PDA

View Full Version : Tea Party and Dems unite to oppose special gun rights for politicians


disintelligentsia
05-29-2013, 1:11 PM
One of the reasons given by some Texas politicians in support of special rights for their group is: "We face a higher degree of risk because we’re known and people might not like our opinions" and "In light of Gabrielle Giffords and others, those in the public eye need to protect themselves."

I DARE them to compare the crime victimization rate for politicians versus the population at whole or, hell, pretty much ANY ethnic sub-group or economic sub-group with an average income under $100,000 per annum. I'd say that given the advantages they enjoy in the form of armed security at work and personal wealth make them far less likely to be the victim of a violent crime. If they're so interested in giving special rights for those who have a greater risk, why don't they grant people who live in public housing special gun privileges as opposed to trying to strip them away?

You can read the article here: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/29/tea-party-and-democrats-team-up-to-defeat-push-to-give-lawmakers-gun-perks/

cfm117
05-29-2013, 6:33 PM
They want the same end result, but for different reasons.

The Tiger
05-30-2013, 5:15 AM
From the article.

"In New York, state lawmakers there are trying to pass a provision in their gun laws that would allow retired police officers to keep assault weapons and high-capacity magazines they bought and used when they were on the force."

sholling
05-30-2013, 5:50 AM
From the article.

"In New York, state lawmakers there are trying to pass a provision in their gun laws that would allow retired police officers to keep assault weapons and high-capacity magazines they bought and used when they were on the force."
That's probably the police unions taking care of their own.

kenblacksmith
05-30-2013, 5:58 AM
One of the reasons given by some Texas politicians in support of special rights for their group is: "We face a higher degree of risk because we’re known and people might not like our opinions" and "In light of Gabrielle Giffords and others, those in the public eye need to protect themselves."

Grow Up !

All the rest of us are responsible for our opinions & the damage they may cause.

You are not going to clothe yourself in our second amendment and in the same breathe deny us the right.

Absolutely not !

Nick Adams
05-30-2013, 6:22 AM
Maybe, just maybe, the whole point of the second ammendment is: "We face a higher degree of risk because we’re known and people might not like our opinions"

lasbrg
05-30-2013, 6:31 AM
From the article.

"In New York, state lawmakers there are trying to pass a provision in their gun laws that would allow retired police officers to keep assault weapons and high-capacity magazines they bought and used when they were on the force."

Haha. Too bad for them. Police unions are always making public appearances with Obama to promote whatever is his latest gun grabbing scheme.

Reap what you sow LEO unions!

cdtx2001
05-30-2013, 6:41 AM
I'd really like to ask that guy, "Soooooo, what you're saying is that YOUR life is worth more than MINE, huh?"



It truly has become us vs them, the rich vs the poor, the royalty vs the peasants.

Glad that this is being fought.

Wherryj
05-30-2013, 10:23 AM
I'd really like to ask that guy, "Soooooo, what you're saying is that YOUR life is worth more than MINE, huh?"



It truly has become us vs them, the rich vs the poor, the royalty vs the peasants.

Glad that this is being fought.

Yes, what they are all saying is that THEY are more important than US-in EVERY aspect.

numpty
05-30-2013, 12:08 PM
One of the reasons given by some Texas politicians in support of special rights for their group is: "We face a higher degree of risk because we’re known and people might not like our opinions" and "In light of Gabrielle Giffords and others, those in the public eye need to protect themselves."

Grow Up !

All the rest of us are responsible for our opinions & the damage they may cause.

You are not going to clothe yourself in our second amendment and in the same breathe deny us the right.

Absolutely not !

Exactly! I don't care if you are 1000x more likely to be targeted than I am, my family is NOT less important than you are. Regardless of the circumstances!

numpty
05-30-2013, 12:23 PM
Maybe, just maybe, the whole point of the second ammendment is: "We face a higher degree of risk because we’re known and people might not like our opinions"

Ironically, wouldn't the cities with the strictest gun-control laws therefore require the greatest second amendment protection...due to their risk? I mean, the risk in Chicago is far greater than some little town in North Dakota, right?

RonnieP
05-30-2013, 12:25 PM
Ironically, wouldn't the cities with the strictest gun-control laws therefore require the greatest second amendment protection...due to their risk? I mean, the risk in Chicago is far greater than some little town in North Dakota, right?

What are you talking about? Chicago is the nation's most safest city. That 500 death people keep bringing up are all made up lies to smear the effectiveness of gun control.

Take it from Chicago, gun control works!!! :p

MolonLabe2008
05-30-2013, 12:27 PM
They want the same end result, but for different reasons.

......this^

Nick Justice
05-30-2013, 12:36 PM
They are falling back into the ancient trap: They are "royalty" and we are not, so they get privilege, and we don't. In a few years, they will claim birthrights.

RonnieP
05-30-2013, 12:48 PM
They are falling back into the ancient trap: They are "royalty" and we are not, so they get privilege, and we don't. In a few years, they will claim birthrights.

In a few years? Take a good look at our "elected" officials, see how many of them are off springs of politicians.

Hell, even our lovely lady Dianne Feinstein is looking to pass the torch to her beautiful maiden daughter. :oji: