Gun licences for MPs

While the UNF government incessantly chant the manthram of a "new political culture", we hear that MPs are to be issued with licenses for firearms, which I guess is for defensive purposes. But, if it is an exercise to legitimize the possession of unlicensed firearms, it is another kettle of fish altogether.

The important question that arises here is, whose protection should be the uppermost in the mind of the government? Is it of the privileged and protected MPs or the civilians who seem to have no protection at all under the prevailing political culture? Speaking about the culture, which is, since of late, being systematically and openly ridiculed and torn asunder as if spurred by a grinding vengeance by uncultured vultures through the several idiot boxes, some sporting pony tails and ear-studs, some clad in uni-sex garb, some vociferous women in disgustingly uncivil figure-hugging jeans and revealing boxing shirts etc., what steps has the Minister-in-charge taken to stop these vulgarities and the ghastly murder of our culture, and to expose their ulterior motives, if any?

If one takes a good look at the crime index, and the increasing number of unsolved crimes, particularly burglaries, it will be patently clear that it is the public who require to be provided with firearms for self-defence.

After all, MPs are not an endangered species under threat of imminent extinction and therefore irreplaceable to be so well guarded. If they are brave enough to create commotions at city police stations, carry hand-grenades to threaten police officers, allegedly "assault" political giants whom everybody treated with awe and respect, and let their naughty sons assault and injure policemen on duty, they certainly should be able to take care of themselves without guns and goons. As a matter of fact, the government should withdraw the guards and revert them to their assigned duties.
Son of a Gun
Panadura