No, that’s not what is absurd

Byline: | Category: 2012, 2nd Amendment | Posted at: Friday, 20 April 2012

Tampa officials want to ban concealed carry permitted guns during the Republican National Convention, but a Florida law won’t let them:

So while Tampa plans to ban a wide range of weapons (clubs, switchblades, Mace) and things that could be used as weapons (chains, glass bottles, water pistols) outside the convention, it cannot prohibit guns carried with a concealed weapons permit.

Mayor Bob Buckhorn says, “The absurdity of banning squirt guns but not being able to do anything about real guns is patently obvious.”

No, Mr. Mayor.  What is absurd is that you want to ban squirt guns.

UPDATE:

It also seems that there is some Second Amendment absurdity over in Charlotte, where the Democrats are holding their convention.  The city’s largest employer (and one of the nation’s largest ever recipient of federal funds), Bank of America, has decided that it doesn’t want to do business with companies that make guns. 

It doesn’t seem that bright of a move for a struggling bank to end relations with a company that operates in one of the strongest industries during this economic downturn.

More here.  (ht: SU)

Prediction:  BoA and Mayor Buckhorn are both going to reverse course very quickly.

Share this post:

3 Responses to “No, that’s not what is absurd”

  1. Fderfler Says:

    A lot of smoke in Tampa with little flame. They could either declare the parade area a “Place of Nuisance” (usually a house of prostitution, but it fits) thereby prohibiting concealed carry for all or have the legislature pass a special measure. There are several solutions, but the Press couldn’t help themselves. In my opinion, Mayor Buckhorn is a very good guy walking a very high tightrope. These are all “staff proposals” being offered for discussion.

    But, Bank of America deserves all the banderillas we can stick into them.

  2. SayUncle » Banning guns at the GOP convention Says:

    [...] Like Bob said: No, Mr. Mayor. What is absurd is that you want to ban squirt guns. [...]

  3. J Says:

    Here is why it’s not absurd (a logical breakdown):
    1) To conceal carry in Fla requires a permit which requires a bacground check. If person X is carrying and doesn’t have a permit, it’s a felony and already illegal.

    2) IF a person with (never mind without) a permit pulls out a gun without it being a defensive shoot, it’s a felony and already illegal.

    3) Trying to assassinate a political figure is a felony and already illegal.

    So… a gun ban really only keeps law abiding CCW permit holders from carrying their guns. Everyone else who might want to pack heat is already violating the law.

    But why ban squirt guns. Easy, there is no law against carrying a squirt gun in public without a permit. You can fill a squirt gun with anything (bleach, pool acid, etc.) and until you hit someone in the eyes with it, jusr brandishing a super soaker isn’t a crime.