Constitutional Rights Doled Out According to "Importance"

[gallantwarrior]

It is puzzling enough that Democrats appear to be willing to allow another rich, old, white guy to buy them out again, but this response just takes the cake.
Bloomberg: Guns for Me, but Not for Thee
So, apparently, Bloomberg believes that his life is worth protecting and yours, your family's, and your friend's lives are not. You are just not important enough to be trusted with the same firearms his security detail carries to protect him from threats. You are not trained well-enough, or threatened enough, or important enough to be permitted you Second Amendment rights to protect yourself. Oh, yeah, and since you financially responsible for your own protection, obviously, your life doesn't matter.

 

[White 6]

Bloomy won't get your guns or mine. Biden is having a hell of a SuperTuesday at this time of night.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I saw that. But just the temerity of Bloomy was astonishing. **** y'all but I'm someone...
That attitude is unfortunately common with people of his "class". Don't think Biden, et.al. don't think the same? Guess again.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is puzzling enough that Democrats appear to be willing to allow another rich, old, white guy to buy them out again, but this response just takes the cake.
Bloomberg: Guns for Me, but Not for Thee
So, apparently, Bloomberg believes that his life is worth protecting and yours, your family's, and your friend's lives are not. You are just not important enough to be trusted with the same firearms his security detail carries to protect him from threats. You are not trained well-enough, or threatened enough, or important enough to be permitted you Second Amendment rights to protect yourself. Oh, yeah, and since you financially responsible for your own protection, obviously, your life doesn't matter.

Few, if any, anti-gun loons disagree with this sentiment.

 

[gallantwarrior]

It is puzzling enough that Democrats appear to be willing to allow another rich, old, white guy to buy them out again, but this response just takes the cake.
Bloomberg: Guns for Me, but Not for Thee
So, apparently, Bloomberg believes that his life is worth protecting and yours, your family's, and your friend's lives are not. You are just not important enough to be trusted with the same firearms his security detail carries to protect him from threats. You are not trained well-enough, or threatened enough, or important enough to be permitted you Second Amendment rights to protect yourself. Oh, yeah, and since you financially responsible for your own protection, obviously, your life doesn't matter.

Few, if any, anti-gun loons disagree with this sentiment.

That their lives are worth an armed guard while regular folks are to rely strictly on government "protection"?
A buddy of mine was once interviewed regarding gun restrictions. His answer: Where he lived, police and fire protection were either distantly located or volunteers. His home protection consisted of a Rottweiler and a Colt .45. Both were more efficient and effective than waiting for government response. I live miles away from any police (State Troopers) support in a remote location. The surrounding community has a population of drug abusers, unemployed, and government entitled persons. Fortunately, I am remote enough to discourage most drug abusers but the area is also frequented by entitled "townies" who view habitations like mine to be easy pickings for vandalism and theft...just 'cause. At least I haven't been stripped of my rights and can still defend my life and property.
P.S. Let's not even mention the potential of dangerous wildlife, i.e. bears, moose, wolves, etc.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is puzzling enough that Democrats appear to be willing to allow another rich, old, white guy to buy them out again, but this response just takes the cake.
Bloomberg: Guns for Me, but Not for Thee
So, apparently, Bloomberg believes that his life is worth protecting and yours, your family's, and your friend's lives are not. You are just not important enough to be trusted with the same firearms his security detail carries to protect him from threats. You are not trained well-enough, or threatened enough, or important enough to be permitted you Second Amendment rights to protect yourself. Oh, yeah, and since you financially responsible for your own protection, obviously, your life doesn't matter.

Few, if any, anti-gun loons disagree with this sentiment.

That their lives are worth an armed guard while regular folks are to rely strictly on government "protection"?
A buddy of mine was once interviewed regarding gun restrictions. His answer: Where he lived, police and fire protection were either distantly located or volunteers. His home protection consisted of a Rottweiler and a Colt .45. Both were more efficient and effective than waiting for government response. I live miles away from any police (State Troopers) support in a remote location. The surrounding community has a population of drug abusers, unemployed, and government entitled persons. Fortunately, I am remote enough to discourage most drug abusers but the area is also frequented by entitled "townies" who view habitations like mine to be easy pickings for vandalism and theft...just 'cause. At least I haven't been stripped of my rights and can still defend my life and property.
P.S. Let's not even mention the potential of dangerous wildlife, i.e. bears, moose, wolves, etc.

Anti-gun loons want the state to have a monopoly on force - they know this cannot happen while the citizenry remains armed.

 

[gallantwarrior]

It is puzzling enough that Democrats appear to be willing to allow another rich, old, white guy to buy them out again, but this response just takes the cake.
Bloomberg: Guns for Me, but Not for Thee
So, apparently, Bloomberg believes that his life is worth protecting and yours, your family's, and your friend's lives are not. You are just not important enough to be trusted with the same firearms his security detail carries to protect him from threats. You are not trained well-enough, or threatened enough, or important enough to be permitted you Second Amendment rights to protect yourself. Oh, yeah, and since you financially responsible for your own protection, obviously, your life doesn't matter.

Few, if any, anti-gun loons disagree with this sentiment.

That their lives are worth an armed guard while regular folks are to rely strictly on government "protection"?
A buddy of mine was once interviewed regarding gun restrictions. His answer: Where he lived, police and fire protection were either distantly located or volunteers. His home protection consisted of a Rottweiler and a Colt .45. Both were more efficient and effective than waiting for government response. I live miles away from any police (State Troopers) support in a remote location. The surrounding community has a population of drug abusers, unemployed, and government entitled persons. Fortunately, I am remote enough to discourage most drug abusers but the area is also frequented by entitled "townies" who view habitations like mine to be easy pickings for vandalism and theft...just 'cause. At least I haven't been stripped of my rights and can still defend my life and property.
P.S. Let's not even mention the potential of dangerous wildlife, i.e. bears, moose, wolves, etc.

Anti-gun loons want the state to have a monopoly on force - they know this cannot happen while the citizenry remains armed.

Fact, that. And, yet, government won't protect them, either. I can understand why elitists like Bloomberg want to disarm the people, but why are so many of these loons set on disarming themselves?

 

[miketx]

 

[M14 Shooter]

Fact, that. And, yet, government won't protect them, either. I can understand why elitists like Bloomberg want to disarm the people, but why are so many of these loons set on disarming themselves?

Useful Idiots.

Only in America do we see throngs of people demanding that the government take away fundamental rights guaranteed by their constitution.

 

[gallantwarrior]

View attachment 310287

I share the road with lots of idiots who have apparently not learned how to use automobiles. Otherwise, why do so many of them end up in ditches and wrapped around light poles and street signs every time it snows an inch? And I live in ALASKA!!!! You'd think they'd learn.