Do Obama's bodyguards carry guns?

[Hereward]

There was a programme about Air Force One on TV about an hour ago. I didn't realise there were TWO 747's, with one always acting as a backup. When Bush made his surprise visit to Baghdad the two 747's flew in convoy so there would be a spare plane available. Bonkers.

[bobthemonkey]

And four E4Bs. A more austere, functional Air Force One with even greater command and control facilities. If AF1 is a flying White House, then the E4 is a flying Pentagon.

Normally wherever AF1 goes, an E4 goes as well.

Edited by bobthemonkey on Tuesday 31st March 21:45

[sadoksevoli]

I think all this is so totally OTT - as much as attacking the President or the head of state of any country could be seen as an attack on the country itself, the messageis philosophically wrong - kill a politician and there's plenty more to fill the gap - it's not th eperson but the office and just becaue you kill the incumbent does notmean you've struck a political blow - the whole poitn about stable political systems (not jsut democratic ones) is that the means and process of succession is smooth. It's becoming a bit of a daft obsession imho.

[Jasandjules]

dan1981 said:

Here you go.....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7973274....

But does he really need all that stuff?

I mean REALLY???

Bloomin' Eco Warriors like to travel in style....

[Cotty]

Hereward said:

There was a programme about Air Force One on TV about an hour ago. I didn't realise there were TWO 747's, with one always acting as a backup. When Bush made his surprise visit to Baghdad the two 747's flew in convoy so there would be a spare plane available. Bonkers.

There are two.

I believe the "Air Force One" call sign is transfered to whatever plane the president is in at that time. Theoreticaly if he is in a crop sprayer that becomes Air Force One. I could be corrected.

[mybrainhurts]

Look, Barry, you can't have guns........YES, WE CAN

[bobthemonkey]

sadoksevoli said:

I think all this is so totally OTT - as much as attacking the President or the head of state of any country could be seen as an attack on the country itself, the messageis philosophically wrong - kill a politician and there's plenty more to fill the gap - it's not th eperson but the office and just becaue you kill the incumbent does notmean you've struck a political blow - the whole poitn about stable political systems (not jsut democratic ones) is that the means and process of succession is smooth. It's becoming a bit of a daft obsession imho.

Yes and no. It's not so much the preservation of the individual, but the national command authority at all times. At the end of the day, the entire point of setup is to keep a clearly defined leader (for the mission, it doesn't matter who) who can commit forces, particular nuclear forces, to combat. Its not just a case of keeping the person alive, its keeping them in contact. Any transfer of power under the rules of succession takes time, and any delay (in the old fashioned Cold War strategic war thinking) can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

The above is probably closer to who the military view the mission, while the White House places greater weight on the person. There is always a fear that in a power vacuum (whether real or perceived) a crazy general with guns starts a shooting war. I know this is all a little Dr. Strangelove, but Curtis LeMay, the head of SAC (US nuclear forces) came awfully close to this (allegedly) during the Cuban Missile Crisis. As such the preservation of the individual, identified leader, and their capacity to give orders is more preferable.

ETA: Cotty is almost correct on the name thing. Air Force One is the callsign of any US Air Force aircraft the president is on. Hence when he is on the helicopters, operated by the Marines, the callsign is Marine One. The proper name of the aircraft is a VC-25A.

Edited by bobthemonkey on Tuesday 31st March 21:57

[Magog]

Cpn Jack Spanner said:

There's no problem getting a licence in the UK to own a gun, provided it's for business purposes. So a bodyguard, vet (who may need to put down a rampaging horse), a company loaning weapons for movie companies etc can own guns. We only have a ban on public ownership of handguns.

In Northern Ireland, you can buy handgun for self defence, if you are a businessman of a certain calibre. It's not something that's widely advertised though.

Pretty certain thats not true, well not entirely, i know the laws different in northern ireland, but bodyguards in the mainland UK cannot carry weapons of anykind. Sure that cannot be true about movie companies too, or is it, can soneone clarify?

[Fittster]

Why all the attention on Obama, the bloke with all the money is President Hu Jintao.

[mybrainhurts]

Fittster said:

Why all the attention on Obama, the bloke with all the money is President Hu Jintao.

What's a huge intao...?

[superkartracer]

paddyhasneeds said:

Odd stuff

Well bearing in mind he has a fighter jet flying overhead then - maybe...

[Wacky Racer]

Cotty said:

I believe the "Air Force One" call sign is transfered to whatever plane the president is in at that time. Theoreticaly if he is in a crop sprayer that becomes Air Force One. I could be corrected.

[Fittster]

mybrainhurts said:

Fittster said:

Why all the attention on Obama, the bloke with all the money is President Hu Jintao.

What's a huge intao...?

Our next ruler (probably).

[f13ldy]

bbc said:

And it will not be hard to spot on the streets - it will be accompanied at all times by a motorcade consisting of dozens of support cars, police cars and emergency medical vehicles.

No st.

Seems red lights aren't a priority for the cavalry.

4 police motorbikes, 4 Ford SUVs (I think), 3 Unmarked Range Rovers, pushing their way through Traffic around Tower Bridge at 9pm.

Be even worse when the Big O is around himself I guess.

[audidoody]

Cpn Jack Spanner said:

In Northern Ireland, you can buy handgun for self defence, if you are a businessman of a certain calibre.

[jeff m]

Considering his stance on gun ownership I see no reason his bodyguards should be armed.

Practice what you preach.

Edited by jeff m on Wednesday 1st April 00:16

[bobthemonkey]

jeff m said:

Considering his stance on gun ownership I see no reason his bodyguards should be armed.

Practice what you preach.

Edited by jeff m on Wednesday 1st April 00:16

So tell us, what exactly is his stance on gun ownership? What bills has he sponsored, or voted for or against concerning gun ownership? What has he said in debates and policy documents on gun control?

[jeff m]

bobthemonkey said:

jeff m said:

Considering his stance on gun ownership I see no reason his bodyguards should be armed.

Practice what you preach.

Edited by jeff m on Wednesday 1st April 00:16

So tell us, what exactly is his stance on gun ownership? What bills has he sponsored, or voted for or against concerning gun ownership? What has he said in debates and policy documents on gun control?

Well he cosponsored the "one handgun a month" which failed, it is all searchable and not exactly a secret.

[bobthemonkey]

jeff m said:

bobthemonkey said:

jeff m said:

Considering his stance on gun ownership I see no reason his bodyguards should be armed.

Practice what you preach.

Edited by jeff m on Wednesday 1st April 00:16

So tell us, what exactly is his stance on gun ownership? What bills has he sponsored, or voted for or against concerning gun ownership? What has he said in debates and policy documents on gun control?

Well he cosponsored the "one handgun a month" which failed, it is all searchable and not exactly a secret.

I know what his policies are; I was asking if you did?

Do you really need to buy more than one handgun a month in the states? Do you loose them that frequently?

I think we've gone too far in one direction in the UK and our gun laws are too restrictive, but to suggest that Obama wants to virtually repeal the 2nd Amendment is frankly ludicrous.

He backed concealed carry for retired police officers for instance. In in the US there is need for some control. (I admit a lot hinges on if you take the 2nd amendment to grant an inalienable right to bear arms, or merely permits it with appropriate checks and balances. ).

I wouldn't take guns away and I wouldn't ban handguns. The focus needs to be on accountability and traceability to ensure that guns don't get into the hands of criminals. This is exactly what Obama seems to advocating, certainly in his more recent speeches on the subject.

[jeff m]

bobthemonkey said:

jeff m said:

bobthemonkey said:

jeff m said:

Considering his stance on gun ownership I see no reason his bodyguards should be armed.

Practice what you preach.

Edited by jeff m on Wednesday 1st April 00:16

So tell us, what exactly is his stance on gun ownership? What bills has he sponsored, or voted for or against concerning gun ownership? What has he said in debates and policy documents on gun control?

Well he cosponsored the "one handgun a month" which failed, it is all searchable and not exactly a secret.

I know what his policies are; I was asking if you did?

Bob re read your post.

PS Most gun laws are enacted at the State level, it is actually quite a complex subject and a bit off topic.
Jeff