Robert A. Levy discusses Gun Control Laws

[RainMaker8113]

An armed society is a civil society

[bladeslayer1225]

Want to know something funny? The state of Wisconsin had around 60-70 thousand hunters this year. (Correct me if I'm wrong please) That is larger than the armies of France, and Germany combined. Guess how many people were killed due to hunting related incidents. Zero!! We are responsible with fire arms, and the combined population of civilians with guns is a big ass force. So the only reason that I can see for gun control is people control. We won't be able to fight back injustice.

[TlGBC]

robert levy is HOTT!!

[konkov123]

@TlGBC he's poopy at best just like US gun laws

[konkov123]

@TlGBC he's poopy at best just like US gun laws

[dovii4ever]

Typical Anti-gun loon The self defence numbers have not been discreadited they have only been discredited by the Anti-gun forces such as the Brady campeign hell bent on robbing Americans of their second amendment freedom

[Dahlsson8]

A cuestion:

"A disarmed man, his life is woth bullet"

English in not my native language. I want to know if the quote(is write by myself) is grammar correctly. thanks.

[Dahlsson8]

worth

[bakathirteen]

I'm sure what you're trying to say is "a disarmed mans life is only worth one bullet" also the first word is "question".

[bladeslayer1225]

@Dahlsson8 A disarmed man's, life is worth a bullet.

It's a good saying.

[neemguy81]

Every one of these mass shootings occured in 'gun free zones' where the asailants did not have the fear of being taken out by the person behind or around them. Armed civilians would have stopped these murders before more lives were lost.

[libertarianjury]

Daniel Webster trusts his government. As such, he is a moron. Government perpetrates the vast majority of all violence, but only once they have been given too much power. Let's see, governments that prohibited minorities (not just racial minorities, mind you) from owning guns, prior to mass murdering them: Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Hutu-controlled Rwanda, etc... The first thing any dictatorship does is "crack down on undesirables owning guns". And in the USA it's no different.

[ancjr]

I don't understand why there is such outrage over a Constitutionally enumerated right. Banning, or at least heavily regulating automobiles (background checks, waiting periods, manufacturer liability for accidents, automobiles confiscated if owner is unfit) which kill far greater numbers of people. This would seem a more effective practice if saving lives were the true goal.

[pjicleanair420]

address these crazy fucks that are doing the crime..if they stabbed everyone would you outlaw knives???

[pjicleanair420]

wanna save lives???? outlaw ciggerettes, and if someone is caught drinking and driving..automatic 10 year ban on their liscenses

[tlhunter50]

Want to save lives then what about drugs, drunk drivers or medical malpractice?????

[Americaisgreat123]

This gentlemen from the CATO institute did a fabulous job at smoking the liberal guest and moderator.

Laws against guns are like laws against drugs, they do not work. The law abiding citizens follow these laws while the killers apparently don't realize that there are gun free zones and illegal firearms.

For a great documentary on gun rights in America, see Larry Elder's movie, "Michael and Me."

[cbmtrx]

I don't know what debate you just watched but Mr Hopkins' arguments seemed pretty lucid to me. I don't see the suggestion being made for an outright ban on hand guns, just more enforcement--which I think is totally unrealistic.

Semi-automatic weapons (that are modifiable) have pointedly NOTHING to do with self-defense.

And there is no mention made here of all the kids killed each year by loaded hand guns stored in their homes.

Crazy people don't go on killing sprees armed with soft fruit.

[dsivori]

All the kids killed by handguns in the home? Do you even know how many that is? More people are struck by lightning. In terms of policy you'd save more lives banning bicycles.

[Americaisgreat123]

Larry Elder addresses all your arguments in his movie "Michael and Me." The amount of lives saved by guns far outweigh the number of accidental deaths. What enforcement is not being done?

From the looks of it, you are not a gun owner. How much do you know about guns? Police carry semi-automatic handguns. The only kind that aren't, are revolvers with hammers.

Does gun control equal decreased gun violence?

You seem to envision a utopia where there are no evil guns. Get real buddy, wake up.

[hapspir]

"Semi-automatic weapons (that are modifiable) have pointedly NOTHING to do with self-defense."

If a man points a semiautomatic firearm at a violent attacker and pulls the trigger, that's self defense, is it not? Your comment is baffling to me. Am I missing something?

[cbmtrx]

What B.S. answer is this. So if I aim a regular gun (and not a semi-automatic one) at an intruder he's less likely to run away screaming?

Oh shut up.

[hapspir]

"What B.S. answer is this."

Allow me to clarify. The vast majority of civilian firearms in the world are semi-automatic. They are regular guns. Automatic weapons that fire multiple shots with a single trigger pull are generally restricted to military and police. Semi-automatics are ideal for self defense because they are easier to control when greater care is needed in the placement of your shots. I think this was a simple misunderstanding of terminology.

[jubeigh13]

The funny thing being, that most, if not all guns are in some way modifiable. I'm going to assume that you are talking about making a semi-automatic weapon fully automatic. Well that would be fine in dandy, if it were not so rare and nearly a non-existent factor, or the fact that it usually takes a skilled armorer, certain parts, and a good knowledge of firearm mechanics to make that conversion, plus the penalty of a felony charge by doing such.

[cbmtrx]

"In some way modifiable" does NOT mean automatic--which is the point here. And I hardly think felony charges for altering a weapon is on these people's minds when they do it.

But this STILL dodges the question: People ARE modifying these guns, so I ask again: Why are semi-automatic guns even needed? What are people shooting at that they need this type of weaponry??

A real life Lord Of The Flies in here...

[jubeigh13]

The problem is that that those people who are modifying those weapons, are doing them in extremely small numbers. You might have 1% of all firearm crime represented by fully automatic weapons that were converted from legal ones. The other option is a revolver, which is limited in calibers, number of shots, and to a certain extent reliability. I'm just guessing that you don't really know what you're talking about.

[braden2005]

My goal is not to shoot the bad guy. My goal is to make sure the bad guy goes after my unarmed neighbor.

[mmagar5754]

It's all in the ears, webster can't hear the truth . . . Levy is all ears; like Ross Perot! In the UK an increase in gun control and reduction in publicly held guns, actually increased crime b/c criminals know that you don't have a gun!

[jo232409]

DAMN!!! LEVY PWND DAT B!TCH!

[a4finger]

most ppl who hate guns haven't come to that conclusion after thorough research and carefull analysis but rather because of fear and other equally dangerous emotions

[ls1z28chris]

I love it when leftists argue against the 2nd Amendment on a "public safety" basis.  They sound just like the Bush administration when they were arguing to eliminate due process and justify torture. So much for those cries of "restoring the Constitution..."

[USAleX]

That guy's face creeps me out...kinda looks like a robot, hmm

[whoo689]

Higher crime rates are just one of the things we have to accept with guns' existence. Try as we might, we cannot regulate our way out of high crime. Rudy Giuliani certainly didn't do that when he made NYC the safest big city in the country.

And don't we already have over 20,000 gun laws on the books?? What else can we possibly try that hasn't already been legislated?

[whoo689]

I just can't accept the claim that banning or restricting legal guns would do much to bring down murder rates. I mean, there are PLENTY of other weapons people can use. Sure, knives require a closer range, but if you REALLY wanna kill someone, you will be able to do it if you're nearby and have a weapon. The fact that you don't have a gun will be irrelevant. The only way guns could reduce murder rates is for things like drive-by shootings, school shootings, and other long-distance shots.

[whoo689]

Err, I mean "no guns" in my last sentence.

[whoo689]

Extreme gun control folks are pansies, if you ask me. Look, we're gonna have high crime and murder rates REGARDLESS of whether or not we heavily restrict gun ownership. There is NO correlation between gun ownership and murder rates. It has to do with a country's culture and society. Nations in Europe or Asia that have much lower murder rates do not have them simply because access to legal firearms is restricted; they're just not as prone to murder. It's common sense.

[whoo689]

You guys are getting plenty of media attention these days, eh? Nice! I guess Obama is the perfect catalyst for anti-big-gov't sentiment and to wake people up.

[thisisrealyo]

Why people go the extents of 'mass killings' are the real issues here, not whether or not a gun should be legal in the first place.

It's the same idea as prohibition or anything that really cannot be legislated to a point of a 'fix', for it will will inevitably result in actions continuing independent of a law to forbid it for the reason that it is an immense form of oppression. 2nd amendment.

Going to the extent of killing a person is the problem. Masking a problem by legislation is silly.

[MS1719ms]

Thank you Mr. Levy!

[HarryNRubin]

I liked it, but Mr. Levy once said that gun laws are sometimes necessary, and I don't believe they ever are...

[sniper6081]

Here's a thought, end the drug prohibition and gun violence will plummet.

[MagnusIan]

EXACTLY. Just like what happened with the end to the prohibition of alcohol.

[Elasaltaculos]

Because my main concern when being shot at is whether the assailant's trigger finger gets tired from repeatedly pulling the trigger or not.

I never saw why it mattered whether a weapon was automatic or not when the target had no means to return fire.

[CountArtha]

Heh-heh - his name was Daniel Webster.

And Mr. Levy was quick to point out the slant of that report before he came on.

[FlailingJunk]

I love people whose words are carefully chosen.

[Kenmoron]

nice informative interview. was a pleasure to watch.

[Sharpshooterjoe]

both sides seem logical, im all for background checks and preventing violent or mentally unstable people from having guns, but the truth is, either you completly get rid of all the guns in the world or you learn to deal with gun violence, banning weapons solves nothing look at Australia who have ban's and almost every weapon yet theres a black market of smuggled guns from outside the country, if they (an island) cant ban guns 100%, how would we?

[harryogre]

Well said, Mr. Levy.

You walked into a clear setup and still made your case.

The Left, as usual, place their ideas on empty hope while ignoring all hard data.

Same with The Right on the Drug War.

[phunNJ]

great interview Mr. Levy