Anti-Second Amendment radicals in both houses of Congress also mocked the idea of armed guards protecting our schools, while they spend their days on Capitol Hill in a virtual armed fortress, surrounded by a heavily armed police force tasked only with keeping them and their staffs safe.  The vast majority of the ruling political class works in facilities where they are protected by armed guards. 

The question is: Why is it a good idea to have armed guards protecting politicians and rich children, but a bad idea to have armed guards protecting our children in government schools?  Let’s have that debate. 

Let’s see if the people think political hacks are more worthy of armed protection than their children and grandchildren.  Let’s debate whether the kids of an overpaid shill are more worthy of armed protection than the children stuck in government schools.  Let’s debate protecting the Capitol by eliminating the armed guards and making the Capitol building a gun free zone like our schools.  If it’s the best way to protect our children, surely it is the best way to protect the hacks in Congress.  And let’s debate whether people would rather pay for armed guards to protect mayors like Bloomberg and Menino, or armed guards to protect their children. 

Let’s have a national debate on why people mocking the idea of armed guards protecting our children are protected by armed guards.  Let the anti-Second Amendment radicals explain why so many of them are protected by people with guns, but they don’t want our children protected that same way.  I, for one, welcome the debate.  BRING IT ON! 



"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."