Article Image

Is AR-15 Toting Chris B. a Racist Member of a Hate Group?

Written by Subject: Corruption
Health care town hall meetings have been all over the news recently with concerned citizens voicing their views over more and more government intrusion into the lives of the average American.  However, the news coverage has been heating up lately because some of these concerned Americans have decided to exercise their God-given right to bear arms at these events.
It all started when William Kostric, of New Hampshire, had (gasp) a handgun on him at one of the Town Hall meetings put on by President Barak Obama.
The major media had a collective brain seizure seeing a free man exercise his God given right to be able to defend himself.  They made ridiculous statements over the air such as “disturbing news,” “Are the police going to allow him to do that?”, “Is that legal?”, and my favorite, “You’re saying a guy has a gun in the open!?”, as if it was the same thing as shooting heroin in public. Several news outlets continued to make a big deal out of something equal to walking your dog in the park for the next several days.
Although I appreciate Mr. Kostric’s love of freedom, this could have easily been taken advantage of by those that hate the Bill of Rights.  An agent provocateur could easily copy these activities, and then take it to the next level by waving it around or, Heaven forbid, fire it in public.  This would allow the media and the government the excuse they are craving to come down so hard they send the freedom movement back into the Stone Age.
While our congress critters continued showing their contempt for the people they are supposed to represent by switching their public town hall events to secret conference calls with the groups that are pushing this giant government take over, those crazy lovers of constitutionally limited government did the unthinkable, they brought an “assault weapon” to the protest in Phoenix!
Before I go on, I want to make the point on how ridiculous the term “assault weapon” really is.
According to, “assault” means “a violent physical or verbal attack… a military attack… a threat or attempt to inflict offensive contact or bodily harm…”
I am at a loss to understand how an inanimate object can do all those things on its own or limit itself to offensive action only.
Thanks to MSNBC, we all know that Socialist is code for the “N” word  And now, again thanks to MSNBC, we know that the people carrying these “assault weapons” are also racists, and probably members of the militia.
"A man (known only as Chris B) at a pro-health care reform rally...wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip....there are questions about whether this has racial overtones....  Here we have a man of color in the Presidency, and white people showing up with guns strapped to their wastes."  We also learn that these people are mad about a black person being president, and we are going to see someone try and do him harm, because of this anger towards having a black President.”
What would we do without the mainstream media?  We would all likely be lost and confused as to who and what kind of people are behind this “violent” “anger”.
Now, all kidding aside, who was this black hating racist?  Why did MSNBC only show his back?  Could it be because if they showed the full picture, it might challenge the story they had already written in advance? 
What?  How could showing the face of one of these white racist African-American haters challenge their story?
Maybe because this is Chris:
Chris is a clean cut young man, whom the media could not label racist or paint as some back woods hick.  As collectivists, compelled to group people together based on race or how one looks, this must have been one of the most frustrating news events these mainstream news reporters had ever come across  Those reporters must have been livid to see someone defending the Constitution, whom they could not put into some preconstructed box.
How could I make such a jaded claim?  The first photo of Chris taken by mainstream outlets leaves out any view of Chris’ skin; a search of the online edition of the Arizona Republic has no photos of Chris, even though the above articles show plenty of photos.  To top it off, the MSNBC video discussing the event only shows that same obstructed view and makes references to racism and not wanting a black person to be president.  
If anyone claims there is no malice in the media towards the lovers of freedom or even bias in general, please share with them this clear example of animosity towards anyone exercising their rights contrary to the will of the power elite. 

8 Comments in Response to

Comment by Marty McKay
Entered on:


Comment by Found Zero
Entered on:

Show me the law that says I can't deploy turbaned stuffed animals on parachutes above public assemblies from blimps.




Comment by Found Zero
Entered on:

Maybe we should build an enormous and very life like tank out of paper mache.

How about we get to these locations ahead of time, strew maniquins about in contorted positions, spray them with catsup and get fog machines going so when people show up it looks like we're just finished a slaughter? We can just stand around with our firearms, sipping coffee and acting nonchalant.

Naw screw that, too obvious. Let's bring back the blimp, fly it over events and put out the rumor it's full of chemical weapons? Now that should get us some attention.

Want to take it up a notch? When we deploy our army of turban-wearing stuffed animals on parachutes, just watch the crowds go wild.

I think this is more or less along the lines of my option 2 above with a little 3 thrown in.

Comment by Marty McKay
Entered on:

I think it's not a bad idea to exercise caution when considering how best to formulate and deliver a message of any kind. You need to consider the target audience, intended interpretation, the context, desired result, etc.

That being said, I couldn't help giving the electronic image of Chris B. a verbal high five with a grunted "Yeah!"

Comment by Bryan Turner
Entered on:

Yes, it is one and the same. Sorry, that my point on being careful was missed. I was not taking both sides of the issue, I was merely pointing out some cautions that might be wise to consider. 

 There is also Ted Turner.  Boy, you are right, we Turners ought to be round up and exterminated. ;D

Comment by Found Zero
Entered on:

I think it's the very same Bryan Turner Ernie.

He makes a point I'd thought about. I'm a "what iffer". What if a liberal or socialist was so inflamed by this that they put on a Gadsden t-shirt and shoot somebody?

The idea isn't without precedent. And let's not forget people like Hal Turner (no relation to Bryan I'm aware of). Come to think of it, there's the Turner Diaries I have four possible options to consider:

1. We should take into account not only our intent, but the perception of our actions. "Intimidation exists in the mind of the intimidated" is horrible legal doctrine but it describes a fact of life as far as human responses are concerned.

2. We charge ahead regardless of any response, perception or polarization of the dynamic with the observation that "toning down our rights" is analogous to loosing them and we have no control over the perceptions of others anyway.

3. Some sort of middle path or something new we haven't thought up yet. Historically we're creative, not confrontational. We've managed to capture people's imaginations in a positive way until recently. We have to get out of the reactive, negative mode and back into the proactive positive.

4. Anyone named Turner is bound to stir up trouble. Kick and ban them all now before it's too late.



Comment by Jet Lacey
Entered on:

From the article - "Although I appreciate Mr. Kostric’s love of freedom, this could have easily been taken advantage of by those that hate the Bill of Rights.  An agent provocateur could easily copy these activities, and then take it to the next level by waving it around or, Heaven forbid, fire it in public.  This would allow the media and the government the excuse they are craving to come down so hard they send the freedom movement back into the Stone Age." 

Are you kidding me?  Is this really from the John Birch Society?  You can't play both sides on this issue.  You're either with the Bill of Rights or you aren't.  It's as simple as that.  Shame on you.

Comment by Ernest Hancock
Entered on:

Is this the Bryan Turner in Arizona that is the Representative of the John Birch Society.

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: