Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What weapons does Obama's security detail use?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I have no further information. This is a quest? Do they simply have handguns or do they use Automatic weapons?
If so, is that because they have to counter equally dangerous weapons that are on the streets?



edit on 13-1-2013 by CALGARIAN because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:41 PM
link   
probably mp5's pdk/pdw's, various sniper rifle weapons and a variety of hand guns from glocks to sigs perhaps a few hk's and whatnot but to answer the crux of your question what ever the mission/situation demands of them



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Man this guy is angry. I think Mark Wahlberg should play him in the movie version.

Secret service protection for former presidents is not what it is for sitting presidents, I am sure. They probably get a 4-man detail and a couple Yukons or something. I may be wrong but I'm sure they don't send an advance team to Home Depot when W needs to buy a shop vac or something.

I personally don't have a problem with this, just the gun grab that has nothing to do with protecting anyone but the government and their wish to become a dictatorship.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   
I found this thread, which addresses your question:

THIS THREAD

And also this article:

THIS ARTICLE

I am sure Google could answer you - that is where I found these two links.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   
The kind that they don't want us to have.
The kind with bullets.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


If I remember correctly, Clinton signed an order stating that after him Presidents would no longer get SS protection once they left office. But apparently Obama just granted himself protection for life, which is what the POTUS used to get before Clinton's order.

I know for a fact that Jimmy Carter still receives SS protection.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   
There are vids out there that show occasional issues where they draw weapons. Under Reagan they were Uzi's and that's as clear as day. I'm not sure what the ones around him may have beyond handguns today. The channels which run programs about the Secret Service say there is always a very capable counter-assault team very close by, anywhere he goes.

I can say personally from being in an Occupy camp sitting about dead center between Michelle Obama's chosen Hotel and the World Series venue in St Louis in 2011, what the agents actually with the person have isn't as important as what is sitting around blocks away in all directions. Nothing moves within 1/4 mile, by my guess, that someone isn't directly observing or able to observe through a scope when any National Command Authority types are around. Just my two cents.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   
The streets aren`t dangerous, criminals don`t have guns,a gun ban makes perfect sense and will make the country safer, if the the bozos in washington really believe this crap then they should lead the way and prove how well a gun ban will work by getting rid of all armed security for politicians.
if they really want to make a change then they should start with the man in mirror and lead by example.

They are trying to tell us that we will be just as safe if we give up our guns and depend on the police to protect us from all the thugs and criminals who have guns.if they are so sure about that then they should stake their lives on that belief ( like we will have to do if they take away our guns) and get rid of all their armed security protecting them 24/7.

in fact i challenge them to lead by example, get rid of your 24/7 armed security and rely on the local police to keep washington D.C. safe for you to walk the streets.This applies to all of you, that`s right even you crazy Joe Biden.
edit on 13-1-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-1-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Have a look for yourself, check out the Obama Protection series of information available in the linked source.

It quite impressive.

edit on 13-1-2013 by ADVISOR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
at the whitehouse they sharks with laser beams on their heads. the secret service carries noisey crickets.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   
To help you answer that question. The Secret Service gets what ever they want to protect him. They really don't want you or anyone else to know their capability's. If they come under attack then the people who do the attacking will VERY QUICKLY feel the full weight of the U.S. Delta Force on their heads if the Secret Service are outdone. Delta is the back up for the Secret Service in every situation so unless its a lone sniper from a mile or more away it just probably wont ever happen.

Unless the Secret Service decided he isn't worth protecting anymore.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 03:23 PM
link   
A full gun ban for all..from citizen, to cop, etc would indeed remove the gun violence...

Thing is, if guns are illegal in all forms, then there are no bullets to be found (maybe some black market stuff).
So, it would work..and the argument of well people will just use knifes instead.
Sure..but you don't get mass murders from knife wielding psychos..you might get one or two if he is a near ninja..thats about it..no more massacres

Just stating the simple fact..don't think you know my stance on gun control by me making a honest observation.

The question is, is loss of life acceptable when enforcing a constitutional right? If you knew flat out your son/daughter/mother/father would be alive today had there been a gun ban, would you be for gun bans, or would you accept the loss of your loved one as collateral damage that is necessary to keep an ideal?

Don't mean to bring it to the "think about the children" level, but it is applicable in this hypothetical...if there was a gun ban, and bullets were about as easy to come by as crack (not to mention the price per bullet and gun), would aurora or sandy have been that way? could that much damage have been done with someone holding a switchblade? How many family members mourn today because of a ideal people scream about?

There is no right or wrong way to consider these questions...personally I see both sides of the argument and am neutral..just when arguing, don't forget there is another very valid side to this debate...your not 100% right or wrong when speaking your mind on this subject.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Watch the video of the attempted Reagan assasination.. You see machine guns coming out from all over the place.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Todays Politicians are nothing but PARASITES who are draining tax payers. For the jobs that they do, they deserve nothing from the tax payers. They cannot even make SIMPLE decisions. The only time they can act reasonably quickly on issues, is when they vote on issues that benefit themselves (like security for life, or pay raises). They always get things done fast when its for THEIR benefit, eh?.

All of these PARASITES do not deserve anything but to all be FIRED.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Furthermore, these anti gun politicians are complete HYPOCRITES. Telling the people (We The People) that armed guards are bad, yet their children enjoy the luxury of protection with armed guards in their schools. Bad idea, eh?
They say guns are not needed for the peoples (We The Peoples) protection, yet they wont go anywhere without armed protection. TRAITORS!!!!

THROW THEM ALL OUT OF OFFICE!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ResistTreason
Furthermore, these anti gun politicians are complete HYPOCRITES. Telling the people (We The People) that armed guards are bad, yet their children enjoy the luxury of protection with armed guards in their schools. Bad idea, eh?
They say guns are not needed for the peoples (We The Peoples) protection, yet they wont go anywhere without armed protection. TRAITORS!!!!

THROW THEM ALL OUT OF OFFICE!!!!!!!!!!


And this is why they need the protection. You average everyday joe does not have nutters ranting about how they are traitors in all caps.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ResistTreason
Todays Politicians are nothing but PARASITES who are draining tax payers. For the jobs that they do, they deserve nothing from the tax payers. They cannot even make SIMPLE decisions. The only time they can act reasonably quickly on issues, is when they vote on issues that benefit themselves (like security for life, or pay raises). They always get things done fast when its for THEIR benefit, eh?.

All of these PARASITES do not deserve anything but to all be FIRED.


And who would take their place?
Would you?
Then if you were, would you take kindly for some kid tomorrow to suggest you were a parasite?



posted on Jan, 14 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Have a look for yourself, check out the Obama Protection series of information available in the linked source.

It quite impressive.

edit on 13-1-2013 by ADVISOR because: (no reason given)


Great link man!


thanks!





new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join