Can you provide evidence that she thinks this? No state prevents citizens from defending themselves. Are you talking about carrying a concealed weapon across state lines?
Yes, I am talking about carrying a concealed weapon across state lines. There is currently a proposal to require states to recognize other states' concealed carry licenses, the same way they recognize other states' driver's licenses. Pelosi is very much against this. So yes, my home state in particular will not recognize any other state's CCW, so it does prevent you from defending yourself in IL unless you are an IL resident and procure an IL CCW permit.
You mentioned a police force. A police force exists to defend all citizens in a country equally. Now you're confusing government security agents with a police force. Can you please provide evidence of your assertion that the security defending Nancy Pelosi uses assault weapons?
Often times, security of dignitaries is partly or wholly farmed out to local police forces. So if Nancy shows up to my neighborhood, and they stick three local cops out in front of her house, they are not protecting her "equally" like they protect me, because they don't sit out in front of my house. It's security dedicated to her. And since almost all local cops have an AR-15 in their car, yes, she is protected by assault weapons. Can I "prove" it? I dunno, probably not, but Google "weapons used by the Secret Service" or "weapons used by local police". See assault weapons on there? See automatic weapons on there?
Sure, that would be a bit hypocritical I guess. Do you have evidence that high capacity magazines are used to protect her? Where are you getting this information?
Where am I getting this information?
https://www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/popular-guns-for-law-enforcement/The most popular weapons are Glock pistols and similar pistols. Almost any full-size semi automatic is going to have a "high capacity" magazine. Unless she goes out of her way to ensure everyone on her detail only carries revolvers or 1911s or compact pistols, she's protected by high capacity magazines.
I think it's sort of a legitimate argument regarding flying though. Pelosi did use the same private jet provided to all speakers of the house, and it would have been more environmentally friendly of her to teleconference into meetings. I suspect that politically this would have serious repercussions though . . . which is why every politician in Washington regularly flies back and forth. I'd love to see less transportation waste from the government, but am not entirely sure how that would work. Train and automobile transportation is likely to be too slow. Do you have any suggestions?
Fly commercial.
Wasn't that your initial complaint that Nancy Pelosi is flying around in planes, which are bad for the environment?[/quote]
No. My complaint was she flies around in PRIVATE planes and then preaches at me that I need to do better for the environment. I'll put my tiny carbon footprint up against hers any day. If you recall correctly, she was clamoring for an even bigger plane to fly her around. Like I said, pure limousine liberal.
That's not true at all. There was a period where she was told to use a military plane with particular capabilities by the House Sargent At Arms, which I think is what you're talking about:
https://www.factcheck.org/2008/12/nancy-pelosis-personal-jet/https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jet-set-2/https://www.truthorfiction.com/nancy-pelosi-jet-is-gone/She also only flew in private planes while she was speaker of the house. Since holding that post she has in fact flown commercial:
https://www.politico.com/story/2010/11/pelosi-to-fly-commercial-045525.
Yur complaint would seem to be largely unfounded in this case.
[/quote] Okay dude, whatever.