5 replies to this topic

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Republicans find themselves in a bit of a hypocritical situation.  Firearms are prohibited at their upcoming national convention.  For the past couple decades, the GOP has been the governmental influence agency for the NRA and they've been reasonably successful promoting their "guns everywhere" agenda.  Examples:

 

-  Texas allows open carry statewide.

-  Many states allow guns in schools, churches, and bars.

-  30 states allow children (regardless of age) to possess long guns.

-  Iowa allows completely blind people to own guns.

 

So now Republicans are faced with attending their national convention unarmed.  It'll be a Gun-Free Zone, a thought that probably scares the bejesus out of them.   Don't they claim that Gun-Free Zones attract criminals, bad guys, crazies, terrorists, and even ISIS?  Of course, it's probably not a good idea to stop an ISIS guy with a gun because you'd have to shoot him through his explosive packed overcoat and hope none of it ignites.

 

But here's where the hypocrisy really starts to show.  When asked, several of the GOP candidates skirted the issue.  John Kasich had no opinion and said he would defer to the Secret Service.  Ted Cruz said the same.  Donald Trump said he would first have to read a petition demanding the guns be allowed at Change.org.  Are these the allies in government the NRA really wants?

 

I'm all for allowing the Republicans to carry their weapons into the convention.  In fact, they should fill the place with every type of firearm you can think of...handguns, rifles, shotguns, automatic weapons, assault rifles, even a couple bazookas.  Make it the safest place on earth. 

 

After all, what could possibly go wrong?

[The Average Joe]

Theoretically, you are right. However, there are a lot of states that limit where you can carry.  Bars are marginally exempt in some states. You can technically enter them, but cannot drink while carrying (big no-no everywhere).  A private event like the convention can set its own rules. Each town can set its own rules. That's why CCL were so hard to get in SAc county, and not hard in Yuba for so many years. A REASONABLE person can accept that a convention with presidential candidates in proximity is not the place for guns. Just as ANY Presidential event is not the place for guns. A REASONABLE person wold also allow an armed officer to pick up his child from school, or military people to be armed on base.

Unfortunately, reason goes out the window when the discussion is about guns or that which must not be mentioned. I see no hypocrisy with banning guns where Presidents or presidential candidates are attending. Although, to be honest, I don't worry about those that have a CCL. I DO worry about those that carry and have no training or license.

As an aside, checked out the new stainless Sig 238 at Ammo Depot  just today. Incredibly narrow at 1.1 inches, and less than a pound loaded (non SS) it would be an ideal carry for a purse or pocket. Pretty slick. Slightly small for my paws, but I'll bet the ladies love it.

[Chris]

Hey GoG, that proposal was made by a liberal activist democrat all to make a story....  And it worked very well as usual with the press.   And as stated in the Heller decision, by no less than Scalia himself, the 2nd amendment is not an unlimited right, he wrote:   "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…. Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."   And in the earlier Miller decision from 1939, SCOTUS limited sawed off shotguns as they are essentially only used by criminals.  I believe the RNC convention qualifies as a "sensitive place".   Just like you can't go into the DNC convention and yell "fire" when there is no fire.  Your 1st and 2nd amendment rights are not absolute.  So please stop the baiting.  I could do the same and make fun of the upcoming DNC convention pointing out all of the oddities of the left....   How about an "abortion on the go" room at the DNC...?   How about "morning after" pills next to the mints by the door on your way out...?  How about gender free bathrooms, no choice...?  How about some cannabis sales out front...?  How about "safe rooms" where only African American delegates are allowed, so they can get away from white folk for awhile...?   Gotta have an Islamic prayer room...   Do we put that one next to the Jewish prayer room or maybe we should keep those two way apart, opposite sides of the venue I might suggest...  And how about those pesky atheists, do we hide any Christian crosses and Stars of David from view as not to offend...?   Do we have an opening prayer or maybe we just don't show it on national TV so we don't look like hypocrites...?   How about a "carbon counter station", you know, the one that adds up all that carbon dumped into the atmosphere by all the transportation used to get the delegates to the convention from cars, buses, planes, all the energy used...?  I am pretty sure the carbon totalizer won't be there but I would really enjoy that one...!   Chris

[The Average Joe]

Let's turn this around. Liberals find themselves hypocritical as there are now calls to disarm their guards at their convention because it is a gun free zone.

 

“If a political party believes that guns do not make us safer,” Gottlieb observed, “they should set an example by rejecting any and all forms of armed security at their national convention. A party that does not believe in the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms should not benefit from the safety provided by others who bear arms."

hahahahaha.

 

While I do agree with the sentiment, at a presidential event, you need to have armed guards.

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Joe,  I'll never claim that the left is without hypocrisy.  Both sides seem to define it well.  This issue brightly illuminates the complete irrationality from the extreme factions on both sides.  And here's the fun part...we're picking these people to run the gov't.

[Chris]

Joe,  I'll never claim that the left is without hypocrisy.  Both sides seem to define it well.  This issue brightly illuminates the complete irrationality from the extreme factions on both sides.  And here's the fun part...we're picking these people to run the gov't.

The problem is that in this country right now you can't call the left out on their oddities and hypocrisy without being called a racist, bigot, redneck, intolerant, homophobic, climate denier, etc....