Washingtonpost.com:

The Secret Service on Monday quashed the hopes of gun rights advocates who were pushing for the open carry of firearms to be allowed at this summer’s Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

An online petition in support of the effort rapidly gained signatures and attention in the past week, applying pressure to pro-gun Republican officials and presidential contenders to walk the walk when it comes to guns. But on Monday, the Secret Service said that only law enforcement personnel will be allowed to carry firearms at the event.

“Title 18 United States Code Sections 3056 and 1752 provides the Secret Service authority to preclude firearms from entering sites visited by our protectees, including those located in open-carry states,” Secret Service spokesman Robert K. Hoback said in a statement. “Only authorized law enforcement personnel working in conjunction with the Secret Service for a particular event may carry a firearm inside of the protected site.”

Ticket or not, any unauthorized person with a gun will not be allowed into the event, he said.

Why on earth would any of the candidates want guns inside the convention center?  There are enough fruits and nuts wandering around as it is.  Arming them would surely spell trouble for someone.

If the Secret Service says no, then that’s that.

21 thoughts on “Secret Service nixes firearms at the RNC

  1. Starry flights

    Trump and Cruz are chicken by-products when it comes to guns. They talk the talk but do not walk the walk.

  2. Lyssa

    Cruz and Trump should openly carry while they campaign to prove how much safer it is when people carry weapons.

    Regarding the convention, maybe Cruz won’t attend – he’s stated publicly and emphatically that he has NEVER and will NEVER support banning guns. Absolutes are wonderfully strong sounds bites; but it requires true conviction to carry them out.

  3. There are indications that the petition that was circulating to allow guns at the GOP Convention was a hoax. Of course, the times being what they are, and Second Amendment sentiment and adherents being what they are, there were thousands of people who put their names to the petition even though it had all the earmarks of a hoax. The rhetoric of satire has become indistinguishable from the rhetoric that motivates real behavior.

  4. Steve Thomas

    I have no issue with this prohibition. This place will be crawling with local, state and federal law-enforcement, so it would not be a “gun-free-zone” where attendees are both disarmed AND unprotected.

    The venue is private property, and this is a private RNC event. Yes, there will be some portions open to the public, and provisions made for visitors/observers/Press, but this is indeed a private function. There is a clear and over-riding safety concern, especially for the candidates and public officials.

    This is a manufactured controversy, and I have chosen to ignore it.

  5. Ed Myers

    Steve, I make the same argument about the streets in my neighborhood. Citizens can be disarmed and still be protected. There is a clear and overriding safety concern when people carry guns. Yesterday’s police blotter reported a traffic altercation ended up with someone pulling a gun. The gun owner likely claims this as a “save.” The other guy claimed it was a crime of brandishing. Fortunately both retreated to their respective cars and drove safely away. Our community can handle crude and rude language in response to some perceived driving infraction (we tolerate it from our GOP candidates, after all) but it can’t tolerate escalation to include threats of death. We are not protected when people carry guns and use them to settle minor annoyances such as those encountered in heavy traffic by shutting down public speech of those that would dare to complain about someone’s driving.

    If the GOP really believes that carrying a gun promote a civil society I want to see that demonstrated at their convention.

  6. Steve Thomas

    @Ed Myers
    Ed,

    You and I will never agree on this. You are not protected as an individual, in public. While I would agree 100% that lethal force can never be justified to settle verbal and minor physical altercation, the presence of lawfully carried firearms does not present an undue risk to your individual safety, and certainly not one that overrides my right to self-defense, when presented with a real threat of ‘death or serious bodily injury.

    As far as the GOP “choosing” to bar privately carried firearms from the convention presenting some sort of hypocrisy in your world, I don’t agree. The difference between you and I in this regard is your opinion doesn’t matter. You are not a Republican. Mine does, as there is no doubt as to which party holds my allegiance. Furthermore, as you are hostile to the entire premise upon which the 2nd Amendment is based, your opinion matters even less so. You can’t make a legitimate argument that your rights are being trampled. I could, if I thought this was the case.

  7. Ed Myers

    Aah, but my opinion does matter in November and this goes to the character of a party that will, after the convention, court my vote.

  8. Steve Thomas

    Ed Myers :
    Aah, but my opinion does matter in November and this goes to the character of a party that will, after the convention, court my vote.

    Really? Your vote will hinge on whether or not the RNC allowed firearms to be openly carried at their convention? This is what will seal it for you? You Ed, who over the years has never given any indication of support for the GOP, and is openly hostile to the 2nd Amendment? I am having a difficult time typing, while laughing.

    Like I wrote: this is a manufactured controversy.

    1. I actually don’t care if they allow guns or don’t. I agree it’s manufactured. If I were a candidate, I would be voting for no guns. (thinking the party of Lincoln might not want to revisit the issue)

      So much is going on that my head is spinning.

      New campaign manager??

  9. Wolve

    Come, come, let us not be shy about the details. CBS says the author of the petition hoax (calls himself “Hyperationalist”) described himself to them as a liberal Democrat who intends to vote for Hillary and is a hyper anti-gun guy. It appears he may have done this on his own just to see how much he could stir up.

    Ah, who knows anymore? But, what the hey, “liberal Democrat” is a pretty good synonym for “dirty politics.”

    I tell you, the “homeboy” ought to be doing stand-up comedy. He gets funnier by the day. If Hillary visits Loudoun , he could be her opening act.

  10. Solve, what are you talking about? What petition hoax?

    I am going to ask you not to insult Democrats on here. That is just an offensive thing to say.

    If there is a specific incident, address it but please don’t do the board brush thing.

    Same to those who want to broad brush all Republicans.

  11. Wolve

    MoonHowler :
    Solve, what are you talking about? What petition hoax?
    I am going to ask you not to insult Democrats on here. That is just an offensive thing to say.
    If there is a specific incident, address it but please don’t do the board brush thing.
    Same to those who want to broad brush all Republicans.

    Balderdash, Blogmistress. It is a fact that Dems are notorious for playing dirty politics. Always have been. And there are admittedly some Repubs who tried to imitate the masters. Well, I could just single out the individual Dems and use terms like “evil” and “ruffian”……. or say they lie so much that they need a Jesus meeting….

    1. That’s just a nasty, biased thing to say. I stand by my request. It’s a form of name calling and therefore very unproductive.

  12. Wolve

    Poor old Starry will go nuts when he finds he can no longer insult Republicans en masse.

  13. When I suggested that the gun petition was a hoax (#3), I thought it even more damning of the mentality surrounding the GOP than if it had been real. If someone can gin up some hyperventilated language mocking the NRA and get thousands of people to sign on thinking it was the real McCoy, we’ve got real problems. It’s sort of like people thinking The Onion is reporting real news.

  14. Wolve

    And there, per CBS News, is one more dirty trick by a liberal Democrat.

    But, Scout is right. Many people of all political persuasions in this country are too ready to sign petitions without a clue as to where they originated or what they really mean. It has, indeed, become somewhat of an “Onion” world.

    1. Wolve, the Democrats aren’t a bit dirtier in their dirty politics than the Republicans. I think its funny that you seem to paint angel wings and halos on those elephants.

  15. Wolve

    Certainly not talking angel wings and halos. I remember well the Nixon dirty tricks bag. What was the name? Donald Segreti or something similar?

    In any case, I maintain that, over the decades, the Dems have been experts and the Repubs have been largely amateurs. I have yet to find a Repub adept enough in this field to buy the whole state of West Virginia in a primary. Now THAT was skill! Poor Hubert never saw the bus that hit him.

    I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

  16. Steve Thomas

    Wolve :
    And there, per CBS News, is one more dirty trick by a liberal Democrat.
    But, Scout is right. Many people of all political persuasions in this country are too ready to sign petitions without a clue as to where they originated or what they really mean. It has, indeed, become somewhat of an “Onion” world.

    Check out the videos Dan Joseph from MRC puts out on youtube. His favorite targets are college students. He once got a whole slew of them to sign a petition protecting “4th Trimester Abortion”

  17. Cargosquid

    Here’s the story behind the petition.

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/03/30/hillary-supporter-started-rnc-open-carry-petition/

    Oh..never mind….I see someone got to it first.

Comments are closed.