Armed Man Arrested Following Incident Outside Abortion Clinic

A Greensboro man was arrested after carrying a gun to a protest outside an abortion clinic, according to the Greensboro News & Record.

[Ray]

Our Federal Government refuses to properly protect our nation's southern border, for political reasons apparently being kept secret from the people. The Liberal Left media rarely mention the millions of illegal aliens among us, as if we are not meant to be even thinking about it. Now in Mayberry, of all places, one Hispanic shoots and kills four others in cold blood, with none of the five Hispanics likely to know who Sheriff Andy Taylor was.

Five deadly Hispanic drug gangs have organized throughout our nation, and they all carry guns illegally. Are criminals the only people who should be carrying weapons? Now the police and Federal agents are ganging up on one law-abiding citizen who was legally carrying a side-arm in plain view, which seems to me to be a sensible thing for law-abiding citizens to do these days, under these ever-worsening conditions.

Then these incompetent protectors of our nation's borders and interior invade and search the law-abiding man's home to invent additional crimes to accuse him of. It would probably be a good idea if many more honest and law-abiding people started carrying guns, instead of just the police and the criminals. If they had been carrying their guns wherever they went, on airplanes for example, the tragedies of 9/11 would not have occured.

Mayberry is gone. We're living in a different world. All you police, thank you for your service but let that man go, and any others like him. He didn't do anything wrong. Their kind may be our nation's salvation, if and when Radicals start going door to door killing the occupants, like they do across the ocean. He was not a member of that anti-abortion demonstration. Where is the obvious crime? How about the 4,000 babies who are being murdered every day, now to be paid for by the taxpayers, if that 1,990-page "Health" bill passes in Congress. May God bless America again

[Blue Dog Dem]

I'm with you, Ray. The bigger issue is that the police (which I have the utmost respect and appreciation) asked this guy to provide information that they did not have a legal right to have. I think their problem is that they found somebody with knowledge of the pertinent laws and a backbone - and they didn't like it. This is a warning that our Constitutional rights are in jeopardy. Mr. Penn has a God-given right to the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments - all of which were trampled upon by over-zelous police officers and the FBI. I'm sure Mr. Penn belongs to the same radical group many of us belong to... we're called God-fearing, conservative, law-abiding AMERICANS.

Now let's sit back and wait for the liberal gun haters to weigh in.

[jrw]

from my clod dead hand

[jrw]

cold

[LiIrabbitfoofoo]

Ray wrote:

Our Federal Government refuses to properly protect our nation's southern border, for political reasons apparently being kept secret from the people. The Liberal Left media rarely mention the millions of illegal aliens among us, as if we are not meant to be even thinking about it. Now in Mayberry, of all places, one Hispanic shoots and kills four others in cold blood, with none of the five Hispanics likely to know who Sheriff Andy Taylor was.
Five deadly Hispanic drug gangs have organized throughout our nation, and they all carry guns illegally. Are criminals the only people who should be carrying weapons? Now the police and Federal agents are ganging up on one law-abiding citizen who was legally carrying a side-arm in plain view, which seems to me to be a sensible thing for law-abiding citizens to do these days, under these ever-worsening conditions.
Then these incompetent protectors of our nation's borders and interior invade and search the law-abiding man's home to invent additional crimes to accuse him of. It would probably be a good idea if many more honest and law-abiding people started carrying guns, instead of just the police and the criminals. If they had been carrying their guns wherever they went, on airplanes for example, the tragedies of 9/11 would not have occured.
Mayberry is gone. We're living in a different world. All you police, thank you for your service but let that man go, and any others like him. He didn't do anything wrong. Their kind may be our nation's salvation, if and when Radicals start going door to door killing the occupants, like they do across the ocean. He was not a member of that anti-abortion demonstration. Where is the obvious crime? How about the 4,000 babies who are being murdered every day, now to be paid for by the taxpayers, if that 1,990-page "Health" bill passes in Congress. May God bless America again

Clearly you didn't bother to actually READ the article. "Where's the obvious crime"?? Gee, how about the law that requires a permit he didn't have, his connection to violent protests in the past and the OTHER law that says no guns at abortion protests.

@@ You people that dont bother to read before you mouth off are a trip.

[LiIrabbitfoofoo]

Blue Dog Dem wrote:

I'm with you, Ray. The bigger issue is that the police (which I have the utmost respect and appreciation) asked this guy to provide information that they did not have a legal right to have. I think their problem is that they found somebody with knowledge of the pertinent laws and a backbone - and they didn't like it. This is a warning that our Constitutional rights are in jeopardy. Mr. Penn has a God-given right to the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments - all of which were trampled upon by over-zelous police officers and the FBI. I'm sure Mr. Penn belongs to the same radical group many of us belong to... we're called God-fearing, conservative, law-abiding AMERICANS.
Now let's sit back and wait for the liberal gun haters to weigh in.

I happen to own guns, I learned to shoot in the Army, and loved it ever since. I'm not stupid enough to take guns to events like abortion protests, illegally mind you, then refuse to show the police a permit -**a permit it turns out HE DIDN'T HAVE**. The idiot deserves whatever he gets.

[Blue Dog Dem]

The issue is still that NC law specifically notes that gun owners do not have to carry their permits. We are not required to explain why we are carrying our weapons. The exception is for concealed-carry, which we are instructed upon getting this permit that we must carry our CC with us if we have our weapons with us. The gentleman wasn't concealing his weapon, therefore he was not required to carry his permit. At this point, he had committed no crime. The police know that they cannot require him to show a permit. It's a tactic used by police quite effectively... ask to see the permit and hope they say, "OK". It just like a police officer asking to search your car or home without a warrant. They hope you'll say yes simply because they are the police.

The original article which we are all commenting from says nothing about him not having a permit to purchase the firearm which he was in possession. It simply states that he didn't show a permit to an officer when asked. I would have done the same thing. Any law-abiding citizen has that right. I do question his presence at an anti-abortion protest. Although it's unclear if he was a participant or simply passing by (as he states) it was NOT a wise decision.

[Lilrabbitfoofoo]

Blue Dog Dem wrote:

The issue is still that NC law specifically notes that gun owners do not have to carry their permits. We are not required to explain why we are carrying our weapons. The exception is for concealed-carry, which we are instructed upon getting this permit that we must carry our CC with us if we have our weapons with us. The gentleman wasn't concealing his weapon, therefore he was not required to carry his permit. At this point, he had committed no crime. The police know that they cannot require him to show a permit. It's a tactic used by police quite effectively... ask to see the permit and hope they say, "OK". It just like a police officer asking to search your car or home without a warrant. They hope you'll say yes simply because they are the police.
The original article which we are all commenting from says nothing about him not having a permit to purchase the firearm which he was in possession. It simply states that he didn't show a permit to an officer when asked. I would have done the same thing. Any law-abiding citizen has that right. I do question his presence at an anti-abortion protest. Although it's unclear if he was a participant or simply passing by (as he states) it was NOT a wise decision.

THe law that was broken was the law that says no guns at abortion protests. FUnny how you all keep missing that.

As a law abiding citizen, you shouldn't have a problem showing your permit. If you have nothing to hide, then why refuse the request? Simply because you can? THat's just stupid. Why bring a gun to an abortion protest to begin with? You also seem to ignore that this man has had a history of violence at these kinds of protests.

[Leonine]

Something tells me that if a prochoicer showed up at a counter-protest with a gun, the prolifers would be screaming about "prochoice violence".

Prochoicers can't even look at prolifers cross-eyed without being accused of being violent towards them but somehow, it's a-okay for a man with connections to violence advocates to show up at a protest with a firearm, despite it being illegal.

I guess they expect prochoicers, women and clinic workers to just paint bulls-eyes on themselves and line up like ducks.

[Punisher]

He broke the law ..... enough said!

[WTH]

Wow! Ray from Akron....you sound angry and bitter!!! I thought the abortion issue was settled by the Supremes along time ago....

[Ocean56]

Leonine wrote:

Something tells me that if a prochoicer showed up at a counter-protest with a gun, the prolifers would be screaming about "prochoice violence".
Prochoicers can't even look at prolifers cross-eyed without being accused of being violent towards them but somehow, it's a-okay for a man with connections to violence advocates to show up at a protest with a firearm, despite it being illegal.
I guess they expect prochoicers, women and clinic workers to just paint bulls-eyes on themselves and line up like ducks.

Exactly. And when we don't choose to be targets for these "prolife" kooks, their fellow kooks go NUTS.

[Blue Dog Dem]

Lilrabbitfoofoo wrote:

<quoted text>
THe law that was broken was the law that says no guns at abortion protests. FUnny how you all keep missing that.
As a law abiding citizen, you shouldn't have a problem showing your permit. If you have nothing to hide, then why refuse the request? Simply because you can? THat's just stupid. Why bring a gun to an abortion protest to begin with? You also seem to ignore that this man has had a history of violence at these kinds of protests.

Like I said before, the original article which these post are based off of said nothing about him being part of an abortion protest, and it certainly said nothing about any criminal past. No one is defending a violation of these laws. In fact, the whole thread is to support and uphold the laws.

That said, as a law abiding, gun-owning and carrying citizen I am not required to carry a permit with me. You can't show something you don't have with you. That's the law - get it? I don't have to carry a permit with me.

Also, even if someone does have a permit with them, there's no law stating you have to show it. It's not a matter of having anything to hide - it's about obeying the laws. The police have to obey the same laws that we are required to obey. That's the core issue - making sure that the government does not trample our constitutional, state, or local rights. What would you do if the police knocked on your door and wanted to search your house? It's the same thing.

Using your terminology, "Stupid" is allowing the police (or any government agency) to exact from you anything more than the law requires. The law is there to protect the citizens. Most gun owners are law-abiding citizens. We are protected by the constitution as well as state and local laws. It would be "stupid" to give up my protection under the law just because a police officer wanted me to.

[J-bird]

LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:

<quoted text>
Clearly you didn't bother to actually READ the article. "Where's the obvious crime"?? Gee, how about the law that requires a permit he didn't have, his connection to violent protests in the past and the OTHER law that says no guns at abortion protests.
@@ You people that dont bother to read before you mouth off are a trip.

#1 There is no law in North Carolina that says you have to have a permit to Open carry a handgun,#2 who says he was a part of the "protest"? And who says he wasn't.
we wasn't there so I feel that it is NOT our right to Judge...
Check out the laws in NC before you "mouth off" Mr "trip".
Have a nice day Sir.