 Hey there friends, thanks for checking in. Just yesterday the Supreme Court ruled that the people of New York no longer need to beg and ask permission to carry a firearm. This is better debate that has been going on for years and years and years. Should the government take the lead role in stating who should or who should not carry a firearm? It falls under just cause, where you have to go in front of a board and explain to them why you need to carry a firearm and if they say no, then that's the answer. You don't get to carry a firearm legally. Meanwhile, criminals are carrying firearms, they are committing crime with firearms every day. There's yet to have a plan of disarming criminals, but they have no problem disarming their own citizens, the law abiding citizens. They want to defund the police, disarm the citizens and let the criminals have their way. You have been seeing that throughout this country. Crime has skyrocketed. It's like out of control. In New York is the perfect example of a primarily unarmed society with victims every day at the hands of criminals. It's really bad and it's happening throughout the country. Crime has skyrocketed. Why is that? Well, the states that have unarmed people are victims or victims of criminals and the Supreme Court said not any longer. Now it falls under a well-regulated militia. If you look at the Second Amendment, it states a well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. And they always say, well, the militia is the military. The militia is a well-organized, government-organized program. And the Supreme Court has upheld time and time again for many years that the militia is us. So when I hear that, I just laugh to myself because they're trying to make up something, twist and turn the Second Amendment. They always want to twist and turn it and say, well, they had muskets back then. Let's go back to muskets. If you can find a way for the criminals to use muskets, which you can't, then maybe that's something we could talk about. But until then, we have the right to keep and bear arms. And that shall not be infringed and the Supreme Court upheld that yesterday. That's a huge victory for the Second Amendment. And what do we see? We see the fallout. All these people are whining, saying, well, now we're going to have more guns and not less. Yes, that's what we want. And armed society is a polite society. But in their eyes, more guns, not less, means more crime. And when you live in an actual free state where you don't have to beg the government, Michigan is a shall issue state. When you live in a state that has armed citizens, you are safer because of their presence. If some madman wants to shoot up a place, it's always when that second gun shows up that crime decrease or is eliminated or even prevented in many cases. Now, if you look at when Obama got in there, there was a huge surge of firearm purchases left in all over the place. We think it was a lot in the last couple of years and it was, but it was just as heavy back then when Obama got in there. And people were also lining up to get their CCW permits. In Michigan, we call it a CPL, concealed pistol license. And they were getting trained. They were practicing. They were buying ammo. They were figuring out what the best gun is for them. And they started carrying. Not just in Michigan, but throughout the entire country. And what do we see? We saw crime decrease. We saw crime decrease. Even though these people were out there saying, oh, it's going to be like the wild, wild West. These people are going to just be randomly shooting other people. They don't have the training. It doesn't state in the Second Amendment that you have to have a specific amount of training. I know a lot of states require that. Michigan is one of them. But it doesn't say that. Should it happen? Yes, absolutely. I say that all the time. But the people have a right to protect themselves. We should not fall victims of criminals who did not take any training, by the way, which is basically what they're advocating for. You know, hey, let's just call the police. Meanwhile, someone's kicking in your door at 3 a.m. They don't have any training. So basically, the Supreme Court says, we need to level the playing field here. We need to tell the people, hey, just cause is gone. You no longer have to beg for it. And that is a good thing. That is a victory for the Second Amendment. We see all this other stuff going on that is setting us back. But that's not what this video is about. This is about the Supreme Court saying, you shouldn't have to beg the government for permission to carry a firearm. It's a win for the Second Amendment. And it's going to make its way through other states as well. Now that this has, this ruling has been decided by the Supreme Court. And I'm certainly in favor of it. When I am out and about, I want more armed people. So yes, I want more guns. I don't want muskets. I want guns that could get the job done if some bad guy wants to hurt me or my family. And I will gladly take on that responsibility myself because I've been carrying it every day for a number of years. And I guarantee you, everybody within my surroundings is safer because of it. And I think that same effect is going to take place in New York because that is a dangerous place to be. And I am pretty confident that with more people carrying, it will become a safer place, quite the opposite of what these anti-gunners are telling you. If you like videos like this, please subscribe and share. I always appreciate thumbs up button. Thanks for watching and you guys be safe.