Convention Planning Security-Meeting Planners Show Concern for Concealed Gun Laws

Okay, you know the world is getting crazier when delegates CANNOT BRING lumber, hatchets, gas mask, chains, and super soakers to a convention but they ARE ALLOWED to bring concealed guns. Yep, you read it correctly, of all the things that are on the list of what you can’t bring to an upcoming convention in Tampa, concealed guns is not one of them. The convention planning that we are talking about is, ironically, the Republican National Convention.

This year is a presidential election year in the US. And as part of that process the major parties both host conventions where they announce and/or confirm their leaders. Obviously the Democrats will host Pres. Obama in his bid to win re-election. And, as it’s pretty much all over but the writing, the Republicans will present Mr. Romney as their candidate to take on Pres. Obama for the Oval Office. Florida and North Carolina have been selected by the respective parties to host their conventions. Florida and North Carolina also have laws which allow concealed weapons.

Security Has Become a Large Part of Convention Planning

Convention planning is a daunting task. Just read a few of our other blog post here and you’ll quickly get an idea of just how diverse the job of the convention planner really is. However, as most meeting planners will tell you, the security of their delegates is top priority.

So you could understand why the convention planners and organizers for the Republican National Convention are showing concern over Florida’s concealed weapon law. And under most other circumstances I can give them that argument without any irony being applied. But not this convention. You see it’s the Republicans themselves (with support from some Democrats) that are responsible for these concealed weapon laws that are law in over 20 states. But, as I said above, irony seems to be alive and well with this gang. Last week Tampa’s City Council passed a resolution to ask Republican Gov. Rick Scott to implement a temporary ban on concealed weapons. This is so they can take added precautions to make sure that their delegates and attendees are safer. Isn’t that the goal for politicians all of the time, not just temporarily??

Perhaps Politicians Need a Lesson in Convention Planning Security

Some meeting and convention planners, that I’ve spoken with, tell me that they are outraged that a political organization can be exempt from a particular law but not their own conferences. Now, I do understand that there are a lot of high profile and powerful leaders that will attend the Republican and Democrat conventions. So does this mean that the convention planners and organizers for the political parties think that the concealed weapon law is okay for 99.9% of the conventions and their delegates but should be temporarily pre-empted when their conventions roll into town?

I guess the saying “it would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic” is appropriate for this situation. From my take, I think that if the lawmakers think that this law is appropriate in their respective states, then they should put their money where their mouth is. Otherwise, perhaps these conventions will also show these lawmakers that wanting a little security for your delegates doesn’t mean you are in violation of the second amendment.

I would be very interested to find out from meeting planners, that are hosting meetings in states where concealed weapons are allowed, exactly what their thoughts are regarding security and how it relates to their convention planning.

Recent Posts