dstieger wrote:Who is the NRA's audience? Anyone not totally behind them already is going to summarily reject the premise of the question. Obama's kids have armed security. My kids don't. Thus, the Obama girls are 'more important' than mine? I haven't done a detailed risk analysis, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that just maybe those kids are more likely to be targeted than mine...and I'd also suggest that the negative consequences to the nation of them being targeted are slightly greater than if mine were targeted.
NRA doesn't seem to be a fast track toward convincing anyone not already completely in their camp.
In my opinion, putting armed guards at schools is an exercise is futility.
Also in my opinion, the children of the POTUS require armed security because of the higher expectations of needing such protection.
With that said, it is indeed more than just a little hypocritical for the president to openly oppose armed protection for the masses while enjoying said security for themselves.