PaganSalt Lake City, UTSo, the President of the United states
should remove security from America's children?Even Fox News
host Chris Wallace even called that logic 'ridiculous'.
The NRA's Wayne LaPierre is raging about proposals to put new taxes on
guns. For heaven sakes, we have special taxes on so many things these days.Tax tobacco products through the roof for cancer research and public
awareness but keep guns free of all taxes except the standard sales tax? Excise
taxes on liquor but not on guns and ammo? Levy big rig trucks that take a toll
on highway upkeep, user fees on so many things but keep your government paws off
of gun and ammo sales?The Second Amendment doesn't create a
privledged claaa, at least it's that's not its intent. But a visionary
President urging us to think outside the box seems to have Mr. LaPierre so
rattled he's not even sounding rational of late.
Just as Obamacare failed to keep health care costs down, the porkulus failed to
end the recession, and dudd-frank has failed to protect consumers and end
too-big-to-fail, BO's proposals are ill-considered and would be
Should we have background checks on people who purchase weaponry and ammo? Ask
the little 5 year old boy who was kept in an underground bunker for a week by a
nutcase with a criminal record and a gun pointed at his head.
The recent killers in Alabama and Texas were law abiding until they pulled the
trigger of the gun that they were obsessed over. Keep guns in the residence and
not on the streets except if locked up with GPS tracker.
Mr. President, the law abiding armed citizens of America stand firmer.
So, the President of the United states should remove security from his
children? Even Fox News host Chris Wallace even called that logic
'ridiculous'. Yesterday. I thought 'more
guns will prevent more guns'? But now, people want Obama's
family to have zero protection. Pick a standard. More
guns do not make people safer. Ft. Hood and the Columbine shootings verify
this. But please, do not be so low as to attack Obama's
children when they do not make policy. Do not use the death of 20
children to justify putting a man's children at risk simply because you
disagree with Obama's political stance. There have been enough
attacks on a man's children, that people should be ashamed of themselves.
Good for him.
Don Quioxte for sure. But, better to take the high road, less traveled than
follow the lambs to the slaughter.
The president of this current country, won't win this fight.Mark my
Firm? What about Mexican cartels, and Egypt?
You got a tough fight ahead, Mr. President. And it's going to get worse.The National Rifle Association has sunk to a new low with its official
list of prominent people and organizations it accuses of attacking the Second
Amendment. Included are celebrities, editorial cartoonists, news organizations,
teacher’s unions, etc. All it takes to make the NRA hall of shame list is
to support or contribute to an “anti-gun group” such as one group
that is opposed to repeal of the Brady Act. The American Bar
Association, the American Medical Association, and the Anti-Defamation League
are among the so-called anti-gun organizations that made the list. It so much
reminds me of the smear tactics of the McCarthy era.
Barack has said he doesn't support armed guards in school.Why
doesn't he be an example and demand that the men who protect his family
stop carrying.Or is he suggesting only his family is a threat or
only his family deserves gun protection?What is a Sandy Hook parent
had felt months ago their child was in danger? Are we to assume barack would
have told them no they are not in danger since barack does not support armed
guards at schools?