It's nice to see a person with common sense. If guns kill people, Then all of mine are malfunctioning. The thought of getting shot is the only thing that keeps criminals at bay.
Isn't it nice to know, That when seconds count, The police are just minuites away? If they respond at all. It has already been ruled by the SCOTUS, that police officers are only required to protect the interests of the city they serve and to enforce the laws. They have NO responsibility to protect you as a citizen.
I very much agree with you in this video. I, personally, will be getting guns for show and for home defense.
I also do not like the idea of only the government having weaponry such as guns. When you start disarming the citizens it only leads to worse abuses (most likely at least). Though an extreme example we can look at Nazi Germany.
Another note, for me it isn't about hunting. I do not like the whole idea of hunting, but it is for defense from criminals and possibly from the government.
i own several guns and i totally agree with your video. also crazypants88 has a very valid point. the average murder takes a few seconds, the average police response takes a few minutes, also the majority of armed responses by citizens are nonlethal and just having a gun is a good enough deterant of crime
The gun laws in my country are fucking ridiculous. After the immense problem of just getting the licencse, it has to be reavaluated once every 10 years.
Also just my favorite argument against gun control is that in order to enforce gun control you need guns. You aren't removing guns from society, you're just taking them away from one group of people and giving it to another.
We have an inalienable right to protect ourselves. How can we do that without the right to a firearm, when firearms exist, and is the #1 form of affective protection AND assault. Many women are at a disadvantage because they aren't physically built like a man. Take a knife fight between the average man and average woman, the man wins... Take a gun fight in the same situation, I wouldn't bet so much on the guy winning all of the sudden. Without firearms, you cannot protect yourself, simple.
The Violence in the US is for a large part due to our senseless prohibition revisited, statistics will verify this, 24 % increase in crime between 1920 and 1924, back then it was rum runners, and bootleggers, now days its cartels and gangs, but its easier to blame whats legal and create new (and destined to fail) laws then actually look at who is committing the violence and why. Yes, gun laws are destined to fail, because the ones who care about the laws aren't the ones breaking them already.
There is also the issue of having the right to self defence. Even though the government is supposed to have had that obligation abrogated to itself, it doesn't relinquish an individuals responsibility to do so when the need arises. Also, I don't think the Founding Fathers intended that there would be a permanent military established as is now the case. The developement of a Military Industrial Complex creates the equivalent of "War Inc". It's pretexts would serve as better tagets than citizens.
Agreed, about the military industrial complex, it raises ideas about what to do, when we HAVE TO HAVE a standing force... We could subsidize agriculture (directly) and use the income as well as the product to drop food prices, by increasing supply, and dishing it out to those who can't afford. This would severely limit the need for benefits to those who lived in welfare, by giving them a very expensive and most important thing. Food. Also, barrack type buildings for homeless. It'd be easy.
In the back woods too, we have bears cougars,and packs of canines. I wish some of the anti-gun people would live here WITHOUT guns, it wouldn't be for long one way or the other.
*facepalm* This debate is to some extend interesting, to some extend ridiculous. I guess its pretty normal in undemocratic societies such as the US, that people want to have a gun to have at least a balance to uncontrollable state power.
Here in germany, we don't need armed individuals to enforce their rights. We have other ways (judicial, population uprising). The elite is a minority. "[The people need] only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies" - Orwell.
Tyranny of the majority is tyranny. The elite are not the only minority that need protection form the majority. Democracies are tools of the majority and for thwarting the rights and freedoms of minorities. Without the means of self protection from the majority, minorities will be at risk of being subjected to the worst abuses imaginable. An armed population is a guarantee of a limit on government at the extreme limits of tyrannical control.
Your preassumption is that the majority consists of alienated inviduals with no humanistic ethics, who automatically switch to "barbarian ethic mode" ("worst abuses") when the circumstances (=being in a majority + the existence of an unarmed minority) allow it. In a society with lacks trust, and solidarity your viewpoint might be to some extend reasonable. But why not trying to make the society more socially civilized, but instead arming everyone? No offence, but thats a sign of weakness.
The majority always arm themselves against the minority. The more power they have the more emboldened to further their ideas and agenda they become.
"But why not trying to make the society more socially civilized"
... How do you make people?
I think people are civilized and worthy of trust right up until they have power over others. That is why I trust a bottom up society, and distrust a top down society. Weakness in my opinion is evident in feeling the need to control others.
I like in the UK. Here the gun laws are absurdly strict. I used to shoot smallbore rifles on a target range when I was a teenager, although I have never owned my own firearm. I grew up in the country so I knew a lot of people who kept sporting shotguns in their houses, but the use of a firearm for self defence is not accepted as a valid reason for owning them.
Without the threat of a mandatory 5 year prison term I think I would probably own a firearm for self defence, although for me personally as things currently stand it isn't worth the risk to carry one illegally. Ironically it is mainly the violent criminal gangs that are willing to take this risk LOL. Yep, prohibition really works, honest!
A gun dealer once told me, we don't need more gun control laws. We just need to enforce the ones we have! I believe in a CITIZENS right to have guns. If you are a convicted felon, have a bad mental history, or if you are here illegally, then no gun for you! I also think that law abiding citizens really don't have a use for armor piercing rounds and such, so restrictions on that might be a good thing.
Funny thing about enforcing gun laws... it requires guns....
Those gun control advocates should go live in the urban jungles and see what it's like to be disarmed in such places. I love how people not subject to the real dangerous effects of laws propose that they be forced upon those who are.
Yeah, I'm armed.
And assuming you don't have any mental or mood disorders, I'd feel just a little bit safer if you were too. :)
Great video! Thumbs up!
Glockwork9 10 months ago
@Glockwork9 Thanks friend. I fully support the right to own a gun. I just wish we had better (widespread) gun safety education.
kailabreece 10 months ago
It's nice to see a person with common sense. If guns kill people, Then all of mine are malfunctioning. The thought of getting shot is the only thing that keeps criminals at bay.
Isn't it nice to know, That when seconds count, The police are just minuites away? If they respond at all. It has already been ruled by the SCOTUS, that police officers are only required to protect the interests of the city they serve and to enforce the laws. They have NO responsibility to protect you as a citizen.
diginit3 1 year ago
what is the name of that piano piece in the background?
starsassy 2 years ago
Sorry for the late response...
Spanish Dance No. 5 by Granados
kailabreece 2 years ago
I very much agree with you in this video. I, personally, will be getting guns for show and for home defense.
I also do not like the idea of only the government having weaponry such as guns. When you start disarming the citizens it only leads to worse abuses (most likely at least). Though an extreme example we can look at Nazi Germany.
UnschoolingEagle 2 years ago
Another note, for me it isn't about hunting. I do not like the whole idea of hunting, but it is for defense from criminals and possibly from the government.
UnschoolingEagle 2 years ago
i own several guns and i totally agree with your video. also crazypants88 has a very valid point. the average murder takes a few seconds, the average police response takes a few minutes, also the majority of armed responses by citizens are nonlethal and just having a gun is a good enough deterant of crime
mustangkraft505 2 years ago
The gun laws in my country are fucking ridiculous. After the immense problem of just getting the licencse, it has to be reavaluated once every 10 years.
Also just my favorite argument against gun control is that in order to enforce gun control you need guns. You aren't removing guns from society, you're just taking them away from one group of people and giving it to another.
Anyway good video.
crazypants88 2 years ago
love your style
abba149 2 years ago
We have an inalienable right to protect ourselves. How can we do that without the right to a firearm, when firearms exist, and is the #1 form of affective protection AND assault. Many women are at a disadvantage because they aren't physically built like a man. Take a knife fight between the average man and average woman, the man wins... Take a gun fight in the same situation, I wouldn't bet so much on the guy winning all of the sudden. Without firearms, you cannot protect yourself, simple.
Clyaton 2 years ago
The Violence in the US is for a large part due to our senseless prohibition revisited, statistics will verify this, 24 % increase in crime between 1920 and 1924, back then it was rum runners, and bootleggers, now days its cartels and gangs, but its easier to blame whats legal and create new (and destined to fail) laws then actually look at who is committing the violence and why. Yes, gun laws are destined to fail, because the ones who care about the laws aren't the ones breaking them already.
vampyres32 2 years ago
Great comment.
"the ones who care about the laws aren't the ones breaking them..."
kailabreece 2 years ago
Great job!
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD
Do you know why?
texasc4 2 years ago
Why? :)
kailabreece 2 years ago
Everyone has a gun!
texasc4 2 years ago
There is also the issue of having the right to self defence. Even though the government is supposed to have had that obligation abrogated to itself, it doesn't relinquish an individuals responsibility to do so when the need arises. Also, I don't think the Founding Fathers intended that there would be a permanent military established as is now the case. The developement of a Military Industrial Complex creates the equivalent of "War Inc". It's pretexts would serve as better tagets than citizens.
RichardRoy2 2 years ago
Agreed, about the military industrial complex, it raises ideas about what to do, when we HAVE TO HAVE a standing force... We could subsidize agriculture (directly) and use the income as well as the product to drop food prices, by increasing supply, and dishing it out to those who can't afford. This would severely limit the need for benefits to those who lived in welfare, by giving them a very expensive and most important thing. Food. Also, barrack type buildings for homeless. It'd be easy.
Clyaton 2 years ago
Your awsome lots of great points. America need more people like you.
"When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns" Copy and paste to prove our point.
Awsome videos. Wonderful points proven.
GreenFire7676 2 years ago
"When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns" Copy and paste to prove our point.
GreenFire7676 2 years ago
In the back woods too, we have bears cougars,and packs of canines. I wish some of the anti-gun people would live here WITHOUT guns, it wouldn't be for long one way or the other.
daddyg321 2 years ago
*facepalm* This debate is to some extend interesting, to some extend ridiculous. I guess its pretty normal in undemocratic societies such as the US, that people want to have a gun to have at least a balance to uncontrollable state power.
Here in germany, we don't need armed individuals to enforce their rights. We have other ways (judicial, population uprising). The elite is a minority. "[The people need] only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies" - Orwell.
Staubdumm 2 years ago
Good comments friend. My family is from Frankfurt.
kailabreece 2 years ago
Tyranny of the majority is tyranny. The elite are not the only minority that need protection form the majority. Democracies are tools of the majority and for thwarting the rights and freedoms of minorities. Without the means of self protection from the majority, minorities will be at risk of being subjected to the worst abuses imaginable. An armed population is a guarantee of a limit on government at the extreme limits of tyrannical control.
stratvic 2 years ago
Your preassumption is that the majority consists of alienated inviduals with no humanistic ethics, who automatically switch to "barbarian ethic mode" ("worst abuses") when the circumstances (=being in a majority + the existence of an unarmed minority) allow it. In a society with lacks trust, and solidarity your viewpoint might be to some extend reasonable. But why not trying to make the society more socially civilized, but instead arming everyone? No offence, but thats a sign of weakness.
Staubdumm 2 years ago
The majority always arm themselves against the minority. The more power they have the more emboldened to further their ideas and agenda they become.
"But why not trying to make the society more socially civilized"
... How do you make people?
I think people are civilized and worthy of trust right up until they have power over others. That is why I trust a bottom up society, and distrust a top down society. Weakness in my opinion is evident in feeling the need to control others.
stratvic 2 years ago
Well Said!
promoatlking 2 years ago
Gun Control: Using both hands on the fire arm.
OlGreyWolf58 2 years ago 3
I like in the UK. Here the gun laws are absurdly strict. I used to shoot smallbore rifles on a target range when I was a teenager, although I have never owned my own firearm. I grew up in the country so I knew a lot of people who kept sporting shotguns in their houses, but the use of a firearm for self defence is not accepted as a valid reason for owning them.
yeahwotevaman 2 years ago
Without the threat of a mandatory 5 year prison term I think I would probably own a firearm for self defence, although for me personally as things currently stand it isn't worth the risk to carry one illegally. Ironically it is mainly the violent criminal gangs that are willing to take this risk LOL. Yep, prohibition really works, honest!
yeahwotevaman 2 years ago
I totally agree. But merely 2 or 3 years ago I would've said that guns's only purpose is to kill people and they should be forbidden.
Then I realized that making something illegal doesn't make it disappear, it merely makes it less accessible for people who don't want trouble.
Furthermore, if a police officer needs a gun to protect him/herself, so do everyone else.
If we just got rid of drug laws, crime rates would drop enormously, and there would be almost no gangs.
NoCryingNowYes 2 years ago 4
A gun dealer once told me, we don't need more gun control laws. We just need to enforce the ones we have! I believe in a CITIZENS right to have guns. If you are a convicted felon, have a bad mental history, or if you are here illegally, then no gun for you! I also think that law abiding citizens really don't have a use for armor piercing rounds and such, so restrictions on that might be a good thing.
jerami101 2 years ago
Funny thing about enforcing gun laws... it requires guns....
Those gun control advocates should go live in the urban jungles and see what it's like to be disarmed in such places. I love how people not subject to the real dangerous effects of laws propose that they be forced upon those who are.
Yeah, I'm armed.
And assuming you don't have any mental or mood disorders, I'd feel just a little bit safer if you were too. :)
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago 2