Why does the President have armed guards?

[NYcarbineer]

Just wondering

Why can't American citizens easily obtain automatic weapons?

 

[Avatar4321]

Oh good the op wants to look stupid.

I apologize for trying to steal your thunder.

 

[hazlnut]

Obviously because his life and the lives of his family are worth far more than the taxpayers who foot the bill.

His dog Bo is more important than you.

 

[rightwinger]

Just wondering

If your question is...

Is it easier to protect one person who is a known target of assasins than it is to protect 80 million schoolchildren?

Then I guess the answer is yes

 

[G.T.]

Just wondering

Bigots, crazies, teabaggers, glenn beck, fox news...

A 400% increase on threat to POTUS since Obama took office due to all of the above.

So you're saying the President needs armed guards to defend himself from people and organizations who aren't going to hurt him physically, but our arming security guards in schools is just nuts despite the fact that there are people targetting them frequently.

There's far more head hunters on the President's head, than any school childrens.'

Sometimes, perspective and relativity need to be brought up when wounds are fresh. You miss the point, completely.

 

[Avatar4321]

Obviously because his life and the lives of his family are worth far more than the taxpayers who foot the bill.

His dog Bo is more important than you.

Clearly hazel thinks it's more important to protect the President than allow people to protect little children.

 

[PratchettFan]

Just wondering

Bigots, crazies, teabaggers, glenn beck, fox news...

A 400% increase on threat to POTUS since Obama took office due to all of the above.

So you're saying the President needs armed guards to defend himself from people and organizations who aren't going to hurt him physically, but our arming security guards in schools is just nuts despite the fact that there are people targetting them frequently.

The secret services has been protecting American presidents since the 19th century. This really isn't something the Obama adminstration came up with.

 

[AmyNation]

There are lots of things that we could pay for that would protect children, the issue becomes, are we all comfortable with the huge tax increase to pay for it?

Again, if you want armed guards, start a petition, pressure your state reps and be willing to have your taxes go up.

 

[Ravi]

Just wondering

Because our gun laws are too lax.

 

[Avatar4321]

Just wondering

If your question is...

Is it easier to protect one person who is a known target of assasins than it is to protect 80 million schoolchildren?

Then I guess the answer is yes

That's not my question. So the answer is irrelevant.

For days we've been told it's absolutely crazy and insane to even consider arming school security or allowing teachers or administrations to conceal-carry. I can understand discussing it and coming to different conclusions and positions. But there is absolutely nothing crazy or insane finding ways to defend children at school.

And yet, many of the same people labeling it insane see the obvious reasons that the President has armed security. The point of this thread was to make people think about the issue rather than just try to label people who disagree with them in a way to avoid the topic.

 

[G.T.]

The fact is, there's more people out to kill the President than any school children. These are blips in the probability department, when these things happen.

 

[Avatar4321]

Bigots, crazies, teabaggers, glenn beck, fox news...

A 400% increase on threat to POTUS since Obama took office due to all of the above.

So you're saying the President needs armed guards to defend himself from people and organizations who aren't going to hurt him physically, but our arming security guards in schools is just nuts despite the fact that there are people targetting them frequently.

There's far more head hunters on the President's head, than any school childrens.'

Sometimes, perspective and relativity need to be brought up when wounds are fresh. You miss the point, completely.

Which, of course, is why he cited a bunch of people and organizations that aren't trying to take out the President.

 

[G.T.]

So you're saying the President needs armed guards to defend himself from people and organizations who aren't going to hurt him physically, but our arming security guards in schools is just nuts despite the fact that there are people targetting them frequently.

There's far more head hunters on the President's head, than any school childrens.'

Sometimes, perspective and relativity need to be brought up when wounds are fresh. You miss the point, completely.

Which, of course, is why he cited a bunch of people and organizations that aren't trying to take out the President.

^ obscure post makes no sense.

 

[Avatar4321]

Bigots, crazies, teabaggers, glenn beck, fox news...

A 400% increase on threat to POTUS since Obama took office due to all of the above.

So you're saying the President needs armed guards to defend himself from people and organizations who aren't going to hurt him physically, but our arming security guards in schools is just nuts despite the fact that there are people targetting them frequently.

The secret services has been protecting American presidents since the 19th century. This really isn't something the Obama adminstration came up with.

 

[eflatminor]

The fact is, there's more people out to kill the President than any school children. These are blips in the probability department, when these things happen.

Excellent point. So then you'll stand against any attempts to inhibit law abiding citizens from their inalienable right to self defense, right?

 

[Koios]

Just wondering

Because he's a high-value/-probability target?

Just guessing

 

[Avatar4321]

Just wondering

Because our gun laws are too lax.

Well, you're consistant Ill give you that.

 

[G.T.]

The fact is, there's more people out to kill the President than any school children. These are blips in the probability department, when these things happen.

Excellent point. So then you'll stand against any attempts to inhibit law abiding citizens from their inalienable right to self defense, right?

You must have missed my second post in the thread.

 

[PratchettFan]

So you're saying the President needs armed guards to defend himself from people and organizations who aren't going to hurt him physically, but our arming security guards in schools is just nuts despite the fact that there are people targetting them frequently.

The secret services has been protecting American presidents since the 19th century. This really isn't something the Obama adminstration came up with.

You may as well get used to bashing your head if you are going to insist on these absurd comparisons. The two things have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

At what point does something get crazy? Far more children are murdered at home than at school, do we need to discuss putting an armed guard in every home with children? If not, don't you love the children?

 

[Ravi]

Just wondering

If your question is...

Is it easier to protect one person who is a known target of assasins than it is to protect 80 million schoolchildren?

Then I guess the answer is yes

That's not my question. So the answer is irrelevant.

For days we've been told it's absolutely crazy and insane to even consider arming school security or allowing teachers or administrations to conceal-carry. I can understand discussing it and coming to different conclusions and positions. But there is absolutely nothing crazy or insane finding ways to defend children at school.

And yet, many of the same people labeling it insane see the obvious reasons that the President has armed security. The point of this thread was to make people think about the issue rather than just try to label people who disagree with them in a way to avoid the topic.

Two different things. No one is a position of power is likely to try to rape or abuse Obama. Giving guns to teachers, security guards, etc., is going to give some child abusers more power than they should have.

Better to make it harder for criminals to obtain guns.

But that would be logical.