Gun Control Advocates' Loudest Voices Are Most Heavily Protected

Of course they are well protected. Protection for me, but none for thee. When you consider the fact that you would need to protect yourself hands on, but they have personal protection paid for you YOU makes their position especially heinous. Bloomberg and Emanuel must think their lives are worth that much more than yours. What are they afraid of? Both New York and Chicago have the toughest gun laws in the country as far as I know. They should be able to do the taxpayers a favor and dismiss most of their security forces and disarm the rest. After all their strict gun laws have made them safer....haven't they?

Leaders lead by example, so I challenge both Mayor Bloomberg and Mayor Emanuel to disarm their security teams. Your cities gun laws have made YOU as safe as your constituents, why exactly do you NEED armed security any more than we do?

 

Because leftists are ELITIST HYPOCRITES, that's why.

 

i think the government wants total gun control now, because they are going to have the mass legal Mexicans pouring into the ranks of the population in the usa and their scared of this scenario of them having more power.

 

I'll give up mine when they give up theirs. Them first!

 

it is very odd coincidental that this immigration push, is now corresponding with gun control.

 

The new bans suggested by Feinstein exempts government officials from the bans. Oddly DHS has purchased several thousand assault weapons, along with the proposed banned mags and bullets.

 

The execution of Kindergartners and thier teachers has shocked the nations' conscience ... only the party of stupid believes this was because of the wrath of God and because Americans watch Natural Born Killers ... but not because of Dems Target Lists and Machine-Gun my Mouth Rhetoric and that Obama is Hitler and Stalin ...

The NRA/Tea Party is as insane as Harris & Klebold, Cho, Loughner, Holmes and Lanza now ...

 

Please explain with reason why those children aren't allowed protection from armed professionals instead? Does anyone believe that any gun ban will keep the criminals away from children? Facts prove otherwise!

 

You have a point ... now, did NRA board member and Training Counselor and Coach and Instructor with the Connecticut State Rifle and Revolver Association since 1999 ... Patricia Clark ... who lives about a mile from Sandy Hook Elementary School ... have any contact with Nancy & Adam Lanza on host of gun issues including the mental-health of Adam Lanza ?

... or is that not part of her job description ?

... or has she fled the jurisdiction by now ?

 

Can you believe this? She got an almost impossible to get California or Washington DC CCW permit.

But, she would disarm you serfs in a minute and leave you to your fate.

[video=youtube;blXkl9YVoHo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blXkl9YVoHo[/video]

 

As a prominent California senator ... I'll bet she's had one since the Milk and Moscone assassinations ... your point ?

 

Why does she need a gun for personal protection, while publicly stating that she would completely disarm law abiding Americans and preventing them from enjoying the same protection?

 

His point being she will/is being allowed to protect herself, yet children at schools and general citizens must be stifled for their security. 99.9 percent of legal gun owners aren't criminals. Do you honestly believe that banning any firearms will prevent crimes or other school shooting from happening? They won't even consider protecting schools with armed professionals as an option/ yet reserve the right for themselves and their families to be protected. Do you agree with with their hyprocisy.

 

She may have a CCW permit but she's not pack'n ... no politician packs ... that's why they have Secret Service.

 

The NRA doesn't protect schools or people, places and things from the guns they facilitate in the sales of .... LaPierre only went into hysteria about it after Kindergartners and thier teachers were executed with the most favorite weapons of the NRA .... military-grade assault weapons for civilian-use ...

As an example, in law, and what's known as an attractive nuisance (doctrine), you can be charged with unintentional murder if a kid jumps your fence and drowns in your pool ... this goes for anything on your property ... this condition says that the possessor fails to exercise reasonable care to eliminate the danger or otherwise to protect the children ...

This is why Lapierre and all like 'em are insane.

 

The NRA is not a lawmaking body capable of providing protection for citizens. It provides current information to gun owners, and has always advocated for educating citizens regarding firearms. It would seem lawmakers would be advocating the same! If they were truly concerned about gun safety.

Now would those lawmakers of guns bans be willing to make laws/suggestions to those citizens disarmed against criminals? I am sure punishing the criminals even harsher will help.

 

Yes, NRA board member and chief defender of the gun-owner faith who lives a mile from Sandy Hook .... Patricia Clark ... and who was concerned about the security of Nancy Lanzas' *home-defense assault weapons* with a disturbed son living with her ... has now visted Sandy Hook with an armed-defense plan ... right ?

Oh wait, sorry, she's not the govt.

 

It's not odd to me. The gun thing is leverage to legalize 10 million new Democrats.

- - - Updated - - -

You really don't read the news do you?

 

Will her CCW be canceled when she's voted out of office?

 

Why ? Because 86% of America is behind her all the way ?

 

Members of congress do not have USSS protection. You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

They don't ? Well what gun-protection do they have ?

 

Link to a reliable polling source please.