Hawkflyer wrote:
I thought that it was interesting that NakedShoplifter (NS), standing quietly at the rear of the room, was perceived as "disrupting the meeting".
It seemed to me that he kept pretty much to himself, didn't shout, try to talk to anyone, didn't prevent anyone from coming or going. I guess this activity falls under some definition of "disrupt" that I am unfamiliar with.
I think the terming of "disrupting the meeting,"
from MMMer point of view, is a carryover from the Burke meeting. Here's what one person described that "disruptive" event as:
If you look at all this from their point of view, the VCDL presence at their meeting was excessive and it was frightening. From what I have read, if the armed citizens did not outnumber them, it was close. So how would they see such a presence of armed strangers that virtually took over their meeting, and certainly had an impact on the evenings agenda?
Now I know I will hear all about how open VCDL would have been if the situation were reversed. But suppose 25 off duty BATFE agents showed up at a normal VCDL meeting wearing guns and BATF hats, filed into the room and said nothing about why they were there? Suppose they started milling around with cameras taking pictures of people and close-ups of the firearms. Gee, do you think this forum would have remained quiet that night?
Many here say repeatedly that any fear others have, or any angst they may feel toward a person carrying is their problem. I would agree with that view if three or four armed citizens just happened to show up at a MMM meeting. Or someone is just going about their normal daily routine. But that is not what happened here. Clearly some people went there with the specific intent of "getting in their face" on the gun issue. The meeting was political because that is what the MMM is about, and the attendance by armed citizens had a political, not a routine informational purpose. It would be amazing to me if most here did not know very well what the reaction would be.
That writer is you, Hawkflyer. So, I fail to see how you don't seethe accuracy of what the MMMer said. You yourself authoritatively declared "the VCDL presence at their meeting was excessive and it was frightening."and that the VCDL/OCDC members went there "with the specific intent of "getting in their face."
I'd say that is a definition of "disruptive" the even an 8th grader would be familiar with.
People don't forget that kind of
"excessive" and
"frightening" stuff in two weeks. And certainly notwhen the same guys show up again.
Hawk, if you're changing your description of the first meeting now, for whatever convenientreasons, at least have the ethics and the decency to recant it. Or go back and delete it from your initial posts. All you have to do is apologize for having said the above three complete paragraphs. Everybody will understand.
