Can I sign the petition in support of open carry guns at the Republican Convention anonymously?

Well you can’t so it’s kind of a silly question. Sign it if you want but it obviously will not be anonymous.

I’m bothered by your willingness to want to sign, but your unwillingness to be identified. If you’re motivated to take a public stand by signing a petition, more power to you. But where is the courage of your convictions? If you want to support this, then where is the pride in letting everyone else know?

As for the substance of your request: This seems to be states rights issue. Ohio in its wisdom said that no guns were allowed in the arena (convention hall). And now these petitioners want to override state law. What happened to the tenth amendment and the right of a state to set its own laws?

This petition isn’t going anywhere. Do you really think that the Secret Service is going to let 15,000 yahoos carry guns in close proximity to several thousand politicians? No way in hell.

I’d also observe that it would be fun to have Cruz and Trump shoot it out on the dais. Cruz would win, if that’s how they selected the candidate. I’ll bet Trump has never fired a gun.

@elbanditoroso: I gave you a GA for that, except I disagree with your last sentence. I am betting that in Trump’s mind, he has the biggest gun.

Open carry (or any carry) at a Republican convention is a recipe for disaster. I’m surprised there hasn’t already been gunfire at one of their rallies.

And forgive my saying, @ ibstubro, but disagree with your wanting to sign the petition at all, and I can’t help but feel your wish to support 2nd Amendmenters without being opening labelled as one is strangely disingenuious.

No!

Petition signatures must be able to be traced to a still-living person with a verifiable address in order to prevent fraud.

I’m willing to support the 2nd Amendmenters willingness to test the open carry law in the crucible that will be the Republican National Convention.

The NRA is a loud and vocal driver of American politics. People that sign the petition are signaling a readiness to allow avid gun carry advocates to prove the safety and desirability of carrying a gun to a large, emotionally charged, venue.

Obviously, the open-carry proponents believe that a successful open-carry convention will prove the efficacy of an armed citizenry keeping the peace.
More power to them.

I’m willing to put my name to a petition, but not in a way that will imply support for more than this test case. Give them the chance – I don’t when they will find a more supportive venue.

I don’t recall the 2nd Amendment saying any thing about open carry. It says some thing about a well armed militia.

@Dutchess_III… YES!!! You are right on.

Over 23K sign petition to allow guns at Republican National Convention

Up over 3,000 signatures since I posted the question a few hours ago. From “Almost 20,000” to “Over 23,000”.

Open-carry at the Republican Convention sounds pretty “open-scary” to me!

@Dutchess_III
and well regulated.
(meaning Vanilla Isis does not count)

Kinda funny. I think Fox News missed the part where the petition was started by a liberal as a joke. There is no other way to read it as something that isn’t satire.

Link to petition.

I’m guessing that if the Secret Service says there won’t be guns allowed at the convention, there won’t be guns allowed at the convention no matter how many people pout and stomp their feet.

Some people need to read the petition. It’s obviously a joke pointing out the hypocrisy.

As usual the gun haters will “forget” the latter half of the 2nd amendment.

…and twist the meaning of the first half.

Oh how funny @johnpowell! How can people be so blinded that they turn into mindless fools?

Over 25K sign petition to allow guns at Republican National Convention

And the momentum builds!

I think it’s just freaking hilarious that the liberals start utter nonsense rumors, such as this one about Cuban refugees hanging on to the wings of Air Force One, in order to flee Cuba…and the conservatives take it seriously!

This “petition” to allow open carry at Republican conventions was another of those tongue in cheek, ridiculous jokes started by the liberals….and the conservatives took it seriously!
I guess the hope now is that all those open carry freaks will start shooting each other and the candidates.

The stupidity is mind blowing.

It does underline how tactless liberals can be. You don’t see the right trolling the left like this.

LOL! It’s just handing them a rope, @ARE_you_kidding_me. What they do with it after that is up to them. That’s not tactless. That’s just letting them play the fools that they seem to be. These “tactics” wouldn’t even be known, or heard of, if the conservatives didn’t take them seriously and start spreading them around as if they’re true.

It seems to me that the conservatives would love, love, love to make the liberals look foolish simply by handing them a rope. For some reason, it just doesn’t work that way on this side. Can’t imagine what the reason could be.

@Dutchess_III
To be honest, that petition does read like something a conservative would write.
In fact, it is actually subdued, and a conservative would actually be considerably more crass.

@ARE_you_kidding_me
No, the right just physically assaults peaceful protesters.

Yes it does, but it’s easy enough to adopt a writing style.

@ragingloli it’s usually the other way around for whatever reason. The left tend to be physically violent when they get in a herd and someone challenges what they have rallied around. Much like their soccer team lost and it gives them the “right” to rampage in the streets. You don’t see the right spike trees or have people “swatted” for not agreeing with their ideology. Far left activists are full of just horrible people.

@ARE_you_kidding_me
you live in a parallel world

It’s reality, sometimes people can’t come to terms with it.

@ARE_you_kidding_me I have to agree with @ragingloli here; not something I often do, but the alternative is to side with someone who is so blatantly wrong that it’s honestly a bit scary. While some on the far left are rather horrible, they are also pretty rare. More importantly, they are rarely heavily armed, don’t go around stripping rights from large portions of the population (women, non-whites…), and generally seek to change through reform, preferring the first amenedment over the second when they protest.

As for SWATing, that’s a gamer thing that transcends political ideology. However, being totally delusional and making stuff up is something normally associated with the Right.

BTW, how much “twisting” is involved in saying that Bubba-Joe-Bob and his drinking buddies are not automatically “a well-regulated militia” just because their birth certificate says they were born in the US? While I believe in the right to bear arms, I also believe that the US military (the same military that a lot of conservatives found a way to not serve despite their hero-worship of us veterans) has it right when they require their personnel to be trained and proven competent before they are allowed to touch a firearm, and they REALLY have a thing for accounting for every single weapon and piece of ammunition issued. Are you saying that the military itself is ultra-left-wing? Would you admit it if you were?

So if you want to see someone who can’t come to terms with reality, look in the mirror.

@jerv You’re taking this conversation too seriously.

@ARE_you_kidding_me I have certain sore spots.

More than 42,000 sign petition to allow guns at GOP convention

Does not matter how many sign it, the S.S. simply will not allow it.

As I said above.

Of course they won’t allow it. It would be absolute insanity to.

It all started as a really dumb JOKE anyway.

@Dutchess_III So did Trump’s presidential campaign. You seem to forget the sort of people we’re dealing with here.

Yeah, I remember the days when Ben Carson was a candidate and Trump was a joke, @jerv.
Good point!

Trump wants to study proposal to allow guns at convention

Trump is a fool

“It was not clear whether the person posting the petition was backing the proposal or attempting to put the party, which strongly backs gun rights, in an awkward position.”

If their intention was to put the Republicans in an awkward position, the Republicans seemed more than willing to help out.

@jerv Good point. There is a faction of this nation who are apparently total idiots who don’t have the mental capacity to know a joke when they see it….but they’re gaining power. That kind of makes me ill.

The petition now has 51,971 supporters.

….......are you not listening @ibstubro? The petition was started as a joke. They will never allow open carry at an event like that, I don’t care how many signatures they get.

I’ve seen a few headlines indicating that the Secret Service has already expressed interest in the affair. Anything that they express interest in often gets “interesting”. Time to grab some popcorn and get ready for the show….

The petition now has 52,185 siggies.

Although some portion of those signatures might be from those of us who find the fantasy of a shootout between ammosexuals at the convention entertaining, the number suggests the possibility of the SS turning away thousands of wannabe conventioneers.

This might result in there being only about 10 people who are actually allowed into the convention. ;-)

@Brian1946: OR they come to the convention sans firearms and try to enjoy themselves by themselves.

It does sound like the potential for Shootout at the OK Corral hahaha.

@jca

“OR they come to the convention sans firearms and try to enjoy themselves by themselves.”

Those are the ten to whom I’m referring. However, I could be wrong. Hell, there might 20 or even a 100 who are let inside. ;-)

Some of you anti-gun folks have a skewed perception of reality. If they allow carry, there likely won’t be any problems. Just hearing your fantasies about this kind of makes me a little sick and validates some of what I sarcastically wrote above.

@ARE_you_kidding_me: It’s not us. I don’t care if they let guns in or not. It won’t affect me one bit. It’s the Secret Service that you have to convince.

Fantasies? Who is having fantasies? @ARE_you_kidding_me.

@ARE_you_kidding_me Considering how tempers have flared at rallies already even without guns, I can’t agree. Or are you saying that Chicago and St. Louis never happened? If you are refuting that those events took place or implying that just carrying a gun automatically makes you both competent and just, then it’s a fair question as to who has a skewed perception of reality here.

While I am generally a supporter of the second amendment, I feel that allowing firearms in a setting that is prone to violence anyways will accomplish nothing except possibly turning assault into manslaughter. And given how mobs are, I’m not talking just one or two victims either; we’re talking some pretty hefty casualties. Not to mention most gun owners don’t have the training of a law enforcement officer or a soldier, so we’re talking about people with poor trigger discipline and questionable marksmanship in non-target-range situations. Considering the stakes, “likely won’t happen” isn’t good enough even if the likelihood of nothing bad happening is 99.9999%. Odds are that you won’t be in a car accident but you wear a seatbelt anyways, right? The same logic applies; the risks of allowing guns at the convention are higher than the hardship and risk of making it a gun-free zone (aside from armed professionals like police), so the law will go on the side of public safety.

If we were talking about someone who wanted to pack so that they could walk down the street without winding up like Uncle Ben (the only dead comic book character to stay dead) or who wanted a semi-auto rifle with a decent-sized clip to go hunting, I would be more inclined to agree with you. But arming a bunch of people who will probably wind up in a fight anyways is just asking for trouble, and anyone who thinks otherwise is so wrapped up in their gun fetish that they have some pretty idealistic notions like confusing the concepts of deterrent and escalation and thinking all gun owners are competent people of upstanding character and impeccable discipline. And quite frankly, it makes me a little embarrassed to be pro-gun since people don’t always bother to discern between rational moderates and fanatical extremists.

@jerv i don’t care if they allow carry there or not. I’m outlining the sick fantasy some here have about gun violence breaking out at one of the Trump rallies. I don’t think anything would really happen if they allowed carry because not that many actually would and there would be much more security presence. If something happens it’ll be an isolated incident, it won’t be a huge brawl like some on the left would seemingly love to see. That said allowing it would be a mistake IMO. There will be the extremists who think it’s ok to have an ar15 slung on their back .They are few and far between but ruin the “image” for the rest.
On “training”
At least around where I live the people who do carry have at least as much or more skill than police or military. Just because you had a few training classes does not give you any special ninja skills that others don’t have. Often just a little training is all that is required of them. I have more faith in the folks who have marksmanship as hobby and actually practice regularly. Some of the police don’t give a shit about guns and consequently have very poor skills with them. They are nothing special because they are required to have them as part of their job. Those with carry permits do go through simmilar training and it is drilled into them repeatedly that you are only allowed to even deholster if your life is in imminent danger. I mean, I live in gun country and I have never once, ever seen someone pull a gun for any reason who was not at the range or out shooting. I don’t think I have ever met a single person who carries regularly and was_not_ responsible. The people who own guns, never go to the range and never carry may not be. I can’t say I’m too worried about it.

I think there would be gun play at a Trump rally. The kind of people who insist on open carry, are very obvious about it, and carry on and on about their “rights” are people who are insecure but have misshapen egos the size of the universe and are constantly finding ways to feed it. Having a big gun, and have the “balls to use it,” go hand in hand.
Those are the kind of people who are rallying behind Trump, too.

There are plenty of those but they get “self-policed” by other gun owners and quickly. Open carry is a very rare thing though. It’s something only a jackass does out in public. You just don’t see it much and it is generally an ego thing.

Then why the big giant push on, with the petition and all of that?

The people getting behind that one are the nuttier types. Allowing “carry” and “open carry” are fundamentally different things. If the petition said “carry” as in permit holder legal carry then it would probably a little different and more reasonable. I can see though if they somehow allow it it will be just like any other NRA rally only with Trump as a speaker. Gun play is unlikely. Politics, if it annoys the left the far right is on board even if they are just being trolled.

Yes. They are the nuttier types. They are the ones most likely to engage in gun play to prove their penis is bigger than the other guy’. They are the ones agitating for open carry. So, tell us again how, if by some miracle, it was allowed and you have all those nuttier types walking around with guns in their pants, gun play is unlikely?

When is the last time you heard of gun play at an NRA or GOA rally? How about at a gun show? It’s just not a likely outcome. The very types who “show off” are the biggest cowards and the least likely to do anything. They’ll also have the evil eye of the rest of us too.

Secret Service doesn’t want to take the chance of some nut who doesn’t like one of the candidates deciding to take things into his own hands and taking the candidate out.

They need to worry about that regardless but I agree, they won’t allow it and should not allow it. They will be right there and armed so it’s not like other gun free zones where there is zero armed presence. If they did though it’s not likely going to cause any major problems except the need for greater security.

Equating an NRA rally with the RNC is a bit of a stretch.

Hearty laugh at the ‘evil eye prevents gun play’ premise!!

Not a stretch at all, there are only gun nuts and advocates at an NRA rally. There are mostly gun nuts at the RNC

That’s the point. They don’t allow guns at those rallies. Why are some of the Republicans so hell bent on making it so that they are allowed?

It’s simple, they are gun rights advocates. Not hard to understand.

Why would anyone petition for the right to carry a gun at an event where emotions are running so high? That’s stupid.

No one said they were the brightest bulbs in the box

Emotions will be high in the sense everyone will be high fiving and saying fuk all dem libs whoo hoo. These will not be the people who represent traditional republicans. It’ll be like a tea party convention. Yet.. guns are not likely going to cause problems there.

….You’re going in circles. Specific nutty republicans are campaigning to allow open carry at the rallies, but you say they aren’t going to go to the rallies? Or if they go, they aren’t going to take advantage of their hard “right” to open carry? and “fuk all dem libs?” Seriously?

They will go, they will carry if allowed..and nothing will happen like some people think will automatically if guns are present. Clear?

But it’s the nuts that will be carrying the guns!

“You know what a gun-free zone is to sickos? That’s bait.”
Donald J. Trump, 1–7-16

Hey…that even made sense. They see it as a triple dog dare. And ain’t no real man gonna ever back down from a triple dog dare! And nobody tells a real man what he can and cain’t do! He wanna carry a gun, by God he’ll carry a gun, and ain’t nobody gonna stop ‘im.

@ARE_you_kidding_me How sure are you? Pretend you’re an insurance agent and give me a probability. Are you wiling to forfeit your eternal soul and the continued existence of your entire bloodline that ONLY the trained people of sound mind will have guns? I mean, I know some gun owners who actually are trained and disciplined, but that doesn’t mean that every gun owner is. Your assertion to the contrary may apply to your household, but how much are you willing to gamble that there is not even a single gun owner in your area that hasn’t been through the training you seem to erroneously think is mandatory in all jurisdictions?

We aren’t talking a rally totally composed of composed people either, so forget any NRA rally and start thinking more along the lines of a KKK rally. Sure, some will arm themselves solely for self-defense, but there will likely be more than zero people there just looking for (or willing to make) an excuse to open fire. Even if it doesn’t actually happen, the risk is unacceptably high.

But I might agree with you if you promise to NEVER do anything like look before crossing the street or check the rear-view mirror before backing up, You seem to be of the opinion that precautions are stupid, so put your money where your mouth is. You say nothing will happen with the certainty of one who knows nothing can happen, so ante up or back down. If you think it’s the least bit outrageous, then there is no way that you can take your own words seriously either.

Then again, you can’t tell the difference between a gun advocate and a gun nut, so I’m not sure if you’re qualified to be taken seriously; you have the right to an opinion, but uninformed opinions that contradict historical fact carry far less weight than those that are aligned with reality. The reality is that the risks of open carry at an event where tempers historically run hot are far greater than the benefits. Thinking otherwise is, at best, ignorant of historical precedent.

@jerv have you even read anything I have written? You’re not making sense. I have already said several times I don’t think allowing it is a good idea. One thing though is that you seem to think that there is a horde of crazy nuts who can’t wait to cause trouble. Just not the case. It’ll be few and far between and any problems will be isolated ones. Precautions should be taken and I have said that. Believe me dude I know the difference between a gun nut and a simple proponent. You just want something to argue about.

There is a horde of crazy nuts who can’t wait to cause trouble, and they’re signing a petition to set that up.

@Dutchess_III but most of them are not out to cause trouble. You really believe that? Think about what you are saying. Most of them are just supporters, they are just not the brightest. That does not in any way mean they won’t be mostly responsible. We are talking about a tiny, tiny percentage who actually wish bad things to happen or are completely irresponsible. This is libtard banter. You’re liberal but not idiotic.

@ARE_you_kidding_me With all your talk of “self-policing” and talk about how all the gun people you know are trained and disciplined, it really was hard to tell which way you were going with it, and ambiguity always runs the risk of misinterpretation.

Fair enough. Self-policing is a thing because gun enthusiasts know that gun “nuts” will destroy their reputations. It’s a real phenomena. Gun enthusiasts are very protective and will not allow jackasses to shit on everything. I should know I’m one of them. I don’t think they should allow it because it will be impossible to tell who wants to pop a cap in trump or who wants to support gun rights. I don’t support it or do I because I don’t want a Trump presidency…..

50,000 attendees at the convention.
Only a tiny percent will be nut-jobs. Like .1%, @Dutchess_III.

That’s only 50 nut jobs loose at the convention, for cripes sake. Ease up. ~

@ibstubro 50 who will be policed by 49,950. Think about that.

That’s what scares me, @ARE_you_kidding_me. One nut shoots and 49,999 people draw down in a packed auditorium. 49 are nut jobs.

Well keep dreaming. 49,000 armed level headed folks pretty much guarantee the 49 nut jobs won’t get away with shit.

How?
What good are 49,000 armed ‘folks’ in/as a crowd?
I think being the first nut-job to fire pretty much guarantees that you will, indeed, get away with shit.

The angle I’m looking at is that group psychology is very different from individual psychology. Mobs have a mind of their own and behave completely differently from any individuals within that mob. That leads to a few other related thoughts.

Hypothetical;

Someone fires a shot. You reach for your gun and scan for where the perp is. By the time you clear leather and scan more than a few degrees of arc, you see hundreds of people with guns. Oh, and a few hundred see you with a gun too.

What happens next?

Well, if someone gets a shot at the perp, that person may be confused for the perp by those that didn’t hear the others say, “There he is! Get him!”. And if someone gets a “false positive” and takes a shot against someone they think is the perp, then it gets even more interesting.

And that’s just the first 2–3 seconds; no telling where it goes from there. If even 1% of a group of 50,000 gun-carriers is less than 100% accurate in both target identification and trigger discipline, that’s still 500 people that could cause some serious accidental damage. All it takes is one screwup.

On the other hand, if the only ones doing the shooting are people with badges, people with snazzy black suits complete with earpieces and cool shades who have many hours of training for engaging in areas with a lot of civilians around, and the perp, the equation is a lot simpler all around and the body count a lot lower.

In any event, this isn’t like going into the 7/11 where it’s just a few shoppers, a cashier and a crackhead. The tactical situation is much different, and I don’t think any civilian has the ability to handle something that even trained professionals have difficulty with. When a tweaker points a gun at a guy behind a register, there is no question who the samaritans should point their guns at. There is far lower risk of collateral damage. Put in enough people to make LOS hard and positive target identification harder…. well, that changes things. A lot.

Like I said a few times, that may not happen but there is a non-zero possibility of it, and that is enough for anyone concerned with public safety to balk.

Hell, I’m wondering where you’d get 49,000 level-headed folks in the first place!

@ARE_you_kidding_me I realize most of them are not crazy nuts. But the ones who are are the ones signing that ridiculous petition.
Anyone with half a brain wouldn’t even give it a passing glance.

Great answer @jerv.

There are lots of reasons that a lot of people would look at, and sign, the petition, @Dutchess_III. Obviously.

“Most” of 53,194 is a sizable number.

Well, name a few reasons they would sign, @ibstubro. I’m listening.

And 53,194 being “sizeable” is relative. If you compare 53,000 to the entire adult population of the US it isn’t a drop in the bucket.

50,000 is the estimated size of the Republican National Convention this year.

The petition is a modest proposal. I think a great number of people would support it on that ground alone, @Dutchess_III.

“Satire is often thought of as a sub-sect of humor, but actually does not necessarily have anything to do with humor. A satire mocks social conventions.”
source

Whatever. It was started as a joke. It may not have been funny, but it certainly wasn’t meant to be taken seriously. lol