Obama's children need gun protection because their father is the president of the USA? Really? They are THAT retarded?
Do the gun morons really don't understand that
Collapse
X
-
Emotional statements make points in gun discussions, apparently. That's why Sandy Hook is being used to try to ban assault rifles, for example, even though an assault rifle may not have actually been used and therefore has nothing to do with what happened.Comment
-
it says a lot about the nra that they would actually lead with that. obviously, the nra feels gun nuts/ card-carrying nra members would identify with that message.
sad to use the president's kids as pawns in political marketing.
just as sad, the other side of the same coin feels that using children in their marketing message re: assault weapons is also ok.
Comment
-
the NRA has done some seriously stupid things for an organization looking for a 'way out'it says a lot about the nra that they would actually lead with that. obviously, the nra feels gun nuts/ card-carrying nra members would identify with that message.
sad to use the president's kids as pawns in political marketing.
just as sad, the other side of the same coin feels that using children in their marketing message is also ok.

that whole 'a gun in every childs hand' speech for example
what in gods name..?Comment
-
Comment
-
My son has owned a .22 rifle since he was 10. Here in the USA, I'd bet most of our grandfathers owned guns at an even younger age than that. Society is dumbing itself down, expecting less maturity as we go along, which is why some of you will make a deal of my son having a gun at age 10. He's 13 now, and very responsible for his age. Kids live up to what's expected of them.Comment
-
My son has owned a .22 rifle since he was 10. Here in the USA, I'd bet most of our grandfathers owned guns at an even younger age than that. Society is dumbing itself down, expecting less maturity as we go along, which is why some of you will make a deal of my son having a gun at age 10. He's 13 now, and very responsible for his age. Kids live up to what's expected of them.
This^^
P.S. What the message of the NRA is, (and it is touching a nerve with people), is that the political elite class have no problem carrying guns themselves, and having armed guards for THEIR kids at THEIR schools, but the peasants shouldn't be allowed to have the same protection. The same thing applies to anti-gun celebs who have armed protection for their families. It's a case of "do as we say, not as we do", and America was built to be a nation of equally applied laws, not separate elite classes to whom different laws apply.... The political class in the US have become such a class of people, to whom a different set of rules apply. Look at all the laws that congress passes that they exempt themselves from.
Not going to argue the gun debate with you, no one will be persuaded, but I'm just explaining the message of the OP point.
.
.Michael Sperber / Acella Financial LLC/ Online Payment Processing
[email protected] / http://Acellafinancial.com/
ICQ 177961090 / Tel +1 909 NET BILL / Skype msperberComment
-
He is the president and what? AND WE DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO KILL THEM SO WE GUARD THEM WITH GUNS. The point is that they don't make his kids less safe, they make them more safe.- As soon as I think up a good sig it's going here.Comment
-
Comment
-
This^^
P.S. What the message of the NRA is, (and it is touching a nerve with people), is that the political elite class have no problem carrying guns themselves, and having armed guards for THEIR kids at THEIR schools, but the peasants shouldn't be allowed to have the same protection. The same thing applies to anti-gun celebs who have armed protection for their families. It's a case of "do as we say, not as we do", and America was built to be a nation of equally applied laws, not separate elite classes to whom different laws apply.... The political class in the US have become such a class of people, to whom a different set of rules apply. Look at all the laws that congress passes that they exempt themselves from.
Not going to argue the gun debate with you, no one will be persuaded, but I'm just explaining the message of the OP point.
.
.
Sounds about right.PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic
AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online!
TChicks.com | Angeles Cid | Mariana Cordoba | MAILERS WELCOME!Comment
-
Comment
-
it's not the argument but the analogy that is ridiculous. it's 2013, of course the president's children need armed protection. obama didn't just come into office and command that to happen. bushie's daughters were fully covered, harumph.........Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
The NRA has completely fucked up. Twenty fucking six and seven year old school children brutally murdered and their only response is "we want more guns". Then a month late they release a video game for five year olds. Outstanding.Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NYComment
-
-
Comment
-
TRUMP 2026 KEKAW!!! - The Laken Riley Act Is Law!
DACA ENDED - SUPPORT AZ HCR 2060 52R - email: brassballz-at-techie.comComment
-
They're sociopaths. The blood of children only boosts gun sales, and that's how they like it. Sandy Hook was Christmas for them. Gun sales have skyrocketed.
These vipers have brought Obama's children into this. These gun peddlers are the enemy of the people.


Comment
-
You do know HANDGUNS killed the people at that school right? NOT the assault rifles and hi capacity mag you are continually whining about.
.Comment
-
Yes, and the US is currently fighting with the UN to see who controls the Internet... I don't think that will lead to good things. I don't see how anyone could favor more government control.Comment
-
You're not a target. Are you?
And as an aside, the First Family (because they are possibly the highest-profile targets on Earth) is protected by an army of not just armed but highly trained experts who follow them constantly and monitor their every move. It's different than simply "being armed."Comment
-
Comment
-
You don't even understand your own argument. You are using the "children" as the reason for banning guns but the guns used to kill the kids aren't being banned?
So why the fuck do you care?Comment
-
Lots of people everyday "believe" they aren't targets and they get dead.You're not a target. Are you?
And as an aside, the First Family (because they are possibly the highest-profile targets on Earth) is protected by an army of not just armed but highly trained experts who follow them constantly and monitor their every move. It's different than simply "being armed."PLEASE WAIT WHILE BIDEN ADMIN UNINSTALLS ITSELF.....
██████████████████▒ 99.5% complete.Comment
-
You're not too bright, are you? His point was that the gun type Obama IS trying to ban, namely the "assault rifle" category, wasn't even involved in the emotional example his administration is trying to use to justify banning it. This isn't hard to comprehend.Comment
-
A kid with mental problems murders 20 some people in a school using handguns. The government responds by making a production of banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines as a solution to the problem.
Just wait until this same logic is applied to censoring the internet or porn industry maybe then some of you will get the point about government intrusion.
.Comment
-
Why are the Dutch so vocal in American self-defense topics? Didn't they surrender during their last invasion? Foh.“If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”Comment
-
That is very true and if every single person could have an armed guard when they go to the movies, school, work or a mall that theory would be sound.
Todd Spaits - Co-founder -YanksCash
Premium ad-packages available - Skype for details - tmspaitsComment
-
I vote and I support this. So what you call intrusion I call representation. Additionally since every poll I have seen supports these actions it might be called democracy.A kid with mental problems murders 20 some people in a school using handguns. The government responds by making a production of banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines as a solution to the problem.
Just wait until this same logic is applied to censoring the internet or porn industry maybe then some of you will get the point about government intrusion.
.Todd Spaits - Co-founder -YanksCash
Premium ad-packages available - Skype for details - tmspaitsComment
-
Comment
-
No guns, but we did trapping rabbits and skinning and cooking them - except we didn't catch any so were given ones from the butchers to skin and cook.↑ see post ↑
13101Comment
-
Well actually what we are hoping is that more Americans will step up and take responsibility to be their own armed guards instead of depending on the government for everything.- As soon as I think up a good sig it's going here.Comment
-
Here's a quote I saw yesterday that sums it up:
If you are for gun control, then you're not against guns, because the guns will be needed to disarm people. You'll need to go around, pass laws, and shoot people who resist, kick in doors, and throw people in jail, and so on; rip up families, just to take away guns. So it's not that you're anti-gun, because [...] you'll need the police's guns to take away other people's guns, so you're very pro-gun, you just believe that only the government (which is of course so reliable, honest, moral, virtuous, and forward-thinking) should be allowed to have guns. So there's no such thing as gun control, there's only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small political elite and their minions. Gun control is a misnomer.- As soon as I think up a good sig it's going here.Comment
-
Comment
-
That doesn't sum it up at all, that's a bullshit strawman argument that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Why does everybody keep trying to equate rational gun control laws with: "Big gubment wants take all ur guns"?Here's a quote I saw yesterday that sums it up:
If you are for gun control, then you're not against guns, because the guns will be needed to disarm people. You'll need to go around, pass laws, and shoot people who resist, kick in doors, and throw people in jail, and so on; rip up families, just to take away guns. So it's not that you're anti-gun, because [...] you'll need the police's guns to take away other people's guns, so you're very pro-gun, you just believe that only the government (which is of course so reliable, honest, moral, virtuous, and forward-thinking) should be allowed to have guns. So there's no such thing as gun control, there's only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small political elite and their minions. Gun control is a misnomer.Comment



Comment