11 votes

Gun-Grabbing Democrat, Owned by Ron Paul Activist

For all of you who think I'm being disingenuous, or using the term "owned" loosely, consider this: this was at a meeting of Texans for Accountable Government (TAG), and there were about 150-200 people in the room. He was hoping to secure TAG's endorsement. There's not much of a reply to hear from him, because the room exploded on him shortly after he tried to answer the question. He believes YOU have the right to keep a gun "in your home"...but he admitted HE has one in his car. Do you get it now? One rule for the peasants, another for himself. He got "owned" because his hypocrisy was exposed to the entire crowd.

And he lost in the primary by 70 points.


http://youtu.be/4UVnEkSIgCk



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This is ridiculous.

You can't "believe in the 2nd amendment" and also "believe in requiring a concealed carry license" at the same time.

Owned ? Dream On

This guy actually makes sense - if you haven't been completely trained in firearm safety - YOU shouldn't take your gun out of the house and in my state the licensing involves alot of range training , safety training , and complete knowledge of preparing you if the day comes and you have to un-holster your gun. This is all invaluable information and I for one have no problem with my state requiring this type of training . Now they have no business telling me what type of guns I can own or how many.

"You Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come"

deacon's picture

so,do you believe

in some rights and not all of the other ones?
i have been around arms all my life,do i need,in your eyes
some other formal training,other than hands on with grownups involved
in the training?
or would the state still need to insure i know a shot gun from a pistol?
if you give one away,it is easier to take the rest
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Concealed Carry Permits in

Concealed Carry Permits in all States are at record levels and that brings in an awful lot of people who never grew up around guns. I should of made it clear that my concern is Conceal Carry and the record number of people who are really unqualified to do just that.

If you never have taken a course , you should , I guarantee you'll learn something, even if you think you know all there is about firearms. I enjoyed the part of the class of - What to do if you have to draw your weapon. I also enjoy going to the range more. I have witnessed women who didn't have a clue about a firearm , where in-fact afraid of them, same thing with the younger crowd. Awesome to watch these individuals become confident in the proper use of a firearm and why is that - well yes the law says they have to , but the training they receive is priceless and it lights a fire under them and when you see them at the range, they want to all become expert marksman and that's awesome, watching how they can now properly and Safely handle a firearm.

"You Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come"

deacon's picture

yeah well

if the gov's didn't step on them rights we are supposed to have
more people would have been around them,so they created this mess
charge you for their service,then charge you again to learn
something you should already know
people have the right to conceal carry already,per that pesky 2nd amendment vince mentioned below
it is thinking like that,that is making it harder for everyone else who knows their rights,as you all sell everyone out with that type of thinking because you think you you need the government to fix that for you,instead of getting out of the way
are cops automatically experts as they have that badge?
i know some who pull it for the wrong reasons (people and animals die)
how about your REPS in office? they conceal carry,but vote your rights away,and they have broke DC law about that!!
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Concealed Carry Requirements

ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

END OF CONVERSATION UNLESS U WANNA TALK REPEALING THE 2nd AMENDMENT...

NOT TO MENTION -> THE FEES FUND MORE TYRANNY!!!

Look at the bigger picture -

Look at the bigger picture - many more people are receiving proper training that wouldn't be - and I look at some of these people as possibly in the near future as being part of a well trained and armed fellow patriot peace keeping force.

You're telling me that Conceal Gun Carry Permits are Un- Constitutional - Well No Shit! and you can stick your talk about "repealing the 2nd Amendment" right up your ass

"You Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come"

Sorry Sonny....

Unlike you, I DO have a problem with state 'required' anything regarding gun training... Have you not learned that giving government an ounce of authority like this will lead to them taking a pound? For instance, in my state of Washington you have to PAY(the vig) to take courses provided by government if you're 42 or younger if you want to get a deer license. So what, at 43 you're magically trained to use a gun to go hunt? Completely arbitrary. It's simply a money generator for the state. I learned how to hunt deer SAFELY from my father who in turn learned it from his who learned it from his and so on... The state doesn't care that I've been hunting for 26 years now, they just want me to 'learn' what I already know from some course they sponsor so they can collect a fee. If I DIDN'T have a dad to teach me and I was inclined to go hunting with a gun what makes you think I wouldn't WANT to learn how to use it? Same with owning a handgun. It's called common sense, yet many forget MOST people have common sense. Would you go and buy a helicopter and start whizzing around in it without first taking lessons? Of course not! You would be endangering lives, yours included. A gun is no different. Sure, there will be the occasional dumb ass who might accidentally shoot himself, but some with 'state approved' training would shoot themselves accidentally too. You can't legislate away stupid. It's natural selection...a culling of the herd. But give the politicians the power to decide if you're 'capable' of something, in this case gun use and safety, and before you know it you'll have to jump through a litany of bureaucratic hoops just to exercise your 2nd amendment right. Statists don't trust people or have any faith in them to make the 'right' choices(even self-preservation!), hence the rise of the nanny state. However, libertarians do. Anyway, that's where I stand.

Concealed Carry Classes are a

Concealed Carry Classes are a Great for those who didn't grow up around guns. If you haven't taken a course you should. I learned alot and I thought I knew it all. I did search out an instructor who was an ex special forces guy, old timer and he gave me some tips I never knew. This guy is way cool and is thrilled with all the different people coming for his 'Special Type of Training ' and his students know how lucky they are and I gotta believe that they will pass on his knowledge. Being educated about guns is a good thing and record numbers of people are getting their permits and yeah it sucks that the government is involved but the training is invaluable.

IE- "take courses provided by government if you're 42 or younger if you want to get a deer license". - I've never heard about this, where I'm from you get your tag and go. Now when I get back to the Smokey Mountains deer is in season all 12 months , turkeys , young bear as we hunt for the table and the hell with the Game Warden or anyone else.

"You Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come"

Whenever I hear Dr Carson

Whenever I hear Dr Carson speak, I know he is talking from a position of knowledge and conviction, honesty, and integrity. You can't agree with another person on 100% of everything. That doesn't mean that other person is a bad person. I saw Dr Carson on Hannity last night and Hannity was squirming a little bit. I changed the channel when Carson was done.

We have already won the gun battle, so I wouldn't let that worry you much. The title of this thread is a bit off base. Dr Carson is talking about divide and conker strategy the MSM engages in. Try indicating something about that in your title.

WTF?

There's nothing about Carson in this video.

“Never think of pain or danger or enemies a moment longer than is necessary to fight them.”
www.youtube.com/user/RevolutionATX

Really, ........i

Really, ........i particularly liked the bit where carson goes into the burning house and saves those two children, which video you be seing
:D

I agree witht the other comments here

Did he lie? Did he contradict himself? He DID agree with conceal carry in the original interview - where I may add seemed NOISY as hell and where someone could easily not hear a question correctly. Why cut off the video at the end? This video seems more like IT failed with their "gotcha" tactics than anything else. Not something to be proud of. I'm pretty sure most of us would have been crying foul if this had been Ron Paul being interviewed. Way to stoop to msm's level.

Thanks for the video. Whats

Thanks for the video. Whats with the weird comments? Is the dp in a bad mood today?

Nothing to do with a bad mood, but being fair

Would you have had the same reaction to the video if this had been some msm reporter trying to interview Ron Paul? Try watching it again with that in mind.

He unapologeticly stated open

He unapologeticly stated open carry should only be allowed in a persons home. That flys in the face of the 2nd amendment. Theres nothing "gotcha" about that.

Yes, AND THEN he went on to elaborate that

he agreed with concealed carry, that he agreed that people should be allowed to defend themselves and as he was "agreeing" with the interviewer - he gets edited/faded out. Why?

And you never answered, so you'd be fine if this had been Ron Paul interviewed, correct?

deacon's picture

and maybe

he changed his story to fit
the crowd
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

deacon's picture

i still believe

that sheriff changed his story from protecting yourself
inside your own home to saying what the crowds (2) wanted to hear
it is the same thing the REPS do all the time
why does the term flipflopper come to mind?
then the sheriff says he believes in concealed carry as long as the paperwork is complete,also he one in his car,but doesn't feel the ones he works for hasn't got that right
are you under the impression that some of the details are missing because it was edited?
if so,i do agree with your comments
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Read the edit above the video.

I didn't intend to ask a "gotcha" question, but he put himself in that position by volunteering information. I couldn't resist. Sorry if you feel like I cheated him.

The crowd was composed of anarchists/libertarian types, VERY pro-gun, and my original intention was to ask him to elaborate on why we need to ask the state permission to carry a gun in the first place. And no, he did not misunderstand the question two days previous to this, he could hear me quite well.

“Never think of pain or danger or enemies a moment longer than is necessary to fight them.”
www.youtube.com/user/RevolutionATX

Please see my reply to this fellow poster above

http://www.dailypaul.com/279760/gun-grabbing-democrat-owned-...

You edited/cut off his responses - twice! Running out of film(joke). This reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvYtvDXBAfo

You just used a different method. Not saying you did it intentionally, but by you editing his responses the way you did on BOTH of those occasions sure makes it seem that way.

Huh? This guy seemed pretty

Huh? This guy seemed pretty reasonable, especially for a lefty.

Forgive me, but I'm having trouble seeing just how he was Owned

Where is the rest of his response? Perhaps he gave a better answer after having a couple days to think about it?

But to go as far as saying he was Owned is a bit disingenuous.

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Owned?

I think that term is being used a little loosely here

At the end, I wonder what the

At the end, I wonder what the rest of his rebuttal was.

+ 1

Sharing on Twitter.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15