Salon writer Cara Michelle Smith, however, has a big problem with the new app. More than one, actually. As you might expect, Smith takes issue with anything that "pumps guns into settings and situations that didn’t previously involve firearms". But she also objects to an app that caters to the security concerns of the 1%. 

Rising demand for humans to arm themselves against one another? It’s a tough data point in the ever-continuing “How’s society going?” conversation. Protector’s services start at $200 an hour — with a required a five-hour minimum — and like all good gig economy offerings, users can customize their order.  

A few toggles include selecting their Protector’s dress code as either business formal, business casual or something called “tactical casual,” which, to this writer, conjures the image of one Letty Ortiz in the “Fast & Furious” franchise carrying a hammer in her cargo pants (photo linked for your viewing ease). After selecting their bodyguards’ outfits, users can pick between a Cadillac Escalade or a Chevy Suburban — both of which have room for five “Protectees,” the app notes as you make a reservation. From there, your personal security detail can ferry you around town, to any number of errands, book signings, book burnings or, presumably, wherever you’d like to bring a few armed beefcakes. 

Smith accuses Protector's founder and CEO Nick Sarath of exploiting "the very real (and very profitable) fears among the ultra-wealthy", which may very well be the case. Though the app has been around for more than a year, Sarath was quick to promote the service after the murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson last December.  

While it might be somewhat untoward to tie in Thompson's death to the private security app, it's not much different than gun control groups immediately seizing on Thompson's murder to demand bans on "ghost guns" and other anti-2A measures. But Smith's distaste goes beyond Sarath's suggestion that using his service can spare other CEO's from being assassinated. She really doesn't like Sarath's marketing of private security as... well, something cool. 

Nikita Bier, a tech founder who said he advised Protector, called the app “Uber with guns” in a post on X, and offered a way for users (read: men) to use the app in a way that doesn’t exactly scream, “The services offered are of grave seriousness and importance, and to anybody out there with more money than they know what to do with, you should never use Protector to bring out some hired goons as a flashy stunt or gimmick.” 

“If you have a hot date this weekend, pick her up in a Protector,” Bier wrote on X, in a post that generated much of the existing buzz around Protector’s launch. (Interestingly, on his LinkedIn, Sarath notes that he was “recruited by Nikita Bier” when he joined Meta in 2019.) 

In its own bid to generate buzz around its launch, Protector paid two young influencers, Josie Francis and Nicole Agne, both 29, to document their time being chauffeured around New York Fashion Week by a pair of Protectors. (Cut to: mirror selfies of two thin women flanked by hulking beefcakes, etc.)

Francis and Agne told The New York Post that “as two girls in their twenties … we’ve never felt safer in the city.” 

“Honestly, we’re already having withdrawals,” they told the Post in a statement. But with all the respect in the world to these influencers, how does their experience have anything to do with high-net-worth individuals fearing a public execution from a disgruntled poor? 

Not much, obviously. But that's the whole point. Sarath isn't just pitching Protector as a service for high-powered and deep-pocketed CEOs and C-suite executives. He wants anyone with the money to pay for a private security detail to see themselves as potential customers, and frankly, there's nothing wrong with that. 

I do have a suggestion for Smith, however, if she's really concerned about the disparity in protection between the super rich and the "disgruntled poor": give up her support for gun control laws that impact the working class and those Americans struggling to get by. If she's so upset by Protector charging $1000 for a five-hour security detail, why isn't she equally incensed by New York City charging almost that much for someone to obtain a concealed carry license so they can protect themselves? If it bothers her to no end that the uber-rich can pull up an app and have a security team in place almost immediately, then why isn't she ticked off about the regular Joes and Janes who are forced to wait more than a year to have their permit applications approved in places like New York City and Los Angeles? 

We know why. Smith takes issue with anyone being able to carry a gun. As much as that might disgust her, it's still a right guaranteed and protected by the Constitution, and the best way to put the 99% on roughly the same footing as the 1% when it comes to personal safety is to ensure that We the People don't face insurmountable barriers or are priced out of exercising our Second Amendment rights. The answer isn't shutting down Protector or trying to shame its CEO. It's getting rid of all of the gun control laws that block average, everyday Americans from protecting themselves and those around them.