DNC Rejecting Armed Security At National Convention? Pro-Gun Group Challenges Democrats To ‘Put Up Or Shut Up’

Will the DNC reject armed security at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia this coming July? That’s what one pro-gun group is urging the political party to do.

According to PR Newswire, a petition launched by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is calling on the Democratic National Committee to show its commitment to gun control by giving up armed security at the national convention in Philadelphia between July 25 and July 28.

CCRKBA launched a national petition to pressure Democrats who will convene at the Wells Fargo Center to do so without the protection of armed police, the Secret Service, or private security personnel. The building is already deemed a “gun-free zone.”

The petition demanding that Democrats drop armed security can be signed here.

CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb explains that the Democratic Party is essentially the one pushing all gun control measures, and they should “put up or shut up” by illustrating to the American people what that changes in its entirety.

“Democrats have become known as the party of gun control,” said Gottlieb. “Virtually all recent gun control proposals at the federal and state levels have been launched and championed by Democrats. It’s time for the party to ‘put up or shut up’ about guns. The best way to do that is to forsake armed security during the convention.”

Gottlieb thinks the DNC should reject armed security because, so far, it has expressed “overwhelming hypocrisy” of “privileged liberal elitists who have traditionally opposed expanded concealed carry rights for average citizens while they continue to enjoy the protection of armed security.”

The report highlights that front-runner Hillary Clinton has chastised the Supreme Court for a court decision regarding the Second Amendment. She openly stated that it was wrong in its 2008 Heller ruling about the Second Amendment. In spite of her persistent push on gun control for average citizens, she allows the Secret Service to shield and protect her.

Hillary Clinton enjoys the protection offered by the Secret Service. Would she be willing to have it the security minus guns at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia this summer (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)?

“If a political party believes that guns do not make us safer,” Gottlieb said, “they should set an example by rejecting any and all forms of armed security at their national convention. A party that does not believe in the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms should not benefit from the safety provided by others who bear arms.”

He continued, “No group, organization or political party that makes erosion of a constitutionally delineated fundamental civil right part of its agenda should benefit in any way from the existence of that right.”

The Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is 650,000 members strong. It’s one of the premier nationwide pro-gun organizations that is non-profit and is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms. The CCRKB accomplishes this through the lobbying of elected officials and is an organization that gun rights activists in local communities can be affiliated with throughout the United States.

Its mission statement reads that it is “dedicated to protecting your firearms rights. Our role is to educate grass root activists, the public, legislators and the media. Our programs are designed to help all Americans understand the importance of the Second Amendment and its role in keeping Americans free.”

Would the Democratic Party consider attending the national convention without armed security? The party may argue that having a convention without the protection of the police, Secret Service, or other security personnel would result in putting the nation at risk of a terrorist attack. Presidential candidates are prime targets, and such an event draws national attention as well as international focus.

It’s not likely that the DNC will reject armed protection at the Democratic National Convention mostly due to the fact that such a proposal isn’t in the best interests of anyone. It would certainly make a statement if the Democrats opted to attend the convention and agreed to sacrifice gun control, but it would make the potential next president extremely vulnerable to an assassination if not a terrorist attack site at the convention’s venue.

[Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images]