Politix

Prev Next
Featured Quizzes
Politix Daily Headlines
Featured Debates
Issues

See all 17 issues

People
White House

See all people

VIDEO

NRA Vid Calls President an 'Elitist Hypocrite' on Gun Control

Why do his kids get armed guards, asks the group

Next>

by Dain Fitzgerald

Staff Writer t

Image: NRA

Conservatives have long called out liberal politicians' hypocrisy for sending their kids to fancy private schools while denying Americans school choice, but this newest shot across the bow gets personal - and adds the raging gun debate to the mix.

Business Insider alerts us to a new video from the National Rifle Association that criticizes President Obama for sending his own kids to schools with armed guards while denying that option to the rest of the country.

"Are the President's kids more important than yours?" the video asks, rhetorically. "Then why is he skeptical about putting armed guards in our schools when his kids are protected by armed guards in their schools?"

It goes on to call the POTUS an "elitist hypocrite" who won't allow citizens the same protection he enjoys. While one might suggest that the President of the United States and family should be granted more security than your average Jane and Joe, watch the video for yourself and see if it doesn't tap into that itch to scratch the ruling class.

Via Business Insider.
Like this article? B Vote Up
?

Do you agree with the video's message?

View results

Comments (view in Forum)

  • MadAmerican
    !
    Yep, check mate on that, but most all executives, congressmen, and senators children all go to private schools with armed protection. Just not Obama, and it's been that way for a while. Still doesn't make it right. But nomatter who's child it is they all need protection.
  • mimi57
    !
    No, not according to the "King"...we are now his "subjects" and under a monarchy for now, I guess even better things are in store for us 'peons'. Gee, can't wait!
  • View all 9 replies >
  • o
    thejimbo
    !
    @Neo_NtheMatrix I don't pretend to know it all....But I do know, that allowing people such as the Governor of NY to have so much power as to ban entire classes of firearms, is setting a dangerous precedent.
  • scotta
    !
    @Mogal does not matter to me. His girls are no more important than my children . Oh wait I forgot that is King Obama. So it is OK. He doesn't have to worry out tax money will pay. Foe protecting his and all of congress's kids. Ours gets shot he will come in for a photo shoot and start screaming how it was the weapons that did it. Not talking about how the kids that have been doing these shooting were all on mind altering drugs.
  • o
    Mogal
    !
    @scotta The only thing you have said that makes any kind of sense whatsoever is that the people doing the shooting are mentally ill and need help.
    The rest is a bunch of hogwash.
  • View all 18 replies >
  • Neo_NtheMatrix
    !
    That is a good question. How come the president gets armed protection for his kids, but other American children are not worthy of security to keep them safe in schools. I'd like an explanation for that one.
  • Denizen_Kate
    !
    If, for example, one of your kids were kidnapped, what would the kidnappers want, besides the usual money? What would the consequences be for anyone outside of your family? On the other hand, if the President of the United States has a kidnapped child, what could those kidnappers get him to agree to in order to ensure the safe return of the child? This could have consequences for the entire world, since the President has the power to launch nukes.
  • Neo_NtheMatrix
    !
    @Denizen_Kate - This is all understood and no one disagrees with any of the points you made. Additionally obama's children have dedicated protection for just them, not the whole school, just them. The NRA is not proposing that every child gets their own secret service agent, they are proposing that every public school gets at least one armed security person (could be an existing teacher, principal, or janitor) for that whole school. Do you not think an entire school of kids are worth protecting?
  • frigginhell
    !
    @Neo_NtheMatrix Let's cut the music program and the arts program. Let's cut the chess club and after school activities. Let's cut any type of mentoring. Let's chop the budget so they don't even have books issued in the century we live in. How about we layoff teachers and reduce the pay for the ones that remain with increased class sizes. Oh wait, suddenly we can afford a full time armed guard on site. Boy didn't he do wonders in Columbine as he shat himself in the parking lot during the entire incident. Don't worry though, we'll never cut funding to the football team.
  • DARSB
    !
    @Neo_NtheMatrix There was an armed police officer at Columbine, Virginia Tech had an entire department of campus security agents, and Fort Hood is, well, an ARMY base. If the presence of trained and/or armed security personnel is demonstrably unable to protect students and soldiers then the assumption underpinning Mr. Lapierre's impractically expensive suggestion is clearly invalid.

    But here's the part that's beginning to annoy: where are your suggestions to keep kids safe in schools? Surely you have some notions to contribute that aren't simply a cut and paste of NRA talking points.
  • View all 21 replies >
  • MadAmerican
    !
    They weren't at Columbine, Virginia Tech, or Sandy Hook. True they do have more odds at danger but are they more important than your kids? That was the question.
  • Denizen_Kate
    !
    @MadAmerican - "... are they more important than your kids? That was the question." The answer is yes, they are more important than your kids or mine. Think about it. What could you be blackmailed into if your kid were kidnapped? What could the President of the United States be blackmailed into if his kid were kidnapped? Like, for example, a determined terrorist organization who demanded a nuke in exchange, or demanded that we nuke Israel or something of that sort. It may not seem fair, and perhaps it is elitist, but it's also reality.
  • Dan_Tien
    !
    @MadAmerican Many of the kids that were shot at those schools were shot because they were at the wrong place at the wrong time, not because the shooter went there with them in mind.

    I know what the question was, but the question was disingenuous.
  • MadAmerican
    !
    @Dan_Tien Whatever you have to tell yourself to make yourself feel better. Point is obama's kids would never have been there and we all know about the fake tears. no child should go unprotected, and it is not right for him to deny those in need who elected him and pay his salary while he reaps the benefits of office.
  • MadAmerican
    !
    @Denizen_Kate Sorry-I am a parent and no child is more important than mine. Do you have children? Would you sacrifice youre child for one of Obama's? I would never trade my son for anybody. He knew the risk when he ran as president, but to deny that right to others is unforgivable.
  • View all 27 replies >
  • GretchenD
    !
    Because, nra nutballs, the President's children are legally allowed to have Secret Service protection until they are at least 18 years of age. Have mommy read this to you in your hooked-on-phonics book.
  • Post Removed by Moderators
  •
    Denizen_Kate
    !
    @2b1ask1 - Better? No. More important? Yes. Think about it. I'm dismayed by the number of people on this thread who don't understand that.
  • PoliticalSpice
    !
    @Denizen_Kate If you're dismayed you haven't been paying attention. This is pretty much the kind of respionse I've come to expect on here.
  • MadAmerican
    !
    So calling all the members of the NRA "nutballs", are you saying that the NRA members are the one's going off the deep end and killing everyone? Why is it the NRA's fault when not one member has commited murder. You need to quell your accusations and get some facts.
  • marine1
    !
    So there is an elite class in this country,who woulda thunk? My kids are more important than yours so tough s&^t, i'm not just talking about obama. who else enjoys these elite protections?
  • Ashstop
    !
    Yes he thinks he and his family should have armed protection but mine don't deserve it, tell you what, you give me and my wife and kids 24 hour armed secret service protection and I'll give up my gun,.... At least 1 of them!!
  • u
    earl
    !
    Great post, Sir. He said that more guns in schools does not make children more safe. So, do more guns at his children's school make his kids less safe. Can you say, hypocrisy?
  • View all 22 replies >
  • DARSB
    !
    Well, I was looking for primer on the false equivalency fallacy my search is over. The protection the Obama girls receive isn't exactly optional, as I'm sure the NRA writers knew but chose to omit, unlike the armed security children of many other millionaires and billionaires receive.

    But my favorite is the reference to tax rate increases for the wealthy (which, by the by, includes NRA VP Wayne Lapierre, who earns about $900,000 annually) and somehow equating that to the Secret Service detail for Sasha and Melia in order to use the "elitist hypocrite" phrase, why, that's just precious - and is far more applicable to the former GOP candidate for President and his "47%" remarks than to a mixed race son of a single mother who managed to become a successful attorney, politician, writer, millionaire and twice-elected President of the United States.

    I can hardly wait for the next NRA video responding to the Department of Justice actually enforcing the laws currently on the books, particularly the background check laws. Since this is an idea put forward by Mr. Lapierre himself, finding a way to attack it without admitting it was his idea will be an interesting exercise on rhetorical contortion.
  • u
    earl
    !
    @Mogal
    They told the truth and gun owners by the millions are not "nuts". Name calling is a weak response to the question.
  • View all 30 replies >
  • mimi57
    !
    It's so typical of this President...of course he's an elitist, I mean wouldn't a pocket
    knife protect him and his family??! I'm sure his secret service people are very well
    armed. He should give up his secret service, since he is now against the second amendment...and tomorrow he is scheduled to use kids to promote his anti-gun
    agenda. Yeah, use kids to promote his agenda. There is truly no low this man will
    stoop to. Gotta love the hypocrisy of the Leftist nuts, what rights will he take next?
    It should be interesting...
  • u
    earl
    !
    If the guns of the Secret Service don't make the POTUS's kids safer, why do they have guns? If the guns do make them safer and they do, why won't an armed guard in the rest of the schools make those kids safer? They would.
  • u
    Cheenoguy
    !
    @Politicskid
    How many other kid's parents get thousands of death threats every year?
    There is also a world of difference between a secret service agent and a janitor with a glock.
  • John_Matrix
    !
    It's already been established and agreed upon by experts in the field of criminology that massacres like Sandy Hook are premeditated and laws or no laws on the books, they're next to impossible to prevent. You want to argue about background checks being required and gun shows fine but leave the sensationalist bullshit out of it.
  • u
    Grubby
    !
    @Cheenoguy Hey, my wife has a Glock and knows how to use it. 9mm, 15 round clip, 3 full clips of home defense rounds ready at all times, and instructions that if a guy is after her don't stop shooting until she stops seeing any motion. If she had been in that school there might have been a different story. She said no way she would have hesitated to take that guy down. Since the gun shows had absolutely no connection to that nut, even abolishing all gun shows would do nothing to stop him or the next one. In fact, zero, zip, none of the recent mass murders were in any way linked back to buying guns from a gun show. I can't get over the stupid people here who think up fixes irrelevant to the problem at hand. If your TV stops working do you take your car in to the dealer for repair???
  • u
    Cheenoguy
    !
    @Grubby
    First off, you goofballs keep swearing that these mass murders are going to happen no matter what. Why the f*ck do they only happen here? How come when Australia reacted to the frequent mass shootings in their country not only did mass shootings stop they weren't replaced with a different form of mass murder? Every other civilized nation has the violent entertainment we have why is it that we are the only ones who kill each other en masse? Surely it has nothing to do with the fact that we allow virtually anyone to own a gun and those who aren't supposed to have them can just stroll into a gun show and buy whatever they want as long as they go to a private dealer.

    Second, you think your wife is prepared to use her gun properly should she ever need it (and I hope you are right). Teaching gun safety and target shooting is not the same as the training one receives as a police officer. I'm not against police officers in schools, but I don't want an amateur protecting my child.

    Lets say your wife would react the way she would under pressure the way you think she would. That doesn't mean that everyone who can carry a gun would.

    If owning firearms is a protection please explain to me why Mrs Lanza is no longer among the living.

    The gun show loophole may have not contributed to the recent shootings but what kind of nutcase is opposed to closing it anyways?

    Aside from Lanza all the recent mass shooters were legal gun owners. What does that tell you about the screening processes for gun ownership here in America?

    To use your analogy your solution to your broken tvs is to pick up the TV and chuck it across the room and plug it in to see if it is now working.
  • View all 12 replies >
  • sailornaruto39
    !
    I understand that the presidents kids are at more risk. I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't be protected, but then what reason is there not to protect normal kids? Doesn't all of Obama's guard just go to show how guns do protect people.

    Aren't normal children basically in a wild nest of people out their trying to hurt them at school? SO we shouldn't have guards for them and hope no one shoots them just because they aren't being specifically targeted?

    And please ppl stop mentioning how sometimes security fails like Columbine, bad security doesn't mean that it doesn't work, for every incident where you can say guns didn't help, another can comes up and says they did.

    My mind is not made up and I am malleable to reason.
  • Mia
    !
    This president and most of the career politicians are hypocrits for numerous reasons. They preach about conserving energy while they drive, fly, live in their huge mansions with the driveways lit up all night. Al Gore. They lecture about eating healthy and putting our soldiers on diets while they dine lavishly on expensive unhealthy spreads.obama and michelle. They extoll the virtues of obamacare and explain to all of us how great its going to be for all of us. Pelosi and reid and the rest. They are now telling us how we cant be trusted with firearms and we dont need them anyway while they are protected. No one is saying THEY shouldnt be protected we are simply saying that dumba__ politicians need to stop telling us what we can and cannot do! They waste our money and our time why would anyone trust them with any important decisions that affect their lives.
  • OpEn_MiNdEd
    !
    As MadAmerican pointed out, wealthy entertainers, newscasters, business moguls, and elected politicians etc. usually send their children to private schools with armed protection. But lets not forget that the reason for private schools is a (supposedly) better education. I doubt they actually send their children there just because they happen to have guards. If you look at other schools (private or otherwise) around the world, most of them do not have armed guards unless that COUNTRY OR AREA IS CONSIDERED DANGEROUS.

    See how I have highlighted that last bit?? Further more, the NRA has called out the President a hypocrite. And they may be right but the NRA should think more carefully before dropping the 'H bomb'. The reason being that the NRA supports measures like armed guards in schools yet oppose any Government department from doing any research on gun-related crimes in America. I assume they think it will be a waste of money to them and/or is pointless (I can't think of any other reasons why they would oppose it). If that is true, then the NRA are a bunch of double hypocrites.
  • u
    UScentral
    !
    Blah, blah, blah.
    One could use this line of reasoning for a number of things. Like...health care. If Medicare and Medicaid are good for the masses, how come congress doesn't subscribe?
  • u
    tomincali
    !
    if obama kids and family are protected why shouldn't all have the same right. we don't have special paid security for every one of our kids and families, that is our job as parents.
  • R Load more comments...