Why them, but not us?

dennisf · Mar 12, 2009

Here is a thought. If the FBI and Secret Service can have auto pistols and rifles to protect politicians why do the politicians want to take away our ability to protect ourselves? Could it be that they are more valuable as individuals than any one of us? I think not. Many of them have the yellow stripes and have never worn the uniform to protect the stars and stripes. They stand under the flag but never stood for it.
Many of the folks that support anti-gun legislation have CHL and so do their security staff. H'mmmm...what's wrong with this picture?
When will we see some anti-gun legislation directed at the criminals and thugs? Maybe the political element fears that group of particular constituents. Maybe some of the bigger gangs could hold a rally and voice their opinion.
If the politicians get their way, just how to they plan to protect all of us law abiding citizens from the bad guys. They can't seem to get anything else right, what makes them think that removing firearms is going to make any thing better or safer?
Just sounding off....

BlvdKing · Mar 12, 2009

That is a really good point. I found this recently and hope its true:
<broken link removed>

chainsaw · Mar 12, 2009

I think they are biding thier time until it is worth it to let us keep our guns,at a very high fee.They just have to go through the registrations and start sending bills to the registerees.It is going to make DC a bunch of money,and that is all they care about,more money for the polititions to eat caviar and drink wine with,While the rest of us pay for it while eating Ramen noodles and govt. cheese.

Sawdust · Mar 12, 2009

Remember, politicians are more important than us simple folks.

Spray-n-pray · Mar 12, 2009

chainsaw said:
It is going to make DC a bunch of money,and that is all they care about,more money for the polititions to eat caviar and drink wine with,While the rest of us pay for it while eating Ramen noodles and govt. cheese.

What?!?!?! You get government cheese!?!?! I just have ramen...

ZeroRing · Mar 12, 2009

Sawdust said:
Remember, politicians are more important than us simple folks.

Just ask them, they'll tell you it's true! :s0002:

Karma · Mar 13, 2009

dennisf said:
Here is a thought. If the FBI and Secret Service can have auto pistols and rifles to protect politicians why do the politicians want to take away our ability to protect ourselves? Could it be that they are more valuable as individuals than any one of us? I think not. Many of them have the yellow stripes and have never worn the uniform to protect the stars and stripes. They stand under the flag but never stood for it.
Many of the folks that support anti-gun legislation have CHL and so do their security staff. H'mmmm...what's wrong with this picture?
When will we see some anti-gun legislation directed at the criminals and thugs? Maybe the political element fears that group of particular constituents. Maybe some of the bigger gangs could hold a rally and voice their opinion.
If the politicians get their way, just how to they plan to protect all of us law abiding citizens from the bad guys. They can't seem to get anything else right, what makes them think that removing firearms is going to make any thing better or safer?
Just sounding off....

I saw a list one time of the anit-gun celebreties who have their concealed carry licenses and carry on a regular basis! I can't remember all of them, but I know that Dianne Feinstein was one that tops the list! She can have one for her protection, but tries to take that right away from us. They are a bunch of elitist idiots that are out of touch with real Americans. They don't care about us. They see us as their servants instead of the other way around.

bcp · Mar 13, 2009

One of the lists:
http://www.nndb.com/event/349/000172830/

Generator · Mar 13, 2009

I have been trying to find this answer online since reading this post and have come up with nothing. Is there a list of Congresswo/men and Senators who have CCWs?
I do respect their privacy as Oregon just passed laws to respect mine (soon to get a CHL)
But as public figures, I know that they trade some privacy for running our country... What did I just type, I meant, Serving their constituents. (don't flame me, I know that some do their job properly)

Feinnstein had a good reason to carry when she did, and I think that we all have a good reason to legally carry. I am disappointed that she is out of touch with normal people who, don't get political threats, But work at night and have to get food at 3am by a place that has been robbed at gun point 3 times last year (Not a lot of places open in Central Oregon at 2am)

So...Who's got the dirt on the public figures... I do try to read many politicians stances/votes and have taken the time to question my reps, thank them, and let other state's reps know that there are citizens in states other than their own who appreciate their writing of a bill(thanking each vote would be way to much time)

To sum up all my rambling; The more we know about our Senators and Representatives that we elect, the more active participants we can be in our Country.

Generator · Mar 13, 2009

bcp said:
One of the lists:
http://www.nndb.com/event/349/000172830/

in the time I took to type....... thanks for the post

elsullo · Mar 15, 2009

Ted Kennedy has taken some great issues and run with them, but on gun control he has always been a total elitist. I also am old enough to remember when "family compounds" were still called "estates."

Once, in the early 80's I think, he entered the Capitol Building through an unusual entrance, and thus got stopped and searched, and caused quite a newsworthy commotion when the Capitol Police refused him entry. BOTH of his bodyguards had full-auto Uzis under their suit jackets!

But to heck with the ordinary citizen who wants a semi-auto rifle for home defence, or to carry concealed! A great quote from a forgotten source: "I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy."..........................elsullo