search
top

Second Amendment Defending the First

Looks like islamic radicals may have made a fatal choice in the victim selection process down in Texas at a “Draw Mohammad” art exhibit featuring a number of controversial speakers, including Pam Geller and Geert Wilders. According to Gateway Pundit, ISIS is taking credit for the attack. Seen on the Internet:

There might be a Paris, Texas, but let’s get one thing straight: Texas ain’t Paris.

My favorite is this:

OneDoesNotAssume

28 Responses to “Second Amendment Defending the First”

  1. RAH says:

    Pamela Geller is well aware of the violence that could occur. She wants people to wake up about the islamist threat. This was planned as a challenge after he Hebdo murders. I must admit having it in Texas and having prepared was well done.

  2. rd says:

    I saw a report they spent $30,000.00 on security for the art show. They knew the dangers and risks. I just wish most people understood them also. The media is already blaming Gellar, Wilders, and Spencer for “provoking” the violent Islamists by excercising Freedom of Speech.

    If we bow to the Islamists on their interpretations of free speech and blasphemy, where will it stop? Will we also bow to their interpretations of the proper dress and behavior for women? Or their attitudes on homosexuality? If so, does that mean Rachel Maddow will be broadcasting on MSNBC in a burka? Or will Rachel Maddow be stoned to death as a homosexual?

    We can live in peace with Islam, but only if Islam is willing to live in peace with us. If they do not want to live in peace with us, then we can live in peace without Islam.

  3. aerodawg says:

    Terrorist whack jobs didn’t understand that just because they both have a Paris, TX isn’t equivalent to France…

    Comment of the day about the incident was “My favorite drawing at the Mohammed Art Contest was the two chalk outlines out front”

  4. RAH says:

    Geller and Spencer both knew the risks and was not willing to let fear muzzle free speech. They paid for the security.
    I do worry about the unspoken lesson to the owners of the venue that are probably more risk adverse not to rent to American Defense Initiative.

    The NY Metro Transit and DC Metro will take this as reason to deny the advertising despite Geller’s winning at the courts. WE have a lot of cowards.

  5. Patrick says:

    Having a hard time finding an answer to a question in my head: the art show occurred on “school-owned property”. Did that mean those in attendance could not carry at the show?

    I don’t think it matters in this case. But curious all the same.

    I suspect there will be another art show. And next time I also suspect it will be ringed with local AR-15s.

    • Matt says:

      That is when the whole “open carry” of long guns actually makes sense in Texas. 10 or 20 volunteers from the Texas Open Carry movement with ARs and the like at the low ready and ISIL will need an army.

      I wonder if the rest of the world got the message of why the USA has a 2nd Amendment today and why pulling off a Hebdo type massacre is going to be a lot harder here to do.

      • Jake says:

        “I wonder if the rest of the world got the message of why the USA has a 2nd Amendment today and why pulling off a Hebdo type massacre is going to be a lot harder here to do.”

        Unfortunately, since they were stopped by the police and not a civilian*, that’s unlikely.

        * I know, I know. Police are civilians**. But in this case it’s not only a useful distinction, but the way most of the rest of the world would view it.

        ** Though in many places, they have become a special class of civilian, not subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

  6. RAH says:

    Yeah I wondered also how many were carrying inside the venue. But then I heard it was school prop0erty .I must admit that was pretty fancy school building

  7. Carl from Chicago says:

    I have little respect or love for the islamists and jihadists, and have no problem with them being killed when attempting stuff like this. That said, rights should be exercised with sobriety and mature, reasoned motivation. Honestly, part of me sees this gathering for a “drawing mohammad contest” as being really less about the principle of free speech and more about the opportunity to provoke folks we already dislike, to create a self-fulfilling prophesy so to speak. I suspect this is precisely what some of the organizers of that drawing contest wanted. Those “god hates fags” people from Westboro baptist were exercising their right to free speech as well, but they were not doing it in a sober, mature, or reasoned manner. So they have the right to protest funerals of service men and women, but they are not right to do so in the manner they chose. I still think one of the best quotes of our time was Churchill’s, when he said something to the effect of “even when you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.” No matter how stupid and silly these views about mohammad and blasphemy are, it is downright impolite to purposefully offend folks. It’s just not sober judgement, in my opinion.

    • Sigivald says:

      I dunno. Depends on the folks.

      I agree it’s rude to go out of the way to offend people who are minding their own business.

      But the kind of Islamist who’d go for you with a gun or bomb for drawing Mohammed, well … it’s like purposefully offending a Nazi.

      I’m not only not against it, I think it’s a mitzvah.

    • Sebastian says:

      I’m not Geller’s biggest fan, but I still believe in her right to free speech. I personally don’t get much of a good feeling from offending other people’s religions, but the response to that should be an indifferent shrug rather than trying to shoot up the place.

      • tkdkerry says:

        Agreed, insulting religions is generally poor form. But it’s not as if Islam hasn’t gone out of it’s way to deserve it.

      • Alpheus says:

        I don’t like my personal beliefs being insulted any more than the next guy, but the thing is, if you think a religion is harmful, and then you should be free to try to persuade others not to believe…and chances are, that persuasion is going to be offensive to the believers.

    • Jake says:

      “Honestly, part of me sees this gathering for a “drawing mohammad contest” as being really less about the principle of free speech and more about the opportunity to provoke folks we already dislike, to create a self-fulfilling prophesy so to speak.”

      It seems more like “hunting over bait” to me.

      Is that legal in Texas?

    • Don says:

      “…it is downright impolite to purposefully offend folks.”
      Wrong.
      What’s impolite is to attempt to force your views on others
      in the latters home country. We don’t have to leave, they
      have to leave, or bear the consequences.
      And Carl, there is a reason you live in Chicago, not Dallas
      and environs…or Indianapolis, for that matter.

      • Carl from Chicago says:

        My handle is confusing. I used to live in Chicago and now live in Kentucky. I used to comment as Carl in Chicago then switched when I moved. Stereotypical thinking works some but not all of the time. I think the suggestion you make is not that it is polite to purposely offend folks. Clearly it is not. I suspect what you think is that sometimes offending folks is justified.

        I guess some time ago I learned that doing the right thing is important, especially when the other folks do the wrong thing.

    • Braden Lynch says:

      Don’t forget that they are determined to kill you whether or not you insult their prophet because you do not submit to islam. It will never stop and they will only be deterred when they lose big time in confrontations with us, the good guys.

      Geller, et al merely highlighted their blood lust right here in America so it will hopefully not be ignored. She did us a great service. She reminded us that they are determined and despicable.

      You know what is impolite? Vowing to kill me because of my differing religious beliefs. Frankly it is time that we give a gigantic middle finger to islam and tell them to live in peace with us or to “go forth, self-fornicate and desist from breathing anymore”.

  8. Calimero says:

    Being French and living a couple miles from Paris (the one with lousy gun laws), I grinned when I saw the outcome on this one.

    I wish the good guy who was shot a speedy recovery with no long term effects.

    And may other dumbasses suffer the same fate as those two bullet-ridden djihadis.

  9. Crotalus says:

    ISIS must be a special kind of stupid to take credit for an attack that failed so miserably. These two idiots had their asses handed to them!

    • Carl from Chicago says:

      I won’t argue against their stupidity. But I would suggest they claim responsibility more to garner attention than to demonstrate prowess.

  10. Bubblehead Les says:

    So when does the Obama Admin send in the DOJ Civil Rights Division to see if those Texas Cops violated the Terrs Civil Rights?

    After all, isn’t it the “New Normal” that ALL Police are nothing but Jack-Booted Thugs and Killers?

    At least that’s the sense I’m getting from the MSM.

  11. CobraBob says:

    Here’s a different type of question: How did one Policeman with a pistol face down & defeat two assault-gun-armed thugs with body armor? great marksmanship? lucky hits? head shots? heaven forbid, armor piercing bullets? Was he a competitive pistol shooter? Hmmmm?

  12. Ian Argent says:

    At least two reports (from MSM sources, so I consider the sources inaccurate unless proven otherwise) said the attacks were carrying actual select-fire “assault rifles.” Any truth to this? And if so, that could actually explain the poor performance of the attackers – “spray and pray” and the likely poor maintenance of any black-market FA weapon.

    Yes, I know Occam’s Razor says they were EBR semi-auto weapons.

  13. Ray Van Dune says:

    “… does that mean Rachel Maddow will be broadcasting on MSNBC in a burka? Or will Rachel Maddow be stoned to death as a homosexual?”

    Damn, just when you think some issue is cut and dried.

  14. Bill Jones says:

    This, of course, is just one more of the endless line of *shit “terrorist attacks”

  15. Scott Connors says:

    There was a photo on the Daily Mail website showing the FBI boxing up what looked to be a Hi Point 9mm carbine as evidence. So once again the “authorized journalists” get the story completely wrong. “Select fire assault rifles” my sweet Fanny Adams…. :(

top