Let's Talk About Gun Control

[PewPew]

Secret Service is not optional for the President/his family and people of notoriety

I feel like the thread ended right at this point. How you gone blame someone for something he has no control over. Also comparing the children of the leader of the strongest nation in the world and some snot nosed brat is two different things.

All kids are important but can you imagine the security risk if Obeezy's daughters get kidnapped? It would create a "Die Hard" type of situation where the kidnappers have the president by the balls. NRA is stupid for this one.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Lol... this guy is so reflexively anti-liberal and anti-Obama it's pathetic. In all these years of message board posting he's never given a single fukk about guns, but now that gun control has become a topic again because of the recent spate of mass shootings, he's some kind of gung-ho ass gun advocate.

LOL calm the fukk down, I don't have a horse in this race either way....I don't support the NRA I couldn't care less about them as an organization...and you're right, I really don't give a fukk about guns...I live in NY and I don't feel any safer because of the laws that just passed. I posted in this thread because I just so happened to be watching morning joe earlier and was at how outraged Minka, Joe, and Mike Barnacle were acting over this commerical - calling it "political pornography" and all this other shyt...the forced outrage is just funny to me.

I gave Obama props for supporting Chuck Hagel in the face of all that republican opposition...I give him props when I feel he deserves it. I'm not quick to cock-slob the man like you and your cronies, if that bothers you so much oh well.

My personal opinion on guns is that they are what they are. In my ideal world, instead of teaching children to be scared to death of guns and to treat them as foreign objects, we should teach all children how to handle and use them responsibly from a young age, not because of the fear of government, but for the simple fact that guns are a part of society and everybody should be familiar with them in some capacity. It has nothing to do with the 2nd ammendment, forming a militia, or preventing "tyranny," it's common fukking sense.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

First of all, their comments targeted the secret service, not just guns in general, so the idea that the president's kids are protected by guns but average people couldn't do the same is just inaccurate, since average people can protect their children with guns.

Second, of course the president's kids have more protection than the average person, and they should. They are in much more danger all the time than the average person's children.

Obama's kids live a pampered life, they aren't in more danger than your average kid living in some fukked up ghetto in anyhood USA.

At it's core, the argument is that every measure possible is taken to make sure the President and his Kids are kept out of harms way, and it shouldn't be any different for the average American citizen. I can't disagree with that.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Idiot

If you had the choice between your kids getting killed or Obama's kids getting killed whom would you chose?

 

[Brown_Pride]

Obama is becoming a disapointment, we want our guns!! I don't give a fukk about his kids safety

The NRA is right but the example is a little extreme. How many presidents kids have been murked and how many regular kids have been murked? NRA: 1 - Barack: 0

I've had 4 kids in school for over 12 years. They have all survived thus far. I made it for my entire school career, my wife, all my co-workers, parents, etc. All without an armed officer on campus.
NRA:1 Barack: ....a shyt ton more.

 

[Brown_Pride]

If you had the choice between your kids getting killed or Obama's kids getting killed whom would you chose?

what does this have to do with anything.

False dilemma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[The Real]

Obama's kids live a pampered life, they aren't in more danger than your average kid living in some fukked up ghetto in anyhood USA.

Eh, I'm not sure I buy this. The president gets more death threats daily than pretty much anyone else. Yes, you're right that the Black child in the ghetto is at a considerable risk of being the victim of violent crime, but that in itself doesn't justify a legal solution that would extend to all Americans, since no other group faces a remotely comparable risk of such violence (as Conservatives are fond of pointing out, the vast majority of violent crime happens in Black neighborhoods, with Black victims and Black perpetrators.)

All in all, though there are more people targeting the president's family right now than there are targeting any random individual in this country.

At it's core, the argument is that every measure possible is taken to make sure the President and his Kids are kept out of harms way, and it shouldn't be any different for the average American citizen. I can't disagree with that.

The problem with framing it this way is that if we all had the same level of protection as the president's children, we'd all just be walking around with armed guards everywhere, all the time. That isn't really a realistic solution. The only other way to equalize it would be to reduce the president's protection, but that doesn't seem to be an option for the pro-gun crowd since they implicitly approve of the level of protection his kids have.

 

[Eastside Get The Money]

How are they going to fund this? In Michigan there are cities that don't even have a police department

 

[GetInTheTruck]

what does this have to do with anything.

False dilemma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I just don't like the "...but it's the PRESIDENT..." argument. Yeah, he's the President, true, but anybody who says that his kids are more valuable than their own is either a shytty parent or being dishonest.

 

[Brown_Pride]

I just don't like the "...but it's the PRESIDENT..." argument. Yeah, he's the President, true, but anybody who says that his kids are more valuable than their own is either a shytty parent or being dishonest.

that's a pretty silly way to look at tit though.

As real said either we all get secret service agents or it's not fair...that's not realistic. And it's not that his kids are more valuable, it's that they are a more likely target of some fukkery.

I don't think most people realize that this shyt is damn near by definition a police state move. ...There are ways to protect our children, taking money that could be used to educate for this crap is just nuts.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Eh, I'm not sure I buy this. The president gets more death threats daily than pretty much anyone else. Yes, you're right that the Black child in the ghetto is at a considerable risk of being the victim of violent crime, but that in itself doesn't justify a legal solution that would extend to all Americans, since no other group faces a remotely comparable risk of such violence (as Conservatives are fond of pointing out, the vast majority of violent crime happens in Black neighborhoods, with Black victims and Black perpetrators.)

All in all, though there are more people targeting the president's family right now than there are targeting any random individual in this country.



The problem with framing it this way is that if we all had the same level of protection as the president's children, we'd all just be walking around with armed guards everywhere, all the time. That isn't really a realistic solution. The only other way to equalize it would be to reduce the president's protection, but that doesn't seem to be an option for the pro-gun crowd since they implicitly approve of the level of protection his kids have.

I don't think that all kids should get the same level of protection as the President's kids, I'm saying that all parent's should have the right to protect their kids to the best of their ability, just like the President does his. You don't have to be a "gun nut" to feel that way.

 

[Mic-Nificent]

they make a valid point though. having armed guards in schools would create jobs as well.

They're not making a valid point at all.

The President has no choice but to have security for him and his family, that's part of the job.

It also ignores the obvious fact that his kids are at MUCH higher risk than the average kid. Obama gets death threats all the fukking time and it's plausible that someone would got at his family in order to get to him.


And lets not even discuss the fact that having armed guards in schools would assuredly result in many black males being shot because of magical shape shifting wallets and iced tea cans.

 

[FAH1223]

my high school for most of my 4 years would have a PG County or city of Laurel, MD cop posted up around the campus during different hours... lunch hour was obviously the biggest time I'd see them around.

 

[50CentStan]

I've had 4 kids in school for over 12 years. They have all survived thus far. I made it for my entire school career, my wife, all my co-workers, parents, etc. All without an armed officer on campus.
NRA:1 Barack: ....a shyt ton more.

I'm glad you and your family did, but let's count the kids at columbine and sandy hook, even out of the population that's .000000000000001% that's still more kids killed than presidents kids, which is 0%. The president doesn't love his kids more than the parents of the murdered students. Asking for an armed officer on campus isn't a big deal at all.

 

[No1]

I'll merge this into the gun control thread later, but I figured it would be good to have a thread for it. Carry on.