Okay, so it is sunday (I did have to double check, given my very odd sleep and active schedule.
So, today, enjoy a little bit from the Second Amendment Foundation and a press release:
That really does sum it all up, doesn’t it?
How about the rest of the press release, while I am at it? I’ll comment in colored text like this.
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today challenged the nation’s leading opponents of gun ownership to “lead by example” and give up their own firearms and armed security before expecting the citizens, for whom they work, to surrender their ability to defend themselves. Sounds good.
“It seems clear from the direction the administration is going that it wants to severely restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners to purchase the firearms of their choice, “said SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “and we think they should demonstrate their belief in their own programs by giving up their firearms and security first. Seems reasonable.
“That would include Joe Biden’s shotguns,” he added, “and the armed security now enjoyed by Senators Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein, and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.
“It would especially apply to President Obama,” he continued, “who just signed legislation giving himself Secret Service protection for life, at the expense of taxpayers he wants to disarm.” Even Oleg Volk had a post on this topic and said exactly what I want to say, only better and before I did. What exactly was the point of passing somethign like this, anyways?
Gottlieb said the same principle should apply to anti-gun celebrities who have bodyguards while supporting legislation that would deprive average citizens from owning firearms for personal protection.
“For example,” he noted, “when I appeared with CNN’s Piers Morgan recently, he asserted that nobody needs an AR-15. The other day near Houston, a Texas teenager used an AR-15 to defend himself and his 12-year-old sister from a home invasion by shooting two burglars. Piers can choke on that.”
Gottlieb believes that public figures have no right to suggest gun bans for private citizens unless they first voluntarily give up their personal security. Basically, they should stop being hypocrites over firearms.
“These anti-gun politicians were not elected to positions of royalty,” Gottlieb said. “They are citizens, with no more rights than any other citizen. They were elected to serve the public, not treat the public like serfs. If they want us to put our safety at risk, they should drop the pretense and give up their guns and guards before daring to suggest that anyone else do the same.” Lead by example?
I will admit, I look more favorably upon the SAF than the NRA. The SAF is currently ripping anti-gun legislation a new one, and the NRA seems willing to compromise on things. That is probably why the white house wouldn’t meet with the SAF, who wants to discuss something with the very people who will be eliminating it as soon as they can?