Guy carries firearm while attending town hall meeting

[noblegas]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/08/11/2026745.aspx

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.

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]

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?

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.

 

[rootX]

Just a nuisance IMO.

 

[noblegas]

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.

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;

 

[drankin]

meh, so what? He's is just one man that is carrying that people know about. He just wanted to make a political statement.

Most people who carry don't make it public information. Like myself. I don't appreciate it because it gives us who carry a bad rap. If the yuppies actually knew how many people actually carry concealed handguns around them, they would freak out.

 

[drankin]

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;

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.

 

[Pengwuino]

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;

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]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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...

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.

But, I would have no problem carrying my handgun, concealed, to this event. I would call that "prudent".

 

[Pengwuino]

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.

Ok, in pretty much every other situation I'd obviously agree. However, in this one very special situation, being surrounded by other people with weapons who aren't necessarily hoping to kill you and that you've consulted with... i think it's quite safe.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

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.

The secret service can do what ever they feel is necessary, within reason, to protect the president. When ever the president is going to be present at a location the secret service set up well in advance, as Pengwuino points out, and they block off the streets for at least a block radius. Depending on the situation people may not be allowed into the area where the president will be unless they have been vetted by the Secret Service. Any person who is in the same room with the president has most likely been vetted before hand.

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.

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.

 

[Pupil]

So carrying a loaded gun near an event with the president is the non-idiotic option...?

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.

 

[Pengwuino]

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.

Was I saying whether it was a good or bad thing to do? or that he did or didn't have the right to?

 

[drankin]

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.

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.

 

[Sorry!]

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.

If our president is going to MINGLE in our presence he does so at risk. lol? Thats messed up.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

But if he is going to mingle in our "presence" he does so at risk.

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]

We do not lose our rights just because the President is in our vacinity.

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.

 

[drankin]

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?

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.

 

[drankin]

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.

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]

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.

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.

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...

An assassin could just as easily carry a pistol in a completely legal and non-threatening fashion up until the point that he pulls it out and starts shooting. Again, I don't see how not having a weapon on ones person at such an event is an unreasonable requirement by the presidents security detail.

 

[cristo]

An assassin could just as easily carry a pistol in a completely legal and non-threatening fashion up until the point that he pulls it out and starts shooting.

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]

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.

Just as many background checks as the rest of us old joes. He was legal begal to be armed but at the same time he was an anti-Obama protester. He was an armed civilian within shooting range of the President. Like I said before, it could just as well have been me in the room with my firearm, loaded, safety off. To think that extensive background checks were done on everyone in the meeting, before they attended, who could have been armed, is naive.

 

[ideasrule]

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.

 

[cristo]

To think that extensive background checks were done on everyone in the meeting, before they attended, who could have been armed, is naive.

I disagree. Of course, none of this information is ever made public, so we'll never know who is right or wrong!

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

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.

Funny, I just found this in another article on him...

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."

 

[edward]

From the OP:

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.

I doubt his reason for moving from AZ. AZ has some of the most least restrictive gun laws in the country. I can strap a gun visibly on my hip and walk into a bar, or anywhere for that matter.

This was just recently passed by the state legislature. They failed to pass a law allowing 18 year olds to carry weapons to school.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

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."

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.

 

[turbo]

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]

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.

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;