Don't they think that this lack of guns will be "bait" for potential assassins? Shouldn't they have as many good guys with guns as possible to stop any potential bad guys with guns? Why aren't the politicians themselves gunned up just in case, for maximum safety?
From their spokesperson: "The Republican National Convention is a National Special Security Event which means the Secret Service is the lead agency and we will defer to their planning as it relates to safety and security of the Convention."
Sounds like some of that Big Government interference to me. When has deferring to the authorities ever been their thing? Why don't they fight this--preferably with guns? Isn't that what the Second Amendment is all about: our last line of defense against a too-powerful government? This is what we've been told for years.
I mean, we KNOW that they truly truly truly believe that more guns make us safer. They say it every time some school kids or innocent church-goers get killed. "If the teachers and choir leaders only had guns!" Why don't they want to be as safe as those losers? Holster up, fellas!
And who is the "Secret Service" anyway? We the people are the Secret Service. Just as we the people are the "well-regulated militia" of the Second Amendment.
Right? Anyone with a gun is a potential hero. Unless, of course, you're a Muslim or young black boy or something like that. If you're one of those, don't even reach in your pocket for a stick of Big Red if you know what's good for you. (Sorry. These are the rules as I understand them.)
I dunno. I'm starting to think that these guys maybe have ulterior motives for begging everyone to buy guns and tote them around everywhere. Could this be possible? They've always seemed to have our best interests in mind for everything else. I'm so confused.
I suppose I only have one request for these politicians: #StickToYourGuns.
