School Obama's Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards

Originally posted by Scope and a Beam
It's the president of the united states, of course his daughter's school has armed guards at every corner.

David Gregory from NBC also had kids at that school.

Originally posted by sensible1

The guards carry openly. They have 9mm's openly displayed. Of course since Obama is black, YOU'D love his children to be unprotected.

I would love to just "trust" your information but obviously your ignorant comment leaves your proof in question.....

How about a link to substantiate your opinion?

And......

Obama can care less about Gun Control, when it relates to the protection of HIS Children. No double standard there........

My children are mixed, so "skin color" is NOT the issue.

But thanks for bringing skin color into the conversation. VERY classy.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

It's an entirely different circumstance. I can appreciate the hypocracy sure, but I bet you those armed guards were hired by the school, not President Obama.

~Tenth

So its too dangerous and crazy for everyone else, but members of the media and democrat party can have armed guards and it's not dangerous or crazy?

reply to post by Asktheanimals


First point I'd like to make is that he is the president, so naturally his kids should be guarded (just as he is) given that fact.

Secondly, your statement "rich people", perhaps they are rich because they worked hard and earned the money fair and square.

Example: My mother was a single mom taking care of me and also worked 2 jobs to pay our bills and took me to work with her many times because she had no one or couldn't afford anyone to watch me. Through the years she struggled and ended up working her way up the latter within a large corporation until she became part owner. In high school many people would call me richie rich and that pissed me off because I knew how hard my mom worked to become a very successful woman. During high school she took me out and sent me abroad to school in 5 different countries around Europe. So when I see these people who don't have a drive in life to become better throw words around like "rich people" I get offended! My mom wanted to give me the life she didn't have at my age and she fought and worked hard to be where she is today. Furthermore, if you don't like how things in your child's life is going do something about it besides qq on a msg board! Get a better job, go to college and make something of your life so that you can give your child the very best. Put the horse before the cart!
Point being: If I was in school now and this was going on I would be one of those kids who had the best school with armed guards, thanks to my mom who worked her butt off!

reply to post by Staroth


You're another genius who is totally missing the point.


Is it dangerous and crazy to have armed guards at school or not?

reply to post by PvtHudson


I suggest you go back and read the OP. Here I will help you out.

But you know, it's not just the school the Obama's daughters attend that has armed guards - many Congressmen, business leaders and just rich people send the kids to these schools because they're safe. Do you not see the hypocrisy that their kids are more valuable than yours? Don't let anyone tell you that armed guards cannot keep a school safe. They don't even have to be openly armed and look like stormtroopers. We're all entitled to safe schools, if it takes armed guards to keep their kids safe ours are worth it just as much.

Originally posted by Hawking
People with money send their kids to private schools with more resources. Our politicians have a lot of money

I thought demanding the same for the poor that the rich have was supposed to be socialism

Are we supposed to pay higher taxes for poor kids to be protected in school but not for them to have healthcare? Guess we'll just protect them from guns and not disease

edit on 25-12-2012 by Hawking because: (no reason given)

I have to respond to one of the first replies here because it got so many stars, and I don't see a proper response.

1. What does a schools resources have to do with the government (Federal, if you ask me) paying for competent armed guards that get regular full psychiatric exams and plenty of TRIGGER TIME? It would actually create many jobs (gotta pay people to be shrinks, guards, and pay ammo manufacturers), and stimulate the economy if you ask me.

2. What does the difference between socialism and capitalism have to do with protecting children? You are talking about personal material assets. The idea of safety is not an asset, but armed guards are. Since public safety is *supposed to be* a responsibility of the government (especially since it is the government that forces the kids to be in school) - they must provide the asset in order to provide the safety.

3. Yes you are right, everyone should have free health care.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
But you know, it's not just the school the Obama's daughters attend that has armed guards - many Congressmen, business leaders and just rich people send the kids to these schools because they're safe. Do you not see the hypocrisy that their kids are more valuable than yours?

No I do not. I, like most folks equiped with a brain, understand that the daughter of the President of the United States of America is a target for Terrorists and Wackos. I also understand a father who is worth Millions or Billions might have special concerns for his children. Kid-Napping...ever heard of it?

Acknowledging those glaring truths does not in any way mean that those kids are "more valuable" than anyone elses APART from the value thier death or abduction would have have to terrorists or criminals.

What part of that simple logic do you not understand?

ATS seems a battle of stupidity lately. Where debates don't even begin with facts or logic, but rather start from places of willful ignorance or dishonesty.

Originally posted by PvtHudson

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

It's an entirely different circumstance. I can appreciate the hypocracy sure, but I bet you those armed guards were hired by the school, not President Obama.

~Tenth

So its too dangerous and crazy for everyone else, but members of the media and democrat party can have armed guards and it's not dangerous or crazy?

Oh no, it's dangerous and crazy.

It's also legal.

What is the problem here?

reply to post by Hawking

Are we supposed to pay higher taxes for poor kids to be protected in school but not for them to have healthcare? Guess we'll just protect them from guns and not disease

How about stop all the dumbass wars and you will have the money you need for both.

reply to post by tide88


And the reason for the Sandy Hook massacre was.......?
What child of a politician attended there - or Columbine?
And you accuse me of ridiculous statements.

All school personnel who so desire, and qualify for a ccw/license to carry a firearm, should be armed.

Anything short of this is gross negligence on the part of the school administration and the local/state/federal politicians/lawmakers.

Having witnessed the murder and mayhem that has been carried out in public schools, and NOT allow any and all persons who fit the aforementioned qualifications to carry a firearm on school property is grossly negligent and criminal.

This ain't Sweden, and this ain't England, and this ain't France.

This is the U.S. of A.

And we got lot's of crazy folk over here, and 300 million guns, (that they know of )

We got gang bangers, mafioso's, killers, rapists, psycho's, child molesters, father stabbers, mother rapers, father rapers, left wing and right wing wacko's out the wazoo.....and a whole litany of plain ole f'd up folk runnin' to and fro on who know's what psychotropic meds and/or otherwise wit fried brains......

And you say what? You want me to hand in my gun and trust the cops to protect me?

hahahabwwwaaaahhhhmuahasnortbwahahahaha! Now THAT's funny!

Guns =/= freedom.

All it does it provide more "freedom" for a deranged sicko to get a gun and go on a rampage with it. When was the last time Japan, Canada or the UK had a gun-related massacre?

It's not propaganda ruining your country, it's all the dumb #wit 2nd amendment gloating hicks who want to protect themselves and their "rights to bear arms"... yet fail to realize their "protection" is actually killing more innocent people than it's helping.

The sad part is... there are so many guns in circulation now that it's not even controllable anymore... And the black market isn't to blame for that - your Constitution is. How many of those "illegal" guns do you think came from your very own distributors with the bar code scraped off? Keep on telling yourselves you're living "free", when in reality, you're living in complete fear (some of you need a gun to feel free, I can walk down the street knowing I most likely won't be getting shot, THAT sounds more free, doesn't it?).

Frankly, I'm surprised you still don't wear spurs out there in the Wild West. It's just sad that in the wake of this massacre, America's solution is... MORE guns. Keep adding to the problem instead, while you bash the people trying to solve it and fall into some paranoid delusion that they're trying to disarm you all to enslave you (do you really think your peashooter will save you from your military if it really came to it?).

And of course your government officials are going to send their kids to heavily armed schools... they need to protect themselves from the masses they armed. Irony at its best... but at the end of the day, it's sad... nothing but sad.

Originally posted by ftman

The sad part is... there are so many guns in circulation now that it's not even controllable anymore....

I'm no moron. Not even close. In fact, a rather educated man. Happen to be living in the U.S. of A. Born and raised right here.

And I have a very clear awareness of my surroundings, and the God forsaken nation in which I reside.

And you need not stoop to name calling, in fact, you did have a clear thought in your post, and I quoted you here. And it is this that is the exact reason why I shall fight to the last to keep my right to be armed.

Indeed this is a lawless land here in the U.S. of A. Indeed, we have the entire gamut of sicko's running to and fro, from the halls of Government right on over to the park bench.

I will not capitulate to the evil bastards who stalk innocents in the classrooms of our schools, I will push to gain my right to shoot back at the mf'rs.

Were it different I would likely have an alternative view, however, it ain't different....it's a nasty place the U.S. of A.

Like I said, it ain't Euroland......ya kinda gotta live here to really get a handle on it Like makin' love, ya can have it explained to ya but ya get a whole different understanding once ya experience it.

reply to post by Staroth


I get your point;
Only those who have enough money should be able to have armed guards at their schools.
Where you get that I'm someone with no "drive" in life I have no idea.
You don't have a clue who I am or what I've done with my life.

Originally posted by smokenmirrors
And you need not stoop to name calling

I agree, and have edited that part out. But the second part is going to stay because it's something I do believe.

Originally posted by hawkiye
This is all a red herring. We don't need armed guards in schools we need freedom and to get rid of the communists who have taken over the government. I used to go to school with a rifle in the window of my truck there were no school shootings in those days. Many schools had shooting teams and boxing teams too... The communist nanny state propaganda has ruined this great nation!

All this argument is BS freedom is always the answer not restrictions and regulations! Freedom to self defense and self determination!

edit on 25-12-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

[/quote

How about MY freedom not to be murdered by some right wing nut job exercising their "freedom" to be a dangerous idiot.

I find the logic behind this thread quite bizarre.

He is the "leader of the free world".. regardless of who he is personally he is as a powerful head of state.. more than that he is a symbol for the people and of a country just like any monarch is.

He is also Commander-in-Chief of the US army.

What message would it send to US military enemies if one was able to target a family member of it's leader? What would that do to military morale and most importantly the confidence of US citizens if an elected president couldn't even protect his own child?

All schools should have more security. I would even volunteer my own time to act as school security, except that if I just show up at schools like that I'd be arrested. Our wicked society does not reward the good guys!

Originally posted by Indigo5
No I do not. I, like most folks equiped with a brain, understand that the daughter of the President of the United States of America is a target for Terrorists and Wackos. I also understand a father who is worth Millions or Billions might have special concerns for his children. Kid-Napping...ever heard of it?

All children are common victims, whether their parents are "wealthy" or not. Poor people's children are kidnapped too, ever heard of that?