U.S. And International Politics

[Joe Elliott]

Question 1: If a citizen has a permit to carry a firearm and is found by Federal officers to be carrying a firearm, do they have the right to take the gun away and shoot the citizen?

Question 2: If so, is this in line with the Second Amendment?

It should be noted that one is either a strong defender of the Second Amendment, or one is not. One cannot sometimes support the Second Amendment, but at other times not, and be considered a strong defender of the Second Amendment.

[Tom Graves]

Question 1: If a citizen has a permit to carry a firearm and is found by Federal officers to be carrying a firearm, do they have the right to take the gun away and shoot the citizen?

Question 2: If so, is this in line with the Second Amendment?

It should be noted that one is either a strong defender of the Second Amendment, or one is not. One cannot sometimes support the Second Amendment, but at other times not, and be considered a strong defender of the Second Amendment.

Re: #1, I would think it would depend on whether or not the person was brandishing the firearm and/or actually pointing it at the Federal officers.

Don't you?

[Lance Payette]

Kind of an interesting article from the New Yorker concerning The Donald's logorrhea ("excessive and often incoherent talkativeness"):

https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-trumps-washington/its-time-to-talk-about-donald-trumps-logorrhea

"Amid all the coverage marking the first anniversary of his return to the White House, one story—which did not get the attention it deserved—stood out for me: a Times analysis of how much more the President has been talking and talking and talking. The findings? One million nine hundred and seventy-seven thousand six hundred and nine words in the Presidential appearances, as of January 20th—an increase of two hundred and forty-five per cent compared with the first year of Trump’s first term in office, back in 2017."

I think any objective observer has to be "just a bit" concerned.

[Royell Storing]

Question 1: If a citizen has a permit to carry a firearm and is found by Federal officers to be carrying a firearm, do they have the right to take the gun away and shoot the citizen?

Question 2: If so, is this in line with the Second Amendment?

It should be noted that one is either a strong defender of the Second Amendment, or one is not. One cannot sometimes support the Second Amendment, but at other times not, and be considered a strong defender of the Second Amendment.

    As we consistently see with respect to this individual, it is not mentioned/skipped over that he had NO ID on him. An alleged "peaceful protester" carrying a semi-automatic weapon with an additional 2 loaded clips and NO ID on him? How about we get real here? We'll see if they are able to Zoom in on the gun amidst that scrum, but you can hear someone Yelling, "Gun, Gun....".

[Tom Graves]

As we consistently see with respect to this individual, it is not mentioned/skipped over that he had NO ID on him. An alleged "peaceful protester" carrying a semi-automatic weapon with an additional 2 loaded clips and NO ID on him? How about we get real here? We'll see if they are able to Zoom in on the gun amidst that scrum, but you can hear someone Yelling, "Gun, Gun....".

Wowie zowie!

[Joe Elliott]

    As we consistently see with respect to this individual, it is not mentioned/skipped over that he had NO ID on him. An alleged "peaceful protester" carrying a semi-automatic weapon with an additional 2 loaded clips and NO ID on him? How about we get real here? We'll see if they are able to Zoom in on the gun amidst that scrum, but you can hear someone Yelling, "Gun, Gun....".

How did the Federal Agents know if he was carrying an ID with him?

If the Federal Agents found an ID on him, would they be in trouble?

Is it possible that if they found an ID on him with the license, they would "lose it"?



If the very worse is true, he did not have his ID and gun permit on him, this is not a felony but a misdemeanor (in Minnesota) subject to a $ 25 fine. I guess you could also say that at one point, he was in the middle of the street, not appearing to be blocking anyone, so he is also guilty of J-walking, another misdemeanor. Committing a misdemeanor does not nullify one's First or Second Amendments rights and allow Federal Agents to shoot one on the spot.



Also, the Federal Agents pushed him to the ground, grabded the gun that was in his backside waistband, yelled "Gun, Gun" and then shot him. The victim never grabbed his gun, the Federal Agent grabbed it.


What do Second Amendment advocates have to say on this?

The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, a gun rights organization in the state, wrote on X on Sunday in response to Patel’s claim: “This is completely incorrect on Minnesota law. There is no prohibition on a permit holder carrying a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines at a protest or rally in Minnesota.” And the national organization Gun Owners of America posted on X on Saturday: “The Second Amendment protects Americans’ right to bear arms while protesting – a right the federal government must not infringe upon.”

[Joe Elliott]

Charlie Kirk quote from 2018:

The 2nd amendment is not for hunting, it is not for self protection. It is there to ensure that free people can defend themselves if god forbid, government became tyrannical and turned against its citizens.



So a free people must be allowed to bring a firearm anywhere they might need to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. And that includes at a protest of that same government. And this right must not be infringed upon for frivolous reasons, like a misdemeanor may have been committed, J-walking or not having the proper permit with you at the time.

Are we dealing with a tyrannical government, when the government uses a misdemeanor to justify the killing of a protester? That his misdemeanor totally overrides any First or Second Amendment rights he would otherwise have had?