The saying, “nothing is truly ‘free” applies to our Constitution just like everything else – although some argue against that. With these freedoms that we have, come people who will always try to abuse them. The 2nd Amendment isn’t the only one. Look at the 1st Amendment: We have Nazi’s freely roaming the streets of the US and they can have their Nazi Germany flag waving as they throw up a “sieg heil,” and there is nothing any of us can do about it. Anything Nazi related is completely banned in Germany (understandably), but here, Nazi’s are free to do as they please because they are still protected under the 1st Amendment. Same with terrorist groups like Antifa, who wear shirts with Communist dictators like Che Guevara and Fidel Castro, who are responsible for the deaths of millions of people and ran extremely oppressive Communist dictatorships. All the while waving communist flags at their rallies. The first Amendment grants us the freedom of speech, among many other rights, but people will abuse that freedom that is given to them. Should we then go restricting the 1st Amendment because some people abuse it? Same goes for the 2nd Amendment. We have this awesome freedom to own different kinds of firearms and other kinds of weapons. So naturally, people will go off an abuse that right. But, because there will be some people who abuse the right, does not mean everyone else should lose it.
Here are some more stories where you can see an unnecessary twist to go after Republicans, gun-owners, and anyone else who doesn’t think exactly the way they do.
- Interestingly enough, The Young Turks never once mentioned anything about incidents like what you see to the right. It’s amazing how only certain stories and sides get covered by them (on any topic). It’s not officially a TYT story until they blame all Republicans or all gun owners for something (but seriously). As you saw in other parts, they can be pretty desperate sometimes. Just ignore this woman who had to move because people were posting her address, phone number, making death threats, rape threats, and trying to go after her. But she’s a “gun-nut” and evil Republican so we can sweep this under the rug, right TYT?
- VICE isn’t always bad. It’s either some SJW telling people to do more drugs or have sex with random people, or something to actually help. This post was nothing more than them blowing off everything Republicans had to say. Some things I’ve never even heard before. Others were actual logical arguments, but they didn’t like it, so they just said, “That’s dumb. I’m right, your wrong. Bye.” And that was their counter argument.
- I always love when people in other random countries, who have never stepped foot in America, tell me what life in America is actually like. Are we supposed to take what other countries think of us when making legislation? Some think so. Sorry, but some cartoonist from a super anti-gun country who has been taught nothing other than, “guns are the most evil things in the world and America is basically the wild west!” their whole life, doesn’t get a say in what we should do here in the US.
- An example of, “He owned a gun, therefore he is a Republican” mindset. Rumors are he was a Democrat and seen at Democratic rallies, but nothing has been confirmed yet. God help whoever goes to the view for anything other than a cheap laugh at the world’s most over-payed echo chamber.
- NBC showing they can’t even do a basic report without screwing up the type of rifle the man is shooting. Totally different rifle, caliber, operating system, style, look, and everything. These are the people that others go to for “reliable” news about the topic of guns, though…
- More identity politics! Blame all our problems on white men – Republicans and NRA members specifically.
- A MASSIVELY misleading headline. The guy actually didn’t debunk anything at all. He said that concealed carriers couldn’t do anything in the Vegas shooting and that had his security guys grabbed their weapons, the police would think they were the shooters. Ok, first, concealed carry courses teach you to get out alive before trying to stay and fight – especially if you have your family with you. In a mass chaos situation of 22,000 people at night time, you get out of the way and behind cover. Where would these gun owners go running to when no one knew where the shooter was anyway? Secondly, why would a concealed carrier draw their gun and join in a firefight, when not only the rest of their family is probably with them, but they are completely surrounded by police officers already on scene? If police are already there, why get in the way? These aren’t even things that people do, yet because he mentioned it and is a celebrity, the Democrats who are overly desperate for ammo for their side of the argument, clang to this like their lives depended on it and never once stopped to play devils advocate.
- The motive was obvious from the very beginning. It was a Democrat looking to shoot up some Republican politicians because too many people are still overly bitter over this last election. The guy literally walked up and asked if it was Democrats or Republicans playing on the field, then opened fire when he got the answer he was hoping for. This also in an example of a couple earlier points about who actually commits the most mass-shootings.
- We already covered this, so I won’t beat a dead horse. Unfortunately, without anyone there to play devil’s advocate or fight for the other side. All the reporters just bounce the same views off each other continuously, then confirm how perfect each others views are. If these random anti-gun reporters don’t understand it, then there is obviously no logic to it. At least, that’s how they act in these situations.
- You can always tell when the media is desperate for a headline and story. Even after a mass shooting, Slate needed their big story to be nothing but complaining that more right-sided sources came up during a Youtube search than left-sided. As you can see, they also implied that just because they are right-sided sources, means that they are all questionable. While that may be the case for some of those, keep in mind this is coming from Slate…
- Shootings are getting categorized now to make them all seem as worse as possible. “This is the worst mass shooting in history,” “This is the worst mass shooting at a music concert,” “This is the worst mass shooting at a church,” “This is the worst mass shooting at a night club.” It really helps get that fear factor out there. Sadly, as you read through the comments, many were buying into it and taking the bait.
- Breaking news: Three guns is now considered a, “small arsenal.” The wording they choose for these titles and headlines are so stretched for their agenda, it’s crazy. We saw them calling for a two gun limit (and only very specific ones). But go just a single gun over and now you have an arsenal.
- Texas actually does regulate them…because it’s federal law. The only way someone who isn’t allowed to have one can get one is if, 1) the people in charge of inputting people’s bad history into the system so it comes up on background checks, mess up (which is what happened here). 2) a straw sale where someone buys it for someone else, which by the way, is already completely illegal. So if the laws regarding doing that and going to prison with hefty fines didn’t keep them from selling it off like that, then how does stacking more laws on top help that? Or, 3) a basic private sale which we already covered in Part 9, has people doing background checks for anyway.
- Yes. You read that right. Apparently, you can now break the law with a firearm in whichever way suits you best, and still not be labeled a criminal. The title point was reworded after some backlash. But the point stands that, any and all bias and political standing aside, that was one of the worst written articles I have ever seen in politics in general. In the first point, she used VICE as her source. That author lets her bias cloud her better judgement. So many of her argumentative points were so vague, weak, and lacking any original though at all, that she should be glad it was a blog and not a live debate.
- Once again, the oh so reliable media strikes again with not even being able to list common rounds correctly.
- Too anti-gun for her own good. People like this really need to get out more and get some fresh air, maybe even at a shooting range!
- “Novice shots killing at 1000m.” “Killing has become too easy” See the big narrative added in? A new electronic scope comes out and they make it all about killing people. Because people don’t use scopes for target shooting, competition shooting, or hunting, right? They have to make everything seem as evil as possible.
Can we also talk about how far our country has stooped over the bitterness of this last election, that we get posts like you saw earlier where Jimmy Kimmel blames all gun-owners and says, “the blood is on your hands”, as Nancy Sinatra calls for a genocide of millions of Americans. Then we have far left Democrats from the general public putting out things like this:
These people are the Democratic version of the people making jokes about the girl killed in the Charlottesville riots.
As you have seen, the data and statistics side towards the pro-second Amendment crowd – and a lot in most categories. This is why the pro-gun-control debate is still a losing argument, even after tragedies like Vegas. Because regardless of these fairly rare occasions, there is not much out there that can back up that side. This is why you have news agencies and journalists putting out overly cherry picked data – if not complete lies, just so they can hope to make some kind of point. If the data backed up those arguments, there wouldn’t be a need to go to such lengths to try to force a narrative on people. But people who are too anti-gun for their own good, refuse to even acknowledge that the pro-gun side could ever be able to make a valid argument.
Something that affects too many people in too many categories, is cognitive dissonance – where someone holds a core belief that is so strong, that even after they are presented with evidence that works against their belief, it is immediately dismissed and will not be accepted under any circumstances. It is so important for people to protect their core beliefs that they will rationalize, ignore, or just straight up deny anything that does not follow the current beliefs they are locked into. You name the topic, and people will fall into this trap on either side of the political spectrum.
Not liking guns and just staying away from them themselves, is not good enough for some people. They don’t like guns, so therefore no one should have them – especially the scary looking ones you see on the TV. Those people along with the people who want grenade launchers in every home, are the people you can’t debate with in this category. You can’t have a sit down talk with them, and can’t sway in any way outside of their current beliefs. Aside from those people, we should be able to find common ground here and, hopefully at some point, make laws that address the actual problems, and those problems alone.
See more questions and topics covered in the rest of the series:
(Pt.1) Why does it seem like nothing happens after major tragedies like Vegas?
(Pt.2) Should the US enact an Australia/UK style gun ban? and “The government should do a full confiscation or gun buy-back like the UK/Australia” but even Australia says it could never work here.
(Pt.3) Is the 2nd Amendment really out of date and need to be revised (or disbanded), or is it just the way it needs to be?
(Pt.4) How often are semi-automatic and automatic rifles actually used in crimes?
(Pt.5) Terminology, definitions and famous buzzwords: “Common sense gun-control,” “machine guns,” “assault weapons,” and “suppressor/silencer.”
(Pt.6) Why do people think concealed carriers are overly paranoid people with evil intentions – especially when the stats show the exact opposite. How often do they actually stop crimes?
(Pt.7) Some of the gun laws people are calling for, are already laws and have been for decades.
(Pt.8) Is everything actually the NRA’s and Republicans fault?
(Pt. 9) The “gun show loophole” is not a real thing. It never was, and never will be able to be. So what is the deal with gun shows then?
(Pt.10) Gun-free zones & the price of freedom and more media tricks.
Sources for full article (not shown in main body already):