 Today we're going to talk about Joe Biden, the most popularly elected president in United States history, who can't seem to get anybody to like his YouTube videos. Hey, everybody, Dylan Schumacher, Citadel Defense. So last night, the president gave his state of the union for his first 100 days in office, and he said this. I don't want to become confrontation, but we need more Senate Republicans to join the overall majority of Democrat colleagues and close the loopholes required in background check purchases of guns. We need a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and don't tell me it can't be done. We did it before, and it worked. Talk to the most responsible gun owners and hunters. They'll tell you there's no possible justification for having 100 rounds in a weapon. What do you think, dear wearing Kevlar vests? Now there is quite a bit there to unpack in 30 seconds of audio, so I made a list. The first thing he says is I don't want to be confrontational, and then goes on to make one of the most controversial statements in the nation, which I just thought was ironic. Then he talks about he wants to close the loophole. Now you got to be careful here because he's going to conflate a lot of different terms to try to get you to believe what he believes. Now the next thing he says here is he wants to close the loophole. What he's talking about there is the ability for private citizens to sell their private property, in this case firearms, to other private citizens without a background check. He's saying we need to close that loophole. I would argue that is not a loophole, rather it is just allowing private citizens to do with their property what they will. And if I were to know that you were a felon, then I still can't sell my gun to you, that would still be illegal. Then he goes on of course to call for the ban of assault weapons. What are assault weapons? Well, you know, who really knows. Basically the scary guns, right, is what he really wants to talk about. The big AR-15s and AKs and the scary guns. Those are what he's going to call assault weapons. And bam, high capacity magazines. Now, we're going to come back to that because what exactly does he mean by high capacity magazines? He goes on to say, we did it before and it worked. First of all, it didn't work. Yes, they did do it before. Between 1994 and 2004, there was a 10-year assault weapons ban in this country that sunsetted in 2004. And since then, gun culture is a very, very different place. There are over 100 million gun owners in America. There are probably somewhere over 400 million guns, give or take. That's a third of the country. At the minimum owns a gun of some sort or another, right? So gun culture is a lot, lot bigger. So he's like, we can get it done. Yeah, maybe. And when he says that it worked, what they'll do is they'll show you this fancy chart and they'll show you this chart that says, hey, between, you know, when the assault weapons ban was in place, crime went like this. It went down, right? What they won't then show you is the other half of the chart where crime continues to go down after the assault weapons ban is lifted. So don't tell me that it worked. The very first school shooting that I remember in my life was Columbine. Columbine happened in the middle of the assault weapons ban. So again, don't tell me that it worked because what kind of weapons did they use that school shooting? Oh yeah, the banned ones. So go on to say, next thing he talks about is most responsible gun owners and hunters. Now, there's a couple of things here. First of all, the Democrats left, they're always going to say most. And most people agree with me. 95% of people agree that we need background checks. Most gun owners agree. What they're trying to do, one, they're lying. Two, what they're trying to do is get you to believe the lie that most people agree with them. Oh, most people agree with me. So if you don't agree with me, there's something wrong with you. That's the kind of very subtle bullying and cajoling that they're trying to accomplish there when they say things like, most gun owners and hunters agree with me. And like I said, no, most gun owners don't agree with you. Most gun owners belong to some organization like the NRA or the Firearms Policy Coalition or the Gun Owners of America or whatever that's saying, no, we don't want any of the things that you're proposing. The vast majority of gun owners do not agree with you. But you know that and that's why you have to lie to try to convince us to agree with you. He's gonna go on to conflate gun owners and hunters. He's gonna say, most gun owners and hunters, he's conflating them like they're one thing because what he wants to get you to believe is that the only legitimate reason, the only legitimate purpose for owning guns is hunting. He just wants you to think all Americans that own guns own them for hunting. That's why they own guns. That's the thing they've been pushing for a long time in this country. But the fact is the Second Amendment and gun ownership in general has nothing to do with hunting. That's not why the Second Amendment was created at all. It was created to defend this nation from tyrants, foreign and domestic, right? So that's why we have guns. Guns are primarily here for a martial purpose. They are not here for a hunting purpose. Yes, that's a secondary tertiary use of firearms and that's fine if you wanna hunt, knock yourself out, God bless it. But that's not the point. That's not the point of why we own guns. That's not the point of the Second Amendment. But he wants to conflate that and he's gonna try to whittle it down to that because then it gives him room to say what he says next which is just outrageous. That's why he'll go on to say there's no possible justification. Well, yes, there is a justification but we're gonna get to that in a second. There's no possible justification for owning 100 rounds in a rifle because you're only using that rifle for hunting. That's the argument he's making, which isn't true. But he's saying, oh, if you're gonna hunt, you don't need 100 rounds. What does anybody need 100 rounds for? We need to get rid of those. That's the other interesting thing here is when he talks about his ban on high capacity magazines, the example that he then references is 100 round magazine, which do exist for like ARs and some AKs. As far as I know, they don't even function that well. But he's saying, okay, no one needs 100 rounds to go hunting. But what he's saying when he wants to ban high capacity magazines is 10 rounds, anything above 10 rounds. So you don't hear him say, well, no one needs to carry 15 rounds in their pistol like the police officers do, right? If police are willing to give up their high capacity magazines in their pistols, then maybe we can talk. But he's standing in a building guarded by people with high capacity magazines that he doesn't think you and I should be allowed to own. The secret service agents that followed him in that door and are gonna follow him out have high capacity magazines. But that's not the example he uses. See, he bates you with 100 rounds. He says, oh, it's gonna be 100 rounds, we gotta get rid of that. But then when the ban actually comes, it's just over 10 rounds. So he's lying, he's manipulating, and he's purposely trying to confuse you and conflate issues so that you say, oh, well, that sounds reasonable. Guns are about hunting, so we don't need 100 rounds to hunt deer and deer aren't wearing body armor, so I guess it's okay. The other thing about that body armor comment, rifle rounds punched through Kevlar, Joe Biden. I know you don't know that because you're an idiot. However, a deer wearing Kevlar vests would have nothing to do with it. A 30 at six round would still punch right through that. I know that's taken me several minutes to break down because there was so much idiocy and lies and just outright stupidity in 30 seconds. It really is impressive. You really just got a marvel at it. Do brave deeds and endure.