portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

alternative media | government

Hipocracy: Repulicans won't allow legal firearms inside the RNC

Hi!
The Republican National Convention is five weeks away, the nation is reeling from a mass shooting in Colorado, George Zimmerman is awaiting trial for shooting Trayvon Martin, and Governor Rick Scott has declined to issue a citywide waiver of Florida's concealed carry law for the convention.

Legal firearms will be permitted all around the RNC, but not inside. Which, as my friend FogBelter pointed out on twitter, is kind of hypocritical when you think about it. Why aren't law-abiding gun owners allowed to pack heat inside the RNC?

Now that the deadline for an out-of-state concealed carry permit has safely passed, Megan Carpentier of Raw Story describes how easy it would be for someone with ill intent to legally bring a gun to the RNC site.

For the record, I don't think civilians should bring concealed firearms anywhere.

homepage: homepage: http://www.inthesetimes.com/duly-noted/entry/13572/how_to_bring_a_gun_to_the_rnc/


Would The Reason Be Because Weapons are Prohibited at the Tampa Bay Times Forum? 29.Jul.2012 15:57

Robert Potts

Why yes, that is the exact reason. See prohibited items listed here:  http://www.tampabaytimesforum.com/guest-services/a-z-guide/ . Seems that weapons of any kind are prohibited. However weapons are permitted all around the Forum for licensed carriers. For the record it doesn't matter what you think about civilian carry.

Just for the record 29.Jul.2012 18:31

@

Its not just republicans who arm ourselves.

just for the record 29.Jul.2012 23:37

Clyde

Criminals who commit crimes with firearms don't go to the trouble of registering with the state for the right to carry a concealed handgun.

The people who go through the trouble to get registered and buy a legal firearm are not going out and robbing a 7-11. They are interested in defending themselves. And if you can't differentiate between those two types of people your opinions on any gun issue, "for the record" are not worthy of being taken seriously.

Ahh, yes. The maggots are crawling out in to the light to defend this. 30.Jul.2012 01:42

gsd

Hey, didn't the shooter in Aurora purchase all of his guns legally?
And what about the guy who shot Gabriel Giffords? All of his firearms were legal.

How about the Minutmen suicide/murders in Arizona? I bet all of his firearms were legal.
 link to latino.foxnews.com

Or the other minuteman murders in Arizona? Legal firearms.
 http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/25/nation/la-na-minutemen-murder-20110126

Lee Harvey Oswald?
Sirhan Sirhan?

Oklahoma City bombing? No illegal firearms there.

Start Dealing with the truth and then come talk to me.

classic indymedia logic 30.Jul.2012 02:19

Clyde

step 1: cherry pick a handful of extreme examples to fit your criteria

step 2: ignore the massive majority of other examples that don't match your flawed argument

step 3: smugly think you've somehow constructed a good position.

Yes, you massive idiot. Those examples were carried out with legal firearms. I didn't say that never happens. Of course it happens. And it leads small minded people to think that they represent the norm.

I wouldn't expect anything less of people here.

hay guys 30.Jul.2012 02:24

...

lets ban guns, then nobody can use them!

it has worked wonders in the past with things like drugs.

Interesting 30.Jul.2012 07:44

gsd

Then when do you even come here Clyde?

I was just pointing out that your comment

"The people who go through the trouble to get registered and buy a legal firearm are not going out and robbing a 7-11. They are interested in defending themselves. And if you can't differentiate between those two types of people your opinions on any gun issue, "for the record" are not worthy of being taken seriously."

Is untrue.

And who ever said anything about banning guns. I was talking about hypocrisy.

I believe that people should be able to own guns, but there is a limit to what we allow. It seems pretty common sense that someone should not be allowed to own a nuclear weapon, or a Abrams tank, or hand grenades, so why should we need a semi-automatic weapon with a high capacity magazine? You want to hunt, shoot target, or defend yourself, what ever, but you dont need an AR-15 with a 100 round drum to do that.

typical - classical 02.Aug.2012 07:14

00-00

Clyde

can you comment without always shitting on "indymedia" in the same sentence?


to preface your comment(s) with words such as "classic indymedia" in a negative diss-in way seems counter intuitive to the social movement that indymedia is providing. An opportunity to have dialog and a voice across many cultures and divides.

why the need to crap talk the vehicle your using?