# Why don't squirt guns have 2nd amendment protection? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 6, 2012, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028 "2012-04-06T19:56:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/41 "2012-04-07T19:47:34Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > [Here is the text of the law](http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/filestores/web/statutes/fs07/CH0790/Section_0790.06.HTM), as stated by the Florida state government. Section (12) specifies where a gun may not be carried, and it the list does not include private businesses, except for private schools, drinking establishments, and to sports events. It doesn’t matter whether there is an exception for private businesses. Property owners are privileged to exclude pretty much whatever they want from their property. If they hold it out as open to the public, they can’t exclude _people_ without cause, but they can certainly exclude firearms. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/42 "2012-04-07T22:39:30Z")
When they came for my neighbor’s water pistol, I said nothing… ---
**Author:** ![flatlined](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/eb9ed0/32.png) [@flatlined](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flatlined)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/43 "2012-04-07T22:50:14Z")
4 years ago, one of the minor Presidental candidates came to speak at a gunshow. As usual, the crowd was dripping weapons, some for sale and some just to show off. The Secret Service guys looked rather embarrassed to be going through the crowd and taking away signs on sticks, but leaving guns, swords and flamethrowers. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/44 "2012-04-07T22:59:09Z")
Now _that’s_ funny! ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/45 "2012-04-07T23:00:12Z")
They can have my super soaker when they pry it from my pruned, wet hands! ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/46 "2012-04-07T23:06:51Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It doesn’t matter whether there is an exception for private businesses. Property owners are privileged to exclude pretty much whatever they want from their property. If they hold it out as open to the public, they can’t exclude _people_ without cause, but they can certainly exclude firearms. There was [a GQ thread from last year](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=14233744#post14233744) where we discussed the difference between a business banning guns, and that business’s policy having the force of law (i.e., violating that store’s policy is in itself a criminal act). ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/47 "2012-04-07T23:25:52Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It doesn’t matter whether there is an exception for private businesses. Property owners are privileged to exclude pretty much whatever they want from their property. If they hold it out as open to the public, they can’t exclude _people_ without cause, but they can certainly exclude firearms. > [@MEBuckner](#): > > There was [a GQ thread from last year](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=14233744#post14233744) where we discussed the difference between a business banning guns, and that business’s policy having the force of law (i.e., violating that store’s policy is in itself a criminal act). RTNB, pretty much the exact opposite of what you claim is true. Businesses can exclude people for disobeying policies (see MEBuckner’s post about restaurants that require men to wear ties in order to be seated for a meal). And, if they ask you to leave because you don’t have a tie, they can choose to call the police who mght end up arresting you for trespassing. As far as guns go, they can demand you leave for ignoring their policy, but they certainly can’t seize your gun. And if the police are ultimately involved, at worst you will face a trespassing charge, not any charge relating to Florida gun laws. My description of the Florida gun law was partly wrong and partly right. A business may not create some kind of zone where possession of a gun is illegal because they post a sign saying NO GUNS. But they can require you to leave if they see you have a gun and they don’t want it there, just as they can require you to leave it you are rude and disruptive to their staff and other customers. You are not in violation of any law until you refuse a direction of a property owner to leave – it is this refusal that might constitute a crime, not the possession of a gun that led to the demand to leave. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/48 "2012-04-08T03:48:12Z")
Yes, but the question is whether guns can be banned from private property, not whether it’s a crime to carry a gun onto that property. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/49 "2012-04-08T04:13:03Z")
> [@BigAppleBucky](#): > > Squirt guns, I suppose, could be filled with more dangerous liquids than water. If I’m running the police in Tampa, and I can’t prevent all fights, then I don’t want pro and anti protestors fighting with anything more dangerous than their fists. So the restrictions make some degree of sense. And any such dangerous liquid could be splashed or thrown using a bucket or a plastic bottle just as effectively. It’s theatre. ---
**Author:** ![user\_hostile](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/user_hostile/32/474_2.png) [@user\_hostile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/user_hostile)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/50 "2012-04-08T06:28:11Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > According to the [_Tampa Bay Times_](http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernment/permitted-concealed-firearms-would-be-allowed-in-gop-convention-protest/1223099), the rules ban people from carrying water guns and “pieces of wood” in the _entire city of Tampa_. \< **pirate voice** \> Arrrgh! How’s Pegleg Pete going to attend the convention as a delegate now?\< **/pirate voice** \> ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/51 "2012-04-08T07:10:23Z")
Thailand is fast approaching the Songkran Water Festival when offices shut down for a week, the Capital evacuates, and the country indulges in a frenzy of bootleg whiskey, mud dances, and shooting each other with water guns. What does this have to do with OP? [In at least one previous Songkran Festival the police were barred from carrying squirt guns!](http://moneynumberone.net/songkran-the-water-fight/) The concern was that a police officer, trying to join in the merriment, might reach for the wrong gun and give someone a lead bullet instead of a dose of scented water. :smack: Perhaps the GOP’s thinking is related, though reversed of course. If a patriot needs to shoot a suspicious hooded black teenager, wouldn’t it be tragic if all the suspect got was a squirt of water? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/52 "2012-04-08T16:40:54Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I haven’t seen anyone posting here calling for a gun ban. > > The reason this regulation is noteworthy is because it is so mockable. If you are ostensibly crafting a safety measure for the convention, it is just silly to ban squirt guns but not handguns. No one here is supporting a gun ban. Right, but Florida recognizes that in crafting safety measures, you can’t run afoul of the law. Squirt guns and other novelty toys aren’t protected by law. The police can ban those under their safety scheme. However, they cannot ban free speech, church worship, or in Florida, carrying a handgun for personal protection. I wouldn’t call it totally silly either. You might get into misdemeanor mischief by squirting someone you don’t like with a water pistol, but still have the self-control not to pull a real pistol and start blasting away at them committing a major felony. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2012, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/53 "2012-04-08T17:55:10Z")
I would guess that they are trying to keep urine filled super-soakers from being deployed by protestors. Remember this from 2008 in Denver? > **[Police seized feces, urine during DNC](https://www.denverpost.com/2008/09/04/police-seized-feces-urine-during-dnc/)** > > Police seized feces, urine during DNC > [@](#): > > Among the items police seized during the Democratic convention were bags of feces stockpiled in LoDo and an estimated 200 bottles of urine in a vacant house, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper’s office revealed today. So it isn’t safety - it is trying to reduce some of the things that the protestors might do. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2012, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/54 "2012-04-12T03:43:23Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Mere bullets cannot kill such as them, but they fear squirt guns filled with holy water. By Jove, I think he’s got it! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2012, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028/55 "2012-04-12T03:58:51Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > I would guess that they are trying to keep urine filled super-soakers from being deployed by protestors. > > Remember this from 2008 in Denver? > > [Police seized feces, urine during DNC – The Denver Post](http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_10382440) > > So it isn’t safety - it is trying to reduce some of the things that the protestors might do. But, as pointed out, doing so in the entire city makes no sense. Not even the best supersoakers can shoot someone a mile away. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-squirt-guns-have-2nd-amendment-protection/618028.md?page=2)