Is it any wonder that Florida wears the crown?Florida Governor Rick Scott has rejected a request by Tampa's mayor to allow local authorities to ban guns from the city's downtown during the Republican National Convention in August.Citing Second Amendment protections in the U.S. Constitution, Scott told Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn conventions and guns have co-existed since the nation's birth and would continue to do so during the four-day event beginning August 27."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," the Republican governor said in a letter on Tuesday.Local officials need Scott's permission to enact the temporary restrictions after state lawmakers last year passed a measure that prohibits local governments from adopting gun ordinances that are stricter than state law.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
So if I read this right following the constitution is wrong? This is what you are saying right?
ReplyDeleteYeah God forbid the governor of a state insist the locals follow the state and federal constitutions. Everything would be so much easier for the government if they could just make up new rules whenever they felt like.
ReplyDeleteNote what Gov. Scott said. He can't see how disarming law-abiding citizens will stop criminals from doing what they do. Exactly.
ReplyDeleteGov. Scott is repeating the tired and false gun-rights refrain.
ReplyDeleteSome "lawful gun owners" do wrong. That's the reason for gun free zones. It's not about the criminals.
Some "criminals" do wrong, and they do it in gun free zones, It is always about the criminals.
DeleteWhy are you a prohibited person Mikey, what was your disqualifying felony, we want to hear your story........
Yes, please tell me why we can trust a citizen to obey a "no gun zone" but we cannot trust them to obey our assault and murder laws.
Delete1. Criminals have a proven record of committing crimes. We're not speculating about them doing wrong.
ReplyDelete2. People who follow the law well enough to pass a background check and get a license on rare occasions screw up and commit crimes. The rate of doing so is far less than established criminals.
3. People who plan to commit a mass shooting won't ask permission to carry a gun first.
So Mikeb, why do you repeat the tired and false gun grabber refrain about how banning guns from the premises will prevent shootings from happening?
Will a gun-free zone sign stop the sociopath who doesn't care about you or your rules? No.
Will such a sign stop a delusional person who hears voices telling him to shoot? No.
Will a sign stop a thug who plans to commit robbery, rape, or murder? No.
A gun-free zone sign will stop the rara avis who is simultaneously is a danger to himself or to others, but also cares enough about what signs tell him to do that he'll disarm in gun-free zones.
This leaves us to wonder about the nature of your obsession, Mikeb.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI still haven't figured out how I will be safer if a criminal is armed and I am not. Maybe that's why lots of citizens elect to arm themselves.
ReplyDeleteNobody's saying criminals should be armed and you should not. This post is about declaring a very confined area for a short period of time a gun free zone.
ReplyDeleteBut why? Folks would just be shooting Republicans. . .
DeleteThe point remains. Anyone who wishes to commit murder isn't going to be deterred by a sign. Metal detectors and guards? Possibly, but not by a sign.
Greg, not everyone who commits murder starts out their day with the intention of doing so. That's why gun free zones work. We'll never know how many murders they've prevented.
DeleteWe'll never know isn't proof. It's a guess, a feeling. My rights and my safety shouldn't be dependent on your feelings.
Delete