what could go wrong?

Obama Hates Children, Deserves No Secret Service Protection

Now illegal: Trusty sidekicksHow is there not a single conspiracy theory about the White House petitions website? It seems pretty obvious — you have to put in your information to sign, obviously, and they say it’s going onto a fancy direct-democracy petition thing, but in fact it is going into a government database developed especially to keep track of the nation’s stupidest people with Internet connections.

Take this petition Daily Caller Genius Jim Treacher is pushing, to remove the security details of both Barack Obama and Joe Biden. If you signed that petition, the government has your name! And now they know that you are absolutely not qualified to do anything requiring a frontal lobe.

From the petition:

Gun Free Zones are supposed to protect our children, and some politicians wish to strip us of our right to keep and bear arms. Those same politicians and their families are currently under the protection of armed Secret Service agents. If Gun Free Zones are sufficient protection for our children, then Gun Free Zones should be good enough for politicians.

Right. Ok. Yes. Let us take a moment and consider: Are you allowed to take a gun into the White House? How about the Capitol? You are not, because — OH MY GOD — they are gun-free zones.

The people in the White House with guns are there to protect the president. Incidentally, regular people have those too! You can pick up any phone, anywhere, press three buttons, and people with guns will come right to your door.

Now we can get into Genius Treacher’s reasoning, because obviously protecting the commander in chief of the armed forces is the same thing as keeping a gun under your pillow:

If gun-free zones keep people safe, then I can’t think of a person whose safety is more important than the President of the United States. If having a gun in your home increases your risk of getting shot, how can we allow our president and his family to be surrounded by dozens of them?

First: Sure, having a gun indicates a heightened risk of gun violence. You know what else puts you at a heightened risk of gun violence? Being the president of the United States. The difference between being the president and being a Florida redneck mad at loud music is that people are actually trying to kill the president.

Treacher then gets mad at Slate’s Matt Yglesias for suggesting that maybe it is a bigger deal when the president’s children are kidnapped:

So, we can refine the argument thusly: Good guys with guns should protect important people from bad guys with guns. But your kids don’t deserve such protection, because they’re not as important. You peasants can go die already. In addition, shut up.

Yes. You should be furious that people think the president is more important than your children! Shadowy international militants want only two things: To kill the president, and to kidnap little Billy from down the street who is always trying to put his boogers in girls’ hair. If the president gets armed guards, why does he get to outlaw other people having armed guards?

Oh… he’s not doing that? You can still have armed guards, just like the president? No no no, that’s different. We want to be our own armed guards, even though that system has resulted in hundreds of thousands of gun deaths, because humans are incredibly stupid. What’s the difference, really, between the Secret Service protecting the president and a paranoid dude with a pile of assault rifles, in case of Racial Unrest? It’s pretty much the same thing, and clearly everyone is in as much daily danger as the president.

In conclusion, gun people: YOU ARE NOT THE PRESIDENT. And having a gun does not make you the Secret Service.

[Daily Caller]

What Others Are Reading

Hola wonkerados.

To improve site performance, we did a thing. It could be up to three minutes before your comment appears. DON'T KEEP RETRYING, OKAY?

Also, if you are a new commenter, your comment may never appear. This is probably because we hate you.