed as a threat. In order to water the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants, you kinda have to kill some tyrants.”
Awaken yourself, sir, to the fact that you have that completely back-asswards.
The tyrants are the “threat”. Do you understand? Get your logic in order.
August 12th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
His actions were indeed here in the lovely state of NH and please note that the man was not removed or even bothered from what I can find. Not only didn’t the SS put his gun and his sign together and come up with a class A threat, they pretty much ignored him. I think the politicalbyline post was completely out to lunch when they think that distracted the SS. The guy with the gun and the sign was so easy to keep track of that they likely found no reason to concentrate on him.
In NH you can actually use your rights two or more at a time, even if you make an ass of yourself doing so. I don’t think his choice was wise, but it was something that sent a message that he apparently wanted. Hell he got more air time than all of the tea partiers did that whole day.
And recall this is a “Free Stater.” He is more on the far edge of the Big L Libertarians. Lots of people don’t like there actions, but a lot of us appreciate getting more conservative or libertarian voices into the state since we tend to get to many comrades moving north from the People’s Republic of Massachusetts. The bluing of NH has been unfortunate since the majority of the long time residence have been much more conservative.
August 12th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Call me silly but I just don’t think that carrying a sidearm near the President is smart business. I dunno if you call read, but the Secret Service did nap some idiot with an unregistered firearm.
Hence my problem with it. Luckily they caught the idiot.
Anyhow, again, thanks for the link in, between you and InstaPundit, my hits are through the roof! 😀
-Pat
August 12th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Well, Patrick, there is no such thing as a registered firearm in NH, so of course it was unregistered. but, as always, PSH requires it be called ‘unregistered’ because that will cause more abject terror in the idiots that believe the MSM.
Not to deny that this guy broke a couple NH laws and one Federal law (that I can see), but they guy we are talking about upthread wasn’t this guy!
Regards,
POl
August 12th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
So the left is finally admitting that Obama is a tyrant? I mean that would only explain why they were having a hissy fit, right?
Are people in this administration timid when they try to infringe or take away our rights? I think not. So what is wrong with being fierce when standing up for our rights?
Our Founding Fathers were lions as men yet it seems when the media puts there cameras on us that we should be nothing more than kittens mewing and begging for milk (our rights).
August 13th, 2009 at 6:37 am
@Patrick
Problem with your contention is that you appear to think that a right requires an intelligent users. Rights are equally possessed by all people. If they choose poorly they pay, but only if they are breaking the law. This guy didn’t.
August 13th, 2009 at 7:45 am
Pat, please pick up a little real info about firearms law before you go running around talking about it; right now I’m finding you much more of an embarrassment than I am the guy with the sign and his legally-owned sidearm.
…and for the “implied threat” crowd, it’s only a threat if POTUS is a tyrant. Mr. Obama is a lot of (bad) things but he’s no more “tyrannical” than Nixon, LBJ or either Bush. Also? Wavin’ a non-supportive sign and open carrying = “Worst. Lone gunman. Evar.” Even crazy assassins know better.
August 13th, 2009 at 8:13 am
Thomas Jefferson would never have condoned uttering those words and being armed….oh wait, he did.
August 13th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
“…it’s only a threat if POTUS is a tyrant. Mr. Obama is a lot of (bad) things but he’s no more ‘tyrannical’ than Nixon, LBJ or either Bush.”
You make a hell of a case, Roberta.
There is just no question about it.
August 13th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
“Mr. Obama is a lot of (bad) things but he’s no more “tyrannical” than Nixon, LBJ or either Bush.”
The phrase “Damn with faint praise” comes to mind.
August 13th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
…Which was my point. Each man sucked, to a degree dependent on your political leanings, but if any of ’em had been actual tyrants, they’d’ve not bothered with elections, nor would they have left when (or even before!) their time was up. The Federal system is broken, probably unfixably so, but it’s not totally destroyed.
August 14th, 2009 at 1:29 am
We’re only 8 months in. Is there a single position of his that isn’t meant to be a tool in the dismantling of that system or at least doing as much damage to the foundations as humanly possible?
As for gun guy, good for him. Actually, good for BOTH of them. No kids in the school where the Obomber was going to be, he left his gun in the car and only had a tool. I’d bet a large portion of the student body goes into it more heavily “armed.” If I HAD to go into a school I’d want to be armed myself.
I hope the guy gets a nice new sign that another network can pick up on…something like “When Chris Matthews met me he felt a tinkle go down his leg”