• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NRA slams the President over Hypocrisy

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Of course, this argument makes perfect sense. Because people are totally as likely to go after your average child as they are to go after the children of the leader of the country. Of course, why didn't I see it? Oh, wait, that's why, I'm not a fucking idiot.

There's been some stupid things about this gun debate being said on both sides (see thread about only needing one gun for example from the left). But it seems the conservative side is really trying to set the bar of stupid higher on this debate every time they open their mouth.
 
sigurros81 said:
Two different scenarios, unless you want to hire an armed guard for everyone in America and treat every citizens as a VIP.
Click to expand...

Equal protection under the law.

Isn't one of the corner stones of this nation that all people are to be treated equally?

Since when do we get to pick and choose which lives are more important then others?
 
Sure, let's pay to have armed guards in every school. I'll vote for it.

As if it's going to do anything to help curb mass shootings. Yet you idiots fail to see beyond your political agenda and just want things that would make absolutely no sense in the first place just to take a stab at Obama...
 
Sorry but comparing security for Potus and his children to individual security is silly.

NRA has blown an opportunity to dictate, even lead the discussions on gun control and chose rhetoric.

But I didn't expect better from a lobby group.
 
I bet the SS probably even has those inherently dangerous Assault Weapons with them at Obama's children's school......
 
Oh the faux outrage. So typical. When every individual is specifically referenced in the U.S. Code for protection, I'll accept this as an appropriate argument.
 
Texashiker said:
Equal protection under the law.

Isn't one of the corner stones of this nation that all people are to be treated equally?

Since when do we get to pick and choose which lives are more important then others?
Click to expand...

You also want your own air force one when you fly around, right?
 
The hypocrisy of obama is amazing, The nerve of that POS to think his children are more important than someone elses children

His children get TAXPAYER FUNDED security and the POS doesn't want security for other kids
 
Incorruptible said:
The hypocrisy of obama is amazing, The nerve of that POS to think his children are more important than someone elses children

His children get TAXPAYER FUNDED security and the POS doesn't want security for other kids
Click to expand...

You're a fucking idiot. In 1917 Congress was the one who decided the President's family was more important. They made the decision on protection for his family. If you can't understand why there is no help for you at all.
 
Carfax83 said:
But the school his daughters attend has their own armed security (11 officers I believe), separate from the SS..

And the Obama Administration is AGAINST having armed guards in schools..

So the argument of hypocrisy is relevant in this situation.
Click to expand...

His kids do NOT go to public schools, neither did the Bush girls in High School or Chelsea before them... You are still comparing apples to oranges.
 
Obama is clearly insane. For example, he wants to raise taxes on himself. I am insane too. I don't think arming the nations schools is very practical but I don't want the President in morning over his dead children when the attack comes. I think of armed guards for his kids as a protection for me. I think nature also figured out something like this millions of years ago too when it put a hard skull around by mushy brain. I guess some things that are insane just make sense.
 
MomentsofSanity said:
You're a fucking idiot. In 1917 Congress was the one who decided the President's family was more important. They made the decision on protection for his family. If you can't understand why there is no help for you at all.
Click to expand...

He knows this but is trolling... just ignore the troll... Everyone else is doing it, join in!
 
thraashman said:
Of course, this argument makes perfect sense. Because people are totally as likely to go after your average child as they are to go after the children of the leader of the country. Of course, why didn't I see it? Oh, wait, that's why, I'm not a fucking idiot.

There's been some stupid things about this gun debate being said on both sides (see thread about only needing one gun for example from the left). But it seems the conservative side is really trying to set the bar of stupid higher on this debate every time they open their mouth.
Click to expand...

Alright, I accept your argument. I am not the President, therefore nobody is really going to be directly targetting my children. Therefore I see no reason to pass laws to ban weapons that some individual may want to use to kill my children...because there's nobody out there that wants to kill my children.
 
highland145 said:
Only if he's not paying for the private school and taxpayers are or he's getting a free ride because he's potus.
Click to expand...

Even then, the free ride would probably be the school's idea, given they'd want the prestige.

I really cannot understand why people think educating children with a loaded firearm on the premises helps the learning process. People already have their kids jacked up on sugar and anxiety meds... surely adding a firearm to the mix won't lead to many tragedies.
 
ShintaiDK said:
You also want your own air force one when you fly around, right?
Click to expand...

Pathetic analogy. A civilian with enough wealth can buy his own damn 747 and travel as he wishes. Obama is justifying legal prohibition of armed protection in public schools even as his kids attend a school filled with armed guards. Any school principal attempting to hire armed guards will face criminal persecution.
 
Genx87 said:
I am pretty sure he outright dismissed having armed guards in school setting while his kids are provided security by the SS and the school itself. I am also pretty sure he will propose a wide range of gun restrictions that will not apply to his security detail as well.

So yes the king is telling the peasants what is good for him is not good for them.
Click to expand...

The SS provides protection to kids in school and in ice cream parlors. Take that up w/tresury department. BTW - Obamas kids did not have armed protection before he ran for POTUS.

People (eligible) will still be able to carry handguns for self protection and hire personal security guards so what's your problem????
 
Also, how is the notion of putting armed guards in schools not completely reactionary and the same behavior that the NRA and other gun advocates were railing against following recent gun-related tragedies? And by recent, I mean all.
 
eskimospy said:
No, the same protection given the president and his family cannot be given to everyone.

The NRA continues to be its own worst enemy.
Click to expand...

of course it can't that is why it's up to the individual to protect themselves and there family.
 
highland145 said:
Only if he's not paying for the private school and taxpayers are or he's getting a free ride because he's potus.
Click to expand...

He is paying for the private school, I dont have a problem with that although there are other issues though which aren't related.

The problem is that his daughters are GETTING TAXPAYER FUNDED SECURITY WITH THE SS, Thats the problem because he doesn't want armed guards at school yet he has guards for his daughters.

The same thing goes with rahm emmanuel, he is against armed guards at schools but his kids have armed guards at the school

This is the politicians having one rule for the normal people and a special rule for them, Do you not see the hypocrisy in this?

Thats one of the reasons they support gun control, they are safe with bodyguards so they think the average person doesn't need guns.
 
jackstar7 said:
Also, how is the notion of putting armed guards in schools not completely reactionary and the same behavior that the NRA and other gun advocates were railing against following recent gun-related tragedies? And by recent, I mean all.
Click to expand...

Newsflash: 2A advocates have been fighting to roll back laws against guns in and around schools for decades, starting with this case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez

The only reactionaries are the statists that exploit tragedies to push for more government power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top