Tampa, Charlotte wanting to ban concealed carry during conventions.

[Hypnogator]

Here we go again....

http://www.heartlandconnection.com/news/story.aspx?list=194786&id=747017#.T58TK9l62So

The Tampa City Council is wanting the mayor to ban concealed weapons during the Republican Convention, under the theory that protesters carrying concealed weapons pose a risk to public safety. Charlotte officials have all but given up on the idea, stating that state law has essentially tied their hands.

Meanwhile, the ACLU is all over the issue of protesters at the conventions -- but only opposing plans to limit the time and location of protests.

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but haven't political conventions -- and protests -- been held in locations where concealed carry was legal, without blood running in the streets?

 

[bluethunder1962]

Isn't that when there is a lot of crime? Do these stupid people not know how many gun owners there are? I wish somebody with a lot of money would sue these states or cities for not being able to protect themselfs. Say if they got shot in cal or il sue them because they could not protect themself and there was not a law officer anywhere around. I don't know maybe I am the stupid one.

 

[N003k]

Didn't Florida recently pass a law adding fangs to their law forbidding towns and cities from passing laws related to guns?

Be interesting to see if someone brings a lawsuit against them if they try.

 

[armoredman]

They're asking the governor to issue an emergency order under law to temporarily suspend carry in the area. If it get misused like this it will never stop.

 

[Neverwinter]

The Tampa City Council is wanting the mayor to ban concealed weapons during the Republican Convention, under the theory that protesters carrying concealed weapons pose a risk to public safety. Charlotte officials have all but given up on the idea, stating that state law has essentially tied their hands.

This is exactly the kind of ridiculous infringement of individual rights that state preemption was intended to prevent.

 

[smalls]

These kinds of things would stop completely if we were able to hold polititions personally (personally financially?) liable for their actions. They wouldn't take such risks with their own wallets.

 

[Striker]

Dead issue in Florida:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ses-to-ban-guns-during-republican-convention/

 

[brboyer]

http://www.tampabay.com/specials/2012/PDFs/Guns at RNC Convention.pdf

Response to Mayor Buckhorn's request from Governor Scott:

. . .
The short answer to your request can be found in the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and in Article I, Section 8 of the Florida Constitution.
. . .

In other words... Unconstitutional!

 

[gatorjames85]

Good for Governor Scott

 

[Hypnogator]

Way To Go, Governor!

Scott wrote that "it is unclear how disarming law-abiding citizens would better protect them from the dangers and threats posed by those who would flout the law."

My thoughts on the matter exactly!

 

[Kim]

Some politicians understand the Constitution espically the 2nd amendment. Unfortunately, many do not. It is those I oppose with my vote everytime.

 

[Prince Yamato]

That's a very well written letter.

 

[armoredman]

NICE!

 

[BemidjiDweller]

Atta boy Governor Scott!

 

[majortoo]

Saw a great quote the other day. Unfortunately, I cannot give you a footnote to give credit to the author. Here it is: "We should make our politicians wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers, so we can tell who they work for!" Quite appropriate for the convention scene!

 

[Sav .250]

Lucky for Fl, Gov Scott is a Republican. On this issue anyway.

 

[publius]

Tampa Mayor Buckhorn, working for the Department of Redundancy Department.

“There is no reason to have a concealed firearm in downtown Tampa that week,” Buckhorn said in Wednesday’s statement. “And, to be clear, I am far less concerned with those who have concealed weapons permits than the ones who may somehow acquire a weapon and use it to create mayhem.”

To be clear, anyone who does not have a concealed weapons permit would already be breaking the law by carrying a concealed weapon. This law can only be targeting concealed weapons permit holders.

I'm glad Governor Scott refused this ridiculous request, since the Mayor was clearly lying about his intentions. That said, it is NOT a second amendment issue.

Don't believe me? How about if we consult Justice Scalia on the subject?

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott 333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884).

Anyone who thinks it is a second amendment issue is, of course, entitled to his opinion. For that opinion to make it into law, you would have to start by convincing Justice Scalia and the others who concurred with the Heller opinion.