Well, at least we are reading from the same report. I think you may be splitting hairs though. Here is the point I was making. You right wingers always claim to be against too much "government power".<quoted text>
Page 144, post #3089 and #3090.
The whole "second amendment" business is all about freedom from government oppression, I thought. In other words, you guys claim to be ready to shoot it out with the "government" if they try to assert too much authority over you, right?
But here, with the Gates situation, you apparently feel that it's ok for the government to arrest a citizen, just for "talking back". So which is it? Even going along with your point, that Gates was yelling and shouting insults at the officer, I have to say "So what?" After all, Gates was in his own home. I thought you second amendement types were all about "a man's home is his castle" type thinking.
So you see my confusion. On the one hand, you puff up your chests and make threatening noises about how the government better not tread on your rights. But then, in Gates case, you make the opposite argument, i.e. even if you are in your own home, don't talk back to the government. Again, which is it?