commentaries

I could careless what the NRA thinks about anything personally.

VALID POINT. This is not about kids, this is about adult decisions. Using kids for or against is not advancing the pros & cons of any decision. Using kids in political ads is about stoking emotions and implying the motives on the other side are rotten.

Armed protection of First Family members is not new. This is a long-standing US tradition. Children have been the victims of mass gun violence. So have adults. It's time to stop the emotional grand standing and get to the bottom of the issues. Mental health services, reasonable gun controls, a more civil discourse about a really difficult and emotional issue. It's time to act like the grown ups. I mean it.

Both sides - Leave the kids out of your political grandstanding!

"Don't use children as props in gun debate" They are not props...they are VICTIMS! And this is not a debate. It is an issue of allowing people to own weapons of mass destruction versus Second Amendment Rights of owning firearms for personal protection. You can keep your pistols. Turn in your machine-guns!

Pot you are black...signed kettle.

I think some are missing the NRA's point. Their point isn't that the president's kids shouldn't be protected - they obviously should. Their point is that we should be allowed to have our kids protected as well. I for one would feel safer sending my son to school knowing that there were law abiding gun owners and/or security at the school to protect them.

everyone said Obama was going to have kids behind him when he made his announcement yesterday......geez, the public is like....psychic!

As far as I am concerned, Obama would have been well within his rights to put up pictures of the 20 kids killed in Newtown at announcement yesterday. Hell, put up the crime scene photos, since so many people seem to want to ignore what's really at stake in this whole debate.

The nra has no point other than to fill their pockets with more money.