With all of the hostility directed at the President at town hall meetings around the country and the incitement being created from persons such as Sarah Palin with her idiocy about "death panels", I was dumbfounded to see a person armed with a handgun awaiting the arrival of the President at a meeting in New Hampshire. The explanation was that the person was permitted to carry the weapon so long as it was not concealed. (I can understand the wisdom and the necessity of the prohibition on concealed weapons. I just wonder how how such a sensible restriction slipped past the NRA.) Of course, having the weapon exposed in a holster makes it easier and quicker for the person or someone else to grab and use it. The next explanation was that he was standing on church property with permission. Well that certainly gave comfort. Whoever heard of some religious fanatic killing somebody----like an abortion doctor for instance?
So looking for an explanation, I ran through the litany justifying the possession of weapons. It does not appear that the person involved was a member of "a well regulated Militia". He was not defending his home, because he was not at home; he was on church property. The likelihood that he would need to defend himself against a potential robber seems remote. Likewise, the appearance of a grisly bear in that crowd was also very unlikely. He certainly was not defending himself from the untold menaces of a national park.
So is this what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they adopted the Second Amendment---that anyone or everyone (with few exceptions) could stand along a presidential parade route armed with a handgun! I don't know the end of the story, but if the Secret Service did not order this man to go home and leave his gun there, our nation's legislatures should not bother returning after vacation and merely turn their keys over to the NRA.