That Breyer demands armed police protection provided at taxpayer expense illustrates no small amount of elitist hypocrisy considering his dissent in the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case... [More]Today's Gun Rights Examiner offering notes some people--those would be our rulers--think they're just more entitled than the rest of us.
Our "Betters" don't THINK they are better than us. They KNOW they are. And they know their Praetorian Guard will ensure they stay that way. As long as the checks keep coming in, "Law Enforcement" will grovel before their Masters and then do WHATEVER they are told. And since FedGov has the printing press and fiat money, them checks will keep on rollin', rollin', rollin'!
ReplyDeleteIsn't Breyer a little old to be a pussy boy who is too effeminate to carry his own gun? Let him get a gun for himself, for his own protection first, and if he still needs assistance from the taxpayers after that, then we can talk about it. Cockamamie commie lib too arrogant to even wipe his own ass.
ReplyDeleteIt does not appear that in either matter that the criminal targeted Breyer because of his position as a Justice, but did target Breyer because he appeared to have coveted things worth taking such as money.
ReplyDeleteBreyer is free to do what many of the rest of us do - be intelligent in our travel plans, both local and distant, be aware of our surrounding environment, lock windows and doors, install an alarm system, become proficient in the use of firearms, acquire them, keep them, and bear them. If we are a victim of a crime or two, we do not expect that we receive future extra protection at taxpayer expense to "feel" safer.
Justice Breyer, it just ain't all about you.