You probably don’t need a security detail

A relative of mine posted this on Facebook the other day:

Hey, teens, wouldn’t you like Schumer’s armed security?

He’ll never approve it for you, but never give it up himself.

It’s worded in a befuddling fashion, but its basic premise is that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has an armed security detail, and he is a hypocrite for supporting gun control. It’s a pretty bogus charge on its face, but even more so when you think about it.

With a handful of exceptions, people in the public eye have more of a need for armed security than regular people do. He probably needs that more than I do, since I’m just some random person with an internet connection, and he’s one of the highest ranking politicians in the country. I’d guess that Sen. Schumer receives literally hundreds of threats on a regular basis. I don’t.

Not to mention that a security detail for a high ranking public officially probably has more training than the average gun owner with a James Bond fantasy, of course. There’s a big difference.

Perhaps my right-wing ‘relative’ should ask herself why exactly those “teens” her post refers to would want a security detail in the first place? And once she figures that out, maybe she will then understand why people in the public eye need armed security details.