posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 07:30 AM
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
Good points you've been making here! I will even grant the folks on the other side of this issue that it's not really fair to include the Schools
the actual top leaders send their kids to. The President, Speaker, Senate Majority Leader and a handful of others are in the National Command
Authority chain and actually could have international attention aimed at their kids...so in those cases, I almost say they ought to have
private tutors for the safety of the kids they attend with, but at least they have security at that top level.
They rest though?? You're absolutely right. Just what enormous threat are a freshman congressman's kid's under or a Governor or State House Rep?
They have issues...but as you've noted, don't we ALL have issues and that is the whole point.
They shouldn't have the luxury of no concerns to their kid's school being a target (or at least a successful one) while the best we get are idiot
school districts in California packing M-16 rifles on the surplus program or whatever deal they have with Colt there to get those rifles at a mere
$1,000 a copy. If THEY need security well then our kids are no less special and unique than theirs and I resent how their attitude actually DOES imply
the opposite when you think about it, huh?
edit on 29-1-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)
The last few posts have given me a new angle to consider in this debate....
Does anyone know, whether the children of high ranking political figures, receive Secret Service protection, or just increased security, overall? If
the SS is involved in a portion of those duties, is their job to defend those children in an active shooter situation, or to remove the children from
the threat, leaving all of the other children behind?