Tucker Carlson: I'll disarm when Bloomberg stops surrounding himself with armed security

Fox News' Tucker Carlson debated the need for firearms with gun control activist and Guns Down America's senior policy adviser Mark Glaze on Tuesday night. The two faced off over one major point of contention for gun owners: gun control leader Michael Bloomberg surrounding himself with armed security.

The declaration

Carlson asked Glaze why Bloomberg should have the protection of a firearm but the average American cannot.

"I wonder, if guns are so bad — and people often say this but I've never gotten a real answer — why does Mike Bloomberg have armed bodyguards?" Carlson asked Glaze.

"I don't get it. If I run a bodega in the Bronx, I don't get to carry a gun. I'm in a lot of danger. Mike Bloomberg doesn't think I should have a gun, doesn't think I should be trusted," Carlson explained. "And yet he runs around — because he's a billionaire — with all of these guys with automatic weapons. Why is that fair for him but not for the bodega guy?"

Glaze responded: "That's what he's protecting himself against. The bad guys with guns."

"What about the bodega owner?" Carlson retorted. "He's not allowed to have a gun but Mike Bloomberg is because his life is more valuable? I don't think it's more valuable."

"I think people like Mike Bloomberg, like you, might be targets because you're in the public eye," Glaze said.

"Mike Bloomberg is a total hypocrite," Carlson replied. "If guns are so bad, then why does he surround himself with them? And again, people at real risk — delivery men — can't have them."

According to Glaze, the solution to the problem is to "go upstream and make sure the bad guys can't get guns."

"When Mike Bloomberg disarms, I'll be next. I promise," Carlson replied.

Gun control hypocrisy

It's hypocritical for celebrity gun control advocates like Michael Bloomberg to say the average American should have to walk around unarmed. If the world we live in is so dangerous that some people need protection, then it's dangerous enough for all people to need protection. There's no cherry picking whose life is more important or valuable.

It's easy for people like Bloomberg to advocate for fewer guns in America when they don't arm themselves but instead rely on others to protect them.

The very object Bloomberg works to outlaw is the very object that he relies on to save his life.