Pogo, there have been numerous references to gun rights in this thread. Unless my reading comprehension is suddenly gone, that's what I got from it.
So now suddenly we are the arbiters of a person's rights? So, what's the point of this thread then? If nothing changed, why would the author insinuate that they were somehow "intimidating" these women by exercising their 2nd Amendment rights?
Naturally there will be a counter protest. These women should have been prepared for such an occurrence. Common sense tells you that if you're going to protest against gun rights/violence, that there will be a protest against it. This is Newton's law of action and reaction at work. "For every action there will be an equal and/or opposite reaction."
References to gun rights in the thread address the fact that
this isnÂ’t a Second Amendment issue, as no government entity is seeking to restrict the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment. That Texas residents are allowed to openly carry long guns pursuant to State law and the Constitution does not give gun owners license to brandish firearms in a threatening manner.
The point of the thread, therefore, was to bring attention to individuals likely using firearms to intimidate those they incorrectly perceived to be
‘hostile’ to gun rights.
And it’s idiocy to maintain that MDA members should have ‘been prepared for such an occurrence,’ as they were not ‘protesting against gun rights,’ where the response by OCT members was unwarranted, irresponsible, and served only to cast gun owners in a negative light – once again.