The very fact that Emma Watson brought an armed security guard to a graduation at Brown University has caused some to wonder about the hypocrisy of gun control activists. You see, Brown University is supposed to be a “gun free zone”.
While we wish that every law abiding citizen had the ability to defend themselves on or off campus, it seems that if you are famous it’s ok to bring a gun into a “gun free zone” and no one will have any problem with it.
Not much has been said of the incident but both the police and the school have said that the armed guard was not one of their own.
According to downtrend.com,
One of two things is going on here. Either Brown approved this armed presence and they don’t want to seem like hypocrites or they found out about it later and don’t want to take action against such a famous graduate. Either way, this is elitism at its finest. There’s one rule for regular schlubs and another for rich and important people.
There probably aren’t too many Brown students from working class families, but for argument’s sake, let’s suppose one of them was there on a special scholarship. Now imagine that this average Joe or Jane showed up to graduation with a loaded pistol just for personal protection. There would be a lockdown, the SWAT team would be called in, and that student would be looking at years behind bars.
A famous person shows up with an armed guard, just for personal protection, and it’s like nothing ever happened. The gun-free zone only applies to those not fortunate enough to have been born into money or who have never starred in a string of blockbuster movies.
Maybe we should reframe the gun control debate as class warfare. It is the rich elites on the left that are trying to disarm the American people. All the while, they enjoy armed protection and privileges that most people can’t afford. The way regular people defend themselves is through gun ownership and the ability to carry their weapons.
In California where it is nearly impossible to get a concealed weapons permit (for now) millionaire Senator Dianne Feinstein had no problem getting one because she is considered to be important. And though she likes the idea of packing heat for herself, she spends considerable time and effort trying to deny the rest of Americans their right to do the same.
Is there a clause in the Constitution that gives rich and famous people extra rights that the rest of us don’t get? Civil rights are natural and inborn and should not be dependant upon the size of one’s bank account.
When I see the lefty anti-gun zealots decrying Georgia’s “guns everywhere” law it makes me furious because the elites like Emma Watson already enjoy armed personal protection wherever they go.
It’s typical for anti-gunners who are either rich, famous, or powerful to be hypocritical in having armed body guards all while fighting to take away the self-defense rights of those of us who can’t afford personal body guards.
Wonder why no one on the anti-gun side has complained about Watson’s armed guard? It should be no surprise since some of the biggest supporters of gun control like Michael Bloomberg and Michael Moore have their own armed guards as well.
We don’t blame them for wanting protection, but why do they want to take away that same protection from the rest of us?
This video reveals “3 secret loopholes” to get untraceable firearms and defeat gun control schemes for good. CLICK HERE. (sponsored)