Outside the event where President Obama will conduct his town hall, there is an anti-Obama protestor with a gun -- a pistol strapped to his lower leg.
The local police chief said it's legal for the man to have a registered handgun -- as long as it is not concealed. What's more, he is on private property, a church yard, which has given him permission to be there.
*** UPDATE *** More on the man with the gun... William Kostric is a married man in his mid 30S who works in sales. He says he moved here to New Hampshire from Arizona about a year ago, because it's a "live free or die" state -- and he thought Arizona was becoming too restrictive with its gun laws.
He's passing out a bookmark that says, "Join the Second Amendment Revolution, the most exciting pro-liberty movement in over 200 years."
He's a Ron Paul supporter, who opposes just about everything Obama, including health care reform.
The local police say he is within his rights to carry a handgun openly under state law. He was carrying a 9-mm Smith and Wesson strapped to his lower leg.
Police say he's OK on a public sidewalk. Kostric says he has permission from a church just down the street from the high school to be on its private property.
He says he was approached by a "detective," possibly a Secret Service Agent, who told him he could be arrested within 1,000 feet of a school with a weapon under a federal law. Kostric moved back to private property.
When Obama arrived, the police had Kostric under surveillance. A local police captain said the Secret Service has been "in the loop."
Kostric has been about 50 to 75 yards from the entrance to the high school, since about 11:00 am ET, doing interviews and carrying a sign and his gun and police have had their eye on him. But as long as he's been "cooperative," they have watched, but let him be.
noblegas said:Discuss. Did he pose a threat carrying a concealed weapon in his pocket? Do you think he had latent intentions other than opposing Obama's healthcare plan?
Pengwuino said:The Secret Service plans events like this months in advance and would have undoubtably had previous communications with the man beforehand. People don't typically get to walk around with a gun near a presidential event without getting carried off at gunpoint unless the SS knows about it.
noblegas said:That doesn't make sense to me. The SS could not possibly anticipate who would show up and who would not at these kinds of events; I pretty sure if they were predicting gun violence, they would have contacted New -hampshire police about telling their citizens not to carry gunds and would have told citizens not to bring guns to these events; The article says that the man didn't break any state laws concerning carrying a handgun and so I don't understand how he would possibly be arrested; There isn't any federal law that I am aware of that says you are not allowed to carry weapons to events where the president will be present;
noblegas said:That doesn't make sense to me. The SS could not possibly anticipate who would show up and who would not at these kinds of events; I pretty sure if they were predicting gun violence, they would have contacted New -hampshire police about telling their citizens not to carry gunds and would have told citizens not to bring guns to these events; The article says that the man didn't break any state laws concerning carrying a handgun and so I don't understand how he would possibly be arrested; There isn't any federal law that I am aware of that says you are not allowed to carry weapons to events where the president will be present;
Pengwuino said:Events with the president are made far in advance. If this person wanted to have a protest or give out information, he would contact the police who would in turn contact the secret service. If you simply walk up out of the blue with a gun where the president is going to be, they will talk to you or bring you in. In either case, they will know who you are and where you are at all times. For all we know, he may have had an unloaded weapon and been searched prior to it. Just because the media was surprised doesn't mean the secret service was.
drankin said:He didn't contact police or make prior arrangements. And I'M SURE his gun was loaded. Carrying an unloaded gun in public is idiotic. Carrying an unloaded gun on your leg for any reason is idiotic. He was simply making a statement and doing so peacefully, though I don't condone it, he wasn't breaking any laws.
Pengwuino said:So carrying a loaded gun near an event with the president is the non-idiotic option...? Guess that's one way of looking at it...
drankin said:I think it's idiotic. But openly carrying an unloaded gun can attract gunfire that you are not equipped to return. If there is word worse than idiotic, that would describe the individual who carries an unloaded firearm openly, in public.
drankin said:This is a good point. There was nothing illegal about it. The President or the SS cannot simply deny people their legal rights on a whim. This is the US for crying out loud. If it were in a federal building then of course, that's the policy for a federal building. But this was a church.
Considering the circumstances if all he wanted to do was make a statement and he was told he would not be allowed to carry the firearm loaded I am sure that he would have gone along with it. Otherwise I seriously doubt that they would have let him in.Drankin said:He didn't contact police or make prior arrangements. And I'M SURE his gun was loaded. Carrying an unloaded gun in public is idiotic. Carrying an unloaded gun on your leg for any reason is idiotic. He was simply making a statement and doing so peacefully, though I don't condone it, he wasn't breaking any laws.
Pengwuino said:So carrying a loaded gun near an event with the president is the non-idiotic option...?
Pupil said:Was carrying a loaded gun near the presence of the president a bad idea? Perhaps it was. Was it his right to do so (in a non-federal building)? Yes. Should it be? No.
Pupil said:Was carrying a loaded gun near the presence of the president a bad idea? Perhaps it was. Was it his right to do so (in a non-federal building)? Yes. Should it be? No.
drankin said:I disagree with your last statement. We do not lose our rights just because the President is in our vacinity. The SS should have held the meeting in a more controlled environment IMO. Like a federal building. But if he is going to mingle in our "presence" he does so at risk.
drankin said:But if he is going to mingle in our "presence" he does so at risk.
drankin said:We do not lose our rights just because the President is in our vacinity.
TheStatutoryApe said:Lol... isn't that a bit rediculous? We have an agency devoted (mostly) to defending the president and spend millions on protecting him yearly but we are going to tell him that he ought to just assume the risk if he happens to go to a public place?
cristo said:If the secret service would have deemed him a threat, I think it's safe to say that threat would have been neutralised. Given the amount of effort you put into protecting your president, there is no chance that just anyone will be allowed to stroll around with a gun as the president walks next to him to a planned meeting. As it was, the worst thing that happened was probably the town paying for a few extra police officers to be on duty.
I understand that. But saying that appearing in public is inherantly risky is different than saying that he should simply assume the risks instead of doing all that can reasonably be done to minimize them.drankin said:It is a risk for the President to appear in public. Remember Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, JFK? That is 4 out of 44. It is extremely risky to appear in an uncontrolled environment, like a private church. The Presidency is the most dangerous occupation in America. I don't care how much money you spend on the SS.
Editing the "attempts successful". I meant to say almost 1 out of 10 Presidents are assissinated.
An assassin could just as easily carry a pistol in a completely legal and non-threatening fashion up until the point thatdrankin said:He wasn't a threat. He was just carrying his pistol on his leg in a completely legal nonthreatening fashion.
If the President is going to appear in public, where the public has the right to carry openly...
TheStatutoryApe said:An assassin could just as easily carry a pistol in a completely legal and non-threatening fashion up until the point thathe pulls it out and starts shooting.
cristo said:Exactly. Which is why this guy will have had extensive background checks run on him before the decision to allow his "peaceful protest" to go ahead was made. It's naive to think that any old joe will be allowed to run around next to the president with a weapon.
drankin said:To think that extensive background checks were done on everyone in the meeting, before they attended, who could have been armed, is naive.
ideasrule said:If I were Obama, I'd feel threatened if I see a political opponent with a gun within shooting range of me. The constitution may allows citizens to bear arms, but this is a matter of safety, and it's not unreasonable to refrain from acting like an assassin.
William Kostric took advantage of that law on Tuesday to show up outside President Obama's Portsmouth, N.H. town hall meeting and hold a sign saying "It Is Time To Water The Tree Of Liberty." That invokes a phrase from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
UPDATE *** More on the man with the gun... William Kostric is a married man in his mid 30S who works in sales. He says he moved here to New Hampshire from Arizona about a year ago, because it's a "live free or die" state -- and he thought Arizona was becoming too restrictive with its gun laws.
TheStatutoryApe said:William Kostric took advantage of that law on Tuesday to show up outside President Obama's Portsmouth, N.H. town hall meeting and hold a sign saying "It Is Time To Water The Tree Of Liberty." That invokes a phrase from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Ivan Seeking said:It seems to me that might legally qualify as a threat. Displaying a gun and effectively calling for bloodshed could easily be seen as threatening behavior.
I hope this nut enjoyed not having the Secret Service or the FBI watching his every move. For the next seven and a half years he will probably be on a watch list. It is also hard to believe that someone who would put on such a display doesn't have something to hide in the form of illegal activity. If he does have anything to hide, he probably just hung himself.
No, he kept his gun on public display at all times. Hiding a gun in a pocket is only permitted when you have a concealed-carry permit.noblegas said:What has the world come to when a private citizen carrying a gun in public is automatically seen as a threat. You are associating stereotypes about lone gunmen like Timmy McVeigh with this guy; I could understand If he was part of some white-nationalist group or N.H. state laws prohibited citizens from carrying firearms in certain public places, but in NH you are allowed to carry a firearm , and he kept his gun in his pocket the whole time;
turbo-1 said:If somebody showed up armed outside a Bush or Cheney rally with an inflammatory poster, there is little question that they would have spent time in the slammer. Hell, you couldn't even get into one of their public appearances if their vetters thought you might not be a faithful GOP robot. When Spiro Agnew visited the University of Maine, the SS shut down about half of the campus, and the only people allowed to ask questions were Young Republicans pre-screened by the Political Science staff. People who tried to ask unauthorized questions were dragged out of the hall by the SS. I was there. The people who were dragged out were not violent nor disruptive, just inconvenient.
noblegas said:What do you mean by inflammatory? I've seen many videos of liberals at rallies protesting the war on iraq and some of these protesters would have bush sketched as the devil or hitler or they would yell phrases like "bush is a nazi" and they didn't get arrested; In fact, George Soros compared Bush to hitler or a nazi in one of his books
lisab said:The obvious difference between Bush protesters yelling out that he's a Nazi and what this guy did was the presence of the loaded gun.
As far as what someone wrote in a book, that's irrelevant, as it posed no immediate danger to the President.
noblegas said:I was talking about the protesters who were comparing obama to hitler, not the guy with the gun; Well, why don't we then prohibit citizens from carrying guns in public places since apparently, having a gun attached to your shorts is a threat to humanity if it is a threat to the president. It doesn't make any sense to me for the gun laws to change just because the president is present at an event; Had this been any other event in N.H., it would not have gotten the media coverage this event has received;
I agree with you that what soros says posed no threat to the president at the time; Neither does the unruly protesters at the townhall meetings labeling president obama as a nazi since they technically are not threatening him;