Later today, President Barack Obama will surround himself with children, and men with guns, to continue his efforts to make it more difficult for you to purchase guns to protect your children:
That’s why the following White House petition couldn’t be more timely:
Eliminate armed guards for the President, Vice-President, and their families, and establish Gun Free Zones around them
Gun Free Zones are supposed to protect our children, and some politicians wish to strip us of our right to keep and bear arms. Those same politicians and their families are currently under the protection of armed Secret Service agents. If Gun Free Zones are sufficient protection for our children, then Gun Free Zones should be good enough for politicians.
As of this writing, the petition needs exactly 2,222 signatures to reach the 25,000 threshold required for an official White House response. Just yesterday, the WH announced that the new threshold is 100,000 signatures, but existing petitions will be grandfathered in. I’d say we can manage 2,222 more signatures, can’t we?
If gun-free zones keep people safe, then I can’t think of a person whose safety is more important than the President of the United States. If having a gun in your home increases your risk of getting shot, how can we allow our president and his family to be surrounded by dozens of them? Think of the children.
Sign the petition. Do it now. Every second you wait puts the leader of the free world at risk.
If not, why not? You first, Touré.
No? Okay then, I’ll get things started with a hypothetical counterargument to this self-evidently sensible request:
“B-b-but… Secret Service agents are trained to use guns!”
Oh, so you’re saying it’s not the gun itself that’s the issue, but the person behind the gun? Well, how about that.
Y’know, that might make a good slogan: “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Hmmm, too wordy. How about: “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” Yeah, that’s kinda catchy. Good job, libs!
Update:
Adam Lanza never bought a gun. RT @markknoller Pres Obama to propose both criminal and mental health backgound checks on all gun buyers.
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) January 16, 2013
Update: Glenn Reynolds explains why President Barack Obama wants to talk about gun control.
Update: Courtesy of Twitchy.com, here’s another counterargument from our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters on the left.
Pretty comfortable saying that the president’s children are in fact more important than yours: youtube.com/watch?v=2bKw7Z…
— Matt Yglesias (@mattyglesias) January 16, 2013
Sorry haters, a kidnapping of the First Kids would be a way bigger deal than a kidnapping of your kids.
— Matt Yglesias (@mattyglesias) January 16, 2013
So, we can refine the argument thusly: Good guys with guns should protect important people from bad guys with guns. But your kids don’t deserve such protection, because they’re not as important. You peasants can go die already. In addition, shut up.
Update: Liberals are smart.
@msterrymcmillan How do you think money and human lives are protected? Happy thoughts?
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) January 16, 2013
Abolish the Secret Service. RT @msterrymcmillan I hate guns. Especially the sound they make. They give folks too much power.
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) January 16, 2013
Update: Obama Gun Proposal to Look Beyond Mass Shootings. And what better way to do that than to start right there in his own home?
Update: You guys did something really important today. For our president. For the children. For America. I’m very proud of you.
