There is a petition that is circulating to allow people with concealed carry permits to carry inside the arena during the Republican Convention. The Secret Service has said no guns will be allowed and they have the authority to do that. I do not agree with their authority and think their ability to institute such a ban undermines government.
The people with permits have passed very extensive background checks that involve all sorts of government agencies. People with permits have been vetted better than any politician the secret service protects. By banning the firearms the Secret Service is basically stating that government can’t be trusted.
Perhaps they are onto something…
The Secret Service is like the rest of the government. They are not against guns they are against YOU having them. If you are SS or law enforcement (other government people) then they are fine with you carrying a firearm. Who knows, maybe they are worried they will have to work harder and have less time for booze and hookers…
So by now you are confused. If I feel this way then why would I not sign such a petition?
It is quite simple. While I believe in the absolute right to keep and bear arms, meaning that you can carry them as you see fit (assuming you are a law abiding citizen), I also know that this event is a private event and the event organizers are in charge of the security and what takes place there. They have as much right to disallow guns at their private event as law abiding citizens have to carry those guns. But it is their event and they get to make the rules.
Your neighbor has the right to say you can’t carry your firearm on his property as do private businesses across this nation.
If you do not like the rule then don’t go there. Many people with carry permits will not patronize any establishment that does not allow firearms. That is their right and they are free to do so (and it is a position with which I agree). There are plenty of firearm friendly businesses where people can spend their money.
If the Republicans do not want people carrying firearms then that is their right. If you don’t like it don’t go.
I find it strange that the people who claim to be pro Second Amendment would have a problem with law abiding people carrying firearms and perhaps that says a lot right there.
In any event maybe those who have tickets should just not show up. Sell the tickets at a profit (if that is legal) or keep them to prevent others from attending. That will push the numbers down.
The petition will not have an effect since the SS has the final say no matter what but at least the RNC could come out in support of the idea..
In the long run though, it is a private event and those running it can do as they see fit even if they do sound like the anti gun folks on the left…
Never surrender, never submit.
A liber do-gooder found out the hard way that no good deed goes unpunished.
Some woman went to help and advocate for refugees because, you know, the racists hate them and do not want to help them. They are all angels and should be met with open arms (and open borders) so they can receive taxpayer handouts and live the life they deserve.
She showed up to help those little angels and they robbed her blind. The darlings took all her belongings from her car and anything she was carrying. It was all recorded and the video at the linked site shows her scrambling around demanding her phone and belongings be returned to her.
Refugees have been let into European nations by the tens of thousands and they have returned the generosity by assaulting and raping women, robbing people and causing civil unrest. They have complained about the freebies they are getting, the food they are served and the places they are GIVEN to live.
I guess this liberal found out the hard way that these folks are not fit to be in civilized nations and that they have no respect for people or property.
At least she was not raped or murdered.
Never surrender, never submit.
Barack Obama is a big government big brother liberal progressive left wing fanatic who believes in government control over the lives of private citizens. He was raised by communists, studied and uses Rules for Radicals, and he violates the Constitution nearly every day. In short, he is un-American and the kind of person the Constitution was designed to stop.
There is a case before the court right now dealing with an Apple iPhone that was used by a few terrorists who shot up San Bernardino. It seems the feds are unable to crack the encryption on the phone, a claim I find preposterous, so the FBI wants Apple to write the code to crack the phone. The problem is, the code would affect all iPhones and make it easier for the government to demand a phone be accessed in the future.
I doubt the issue at hand is the phone itself. I am sure the highly paid people at the FBI (or perhaps the NSA) could get into the phone. I mean, are we really supposed to believe that the same government hacking into systems all over the world can’t get into a phone? No, this is about setting precedence that would force companies to build backdoors into devices that government could use when it wanted to obtain data.
Obama recently made his views known when he discussed the issue. He believes that PRIVATE companies should not be able to build items government cannot access. That is the basic idea behind what Obama said. Now he laced it with sugar coating by discussing child pornography and such things because, well no one could oppose such common sense things.
Then he got to the real reason. You see, government needs to access your electronic items so it can be certain you are paying your taxes. Obama thinks that without the ability to access phones people will be walking around with Swiss bank accounts right on their devices.
As if most people have the ability to get one. But the rich certainly have them (I would not be surprised to find out many politicians had them) though I suspect they would not be foolish enough to keep that info on their phones.
While Obama thinks no citizen should have absolute privacy he carries an electronic device paid for by the taxpayers that has all kinds of encryption on it to keep it from being hacked. And while Obama thinks government should have the ability to access your information he certainly supports YOU going to jail for accessing anything held on the government’s electronic media.
They work for us but they act like they own us. Their information is very important to them so much so that Hillary Clinton set up a home brew server to route all her communications through other than government channels.
Instead of worrying about some citizen keeping a Swiss bank account on a cell phone perhaps Obama should concern himself with government officials who are hiding their misdeeds from the public.
People have a right to privacy and that right should not be infringed upon because the government can’t access data it wants. But if the court agrees with government and allows this violation of our rights perhaps we should be afforded the opportunity to redact things before they get to see them.
You know, just like they do when citizens request information…
The apple does not fall far from the tree and in the case of Obama it is a rotten apple that fell from the tree of communism.
Never surrender, never submit.
Woman beater and alleged musician Chris Brown is a violent thug coward who believes in violence to get what he wants. It appears as if Brown follows the Obama philosophy of a good brawl when necessary (or getting in their face or bringing a gun if they bring a knife, take your pick of Obama violence) to achieve what is desired politically.
The Chris [Brown] and black lives matter (except when they don’t) crowd see violence as a means to achieve political success, you know, like they do in third world dictatorships.
“I won’t but that sounded pretty scary. You’re a tough guy,” Obama said.
“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.” Fact Check
I know Donald Trump has stated violence is appropriate when dealing with violence** but I don’t recall him ever asking people to be violent for the sake of being violent or to push an agenda. Trump said he felt it was appropriate that his supporters fought BACK.
As for Brown, he wants retaliation for an incident in which a man at a Trump rally sucker punched a protester in the face [an act Trump did not condone] as he is being led out by police. Brown thinks this is getting out of hand and he wants blacks to show up 40 and 50 deep to Trump rallies and then dare people to punch. If the guy punched without provocation then he deserves to be prosecuted but if Brown’s response is deemed appropriate then we need to relook at all of it.
How many anti Trump folks have committed violence toward Trump supporters? Should Trump supporters line up 40 or 50 deep and inflict violence on those people? Look at how the anti Trump morons acted in Chicago. Their threats of violence and assaults on Trump supporters led to the event being cancelled and those who attended to see Trump fearing for their safety as Chicago’s finest kept their distance (I am sure they don’t support a guy like Trump either so they won’t protect his supporters).
Brown is a coward who beats up women for kicks. That is about the only fight this coward could ever hope to win, unless of course he had others, 40 or 50 deep, in front of him for protection. Did you notice how Brown, like most liberal pukes, wants others to commit violence in his name? Funny thing though, liberals like to talk about the violent people on the right when all the mass shootings and riots are done (or incited) by liberal dindu nuffins like Brown.
The only way Brown would lead the way is if he were attacking women, because you know, it makes gangstas tough if they can beat up a female. Guys like Brown don’t like to attack folks who might punch back.
So follow Brown if you want but keep in mind that most people are not going to stand around and let you attack them.
In other words, be careful what you ask for.
**The Blaze is owned by Glenn Beck so the take will be anti Trump even though the actions show nothing that would appear to be inappropriate.
Never surrender, never submit.
When Donald Trump entered the presidential race there was a lot of worry that if he did not win the nomination he would run third party which would guarantee a Democrat win. This was such a bone of contention the establishment made a big show of asking during the first debate if anyone would not support the winner if it were someone else. Trump indicated he would not depending on how he was treated.
He eventually capitulated and said he would support the nominee if he were not the winner. This made everyone happy.
The establishment Republicans made a big show out of telling everyone how they would support the winner no matter who it was. This was when they all thought Trump had no chance to win and when their only concern was him going third party if he lost. They could not afford to lose the kingdom.
Fast forward and Trump is in the lead. There is a very good chance he will be the nominee and all of the sudden those establishment Republicans who swore they would back the winner are backing out of their promises.
The latest to do so is Mitt Romney. I admit I voted for Romney in 2012. He was not the best Republican we could have put forth but he won and he was a heck of a lot better than Obama. In fact much of what he said would happen (and for that matter much of what Palin said four years earlier) has actually happened. All those smug liberals, including Obama, have said nary a word about the things they were wrong about, the things they ridiculed Romney over and there have been many.
My support of Romney then does not mean I will support what he says now. I have not made up my mind on a candidate but if Trump wins I will vote for him over the Democrat because both of them are Socialist/progressive thugs who will be worse than Obama. They will strike the finishing blow to our once great nation.
Romney, a man who begged Donald Trump for his endorsement in 2012, has blasted Trump and stated he would be bad for the party. Romney said many bad things about a guy who he praised when he wanted an endorsement. Romney is an establishment Republican who will say or do anything in the name of the party and at the expense of the nation.
It is a shame because Romney had a chance to keep his word and back the winner even if that winner happens to be Trump as he stated he would and as he expected from Trump.
You can’t trust the establishment. They are awakening to the reality that Trump might just win and they do not know what to do.
Unfortunately, they will not hold themselves to the same standards they demanded of Trump when they thought he could never win.
If they screw this up they can rest assured there will be a Democrat in the White House and a new party of people who finally figure out that the Republicans have abandoned them will form.
Never surrender, never submit.