58 thoughts on “The Gun Argument Demolished”

  1. Brilliant video. It should be law that all growers and vendors of lettuce should be subject to background checks.
    Eliminate outbreaks of ecoli for good, especially at schools.
    We have a responsibility towards our children.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  2. When you produce a product specifically designed to kill people and it proves to be ruthlessly efficient at doing just that then it might be hard to argue that it is faulty, in any way. In the instance of a gun being fired and shooting a child after the magazine had been removed there seems a valid argument for ensuring that the manufacturer clearly informs the consumer about this feature or redesigns the gun. Would this fix the problem? That a gun can be redesigned to kill people slightly more efficiently than it already does can hardly be blamed on the manufacturer. But if you could blame the manufacturer would this fix the problem? A lettuce could be modified after purchase to be highly toxic. You can’t blame the farmer for that. It’s fortunate that Hollywood never thought of depicting heroes valiantly protecting the American Way of Life with poisoned vegetables or we’d have a whole new problem.

    Better background checks would be great. Raising the age from 18 to 21 – great. Banning the purchase of the most horrifically deadly killing devices – great. But this is just chipping away at the edges, potentially reducing the gun deaths (by how much, do you think?).
    We recognise that cars kill people, but we also recognise that cars are vital for the running of our society. We do the best we can to reduce deaths caused by cars, but reluctantly accept the death rate. There is an argument to further restrict the use of cars or increase safety features, stricter testing requirements etc. But we will still accept deaths, because we can’t properly survive without transport.

    We need cars and trucks (and lettuce).
    BUT WE DONT NEED GUNS.
    Not in the hands of private citizens, anyway. Don’t modify them. Don’t just restrict them. Don’t monitor them more carefully. GET RID OF THEM. All of them. And don’t say that you can’t do it, because you can. Don’t tell me that the most advanced nation on the planet cannot protect its children from being slaughtered by military weapons in their classrooms. I simply don’t believe that.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • As an interesting side note, in both Canada (my home country) and the US, automobile deaths have been dropping for decades. The rate is now about half of what it was just 20 years ago. Among children it used to be the number one killer – a distinction that is now owned guns. A child today is more likely to die from a gun than from an automobile.

      Why are automobile deaths declining? Largely because manufacturers are building safer vehicles, and lower rates of impaired driving. We have, as a society, put an emphasis on making sure that our roads are safer and the end result is that it happened. Nobody had to give up their cars. Nobody had to only take public transit. We changed the culture around impaired driving and we manufacturers made safer products.

      Apply the same thinking to gun and one side of the aisle makes it sound like the Boogie Man is coming to throw you in prison and take away all of your rights – which is odd considering that they’re the ones closest to adopting fascism.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • Quite so. And if nobody needed automobiles we could drop the fatality rate even further. But people do need automobiles and the manufacturers and governments have worked hard to make automobiles and their operation a safer operation.
        But the concept of a safe gun is an oxymoron. Automobiles are designed for efficiently transporting living things from one place to another. An unfortunate side-effect of their operation is that sometimes living things die. Guns are specifically designed to kill living things. Death is not an unfortunate side effect – it is the goal.
        The very people who believe it is their ‘right’ to have a gun are the ones that I feel least comfortable about having one.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  3. Gun enthusiasts refuse to give up theit weapons, continuously quoting the 2nd Amendment. When the 2nd Amendment was written, the guns they said could be put in the hands of a militia were single liad, single fire. If gun enthudiasts really want their guns, make it ilkegsl to manufacture, own, or sell anything but single load, single fire guns. Outlaw anything with a msgazine. Personally, I see no need for anyone to own a gun, but if nothing else, limit the numbrr of bullets a projectile weapon can release to one bullet per load. Give gun enthusiasts the very gun that the law allows for. Anything else should be illegal.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  5. Guns?! HA!! Useless! I always carry a small thermonuclear device with me when I go out! That way, if I’m accosted by an entire city that wants to usurp my right to free speech, I can “stand my ground” and blow it to hell! God bless America! And God bless the second amendment! (Great video, BTW.)

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  6. Yeah nan, tell Biden and his hundred bodyguards to give up their side arms. Didn’t think so.

    Or is his life more valuable than yours? Didn’t think so.

    The woman was boring, uninformed, and like every naysayer, never addresses responsible safeguard and use of arms.

    The deranged punk who shot up the school? Noooo, no clues that he was asking for attention- yeah ok.

    And why do you NEVER hear of home owners, good people, who killed rapists or potential killers? Doesn’t fit the leftist mob agenda .

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Your entire comment is so full of holes that I considered deleting it … but decided to keep it so others could see a live example of demented thinking.

      Have a nice church-day! ⛪🙏

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      • Demented nan?
        Soooooo, pelosi and her armed thugs/ and the president and his armed thugs/ and schumer and all his armed thugs/

        you have admitted that their lives MATTER…………… more than yours. Yeah ok. They can be armed but not you???

        Go into any home depot, and you will find just as many killing tools. as to a firearm being fired without the magazine? Yeah, its called one in the chamber, which is explained in any safety manual.

        Read the instructions and responsible safety. And NO gun law will keep firearms out of the hands of maniacs and criminals.

        That brain dead Feinstein said she would confiscate EVERY gun from EVERY farmer, carpenter, electrician. MD, medic, wife, husband, etc etc……

        So who is demented?????? But nooooooooo, we send arms to Ukraine??? Wake up.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        • More guns, more mass shootings
          More guns, more suicides especially among women.
          Ergo less or no guns ( other than with armed forces and police) means almost zero chance of mass shootings and almost zero chance of gun related suicides.
          Commonsense.
          Oh,and evidence bears this out.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          • More guns don’t seem to help the Ukrainians eh? Not powerful enough the tanks it appears.

            As to the murdering bastards in US who take lives/ rest assured there were many signals long before the carnage. But noooo, no one offers the right kind of help- help which may deter such actions.

            Then there is the lockdowns- the inability to pay for goods and services/ kids who are taught it’s ok to question whether you are male or female/ the mental instability caused by rotten govt- the stupidity of Bureaucrats who would dare suggest 9mm handguns (the most popular sporting/ target/ competiton/ Defense/ ) be banned.

            So yeah ark, there are a thousand reasons crime thrives. And don’t forget, the ones who kill are living lives of luxury instead of going to the electric chair- again liberal policy which aids and abets the bastards.

            Takes guts to SPEEDILY sentence a man when guilty- and this lack of inaction supports more killers who know they can just about get away with murder.

            But if not guns, then a school bus over a cliff, killing 70 more. Or acid at the water fountain. Or an airplane into a building. The problem can never be the tool, if that were the case, Home Depot would close today.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I have no interest in your gish gallop bullshit.
            America’s weird obsession with guns is a mental sickness.
            And my previous comment is based on statistical evidence.
            Would you like to read the link yourself or will you simply continue to dribble your idiotic filth as always?

            Liked by 1 person

          • In a court of law I would crush your supposition re. the ‘mental sickness.’

            ‘America’ is not a person. ‘America’ can neither pick up a firearm nor pull a trigger.

            ‘America’ is a country. The threats are many, and they are real from without and within, notwithstanding deranged units everywhere.

            Liked by 1 person

          • So you are neither interested in reading the link or curtailing fire arms in your country.
            Got it.
            Tacitly,therefore you are giving the nod to the next maniac that decides to slaughter school children.
            Tacitly you acknowledge that people with firearms, and especially woman will commit suicide far more likely than if there was no access to guns and you are simply prepared to wave it away and do nothing; not even to restrict access to firearms.

            And you call yourself a Christian whose foundational belief is love thy neighbour?

            I wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire.

            You are a disgusting, sick human being.

            Liked by 2 people

          • It is against the law to kill people. But a lion killing a deer is ok? Don’t you see your own dilemma?

            Do people have more right to life than a deer? And why are you not up in arms over abortion and the killing of they who also gave right to life? What’s the difference: the child inside the womb or outside? No guns needed for senseless killing.

            And it is me who is vile…..

            Liked by 1 person

      • Well, Tks anyway for not deleting- one of your commenters said ‘guns are designed to kill.’ Really?

        Shooting is an Olympic sport – as is archery. So who is being killed by such weaponry?

        Such myopic hysteria does not bode well with common sense-

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        • Good point
          I see no reason not to remove shooting from the
          Olympics. Of course, if one ignores the prime reason for designing and producing guns. ..to kill. .. then I suppose shooting could be kept as a sport
          Archery ….Hmmm,well I doubt there would be any mass shootings using bows and arrows, so keep it, lose it, all the same to me.
          However, and this is the point you refuse to address, removing firearms from the hands of the general public would make for a far safer society.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          • You ask a fair question. I don’t know, follow the clues maybe? A kid who cuts himself dripping blood seems a good indicator.

            Threatening to shoot up a school may be another. Intentionally running over people in a car.

            These are extreme I’ll admit- but far too often it’s too late to notice or care. Seems there are always trails and clues-

            Liked by 1 person

          • U tube is filled with examples of responsible and irresponsible arms ownership and usage.

            But you have to admit, there are ten thousand ways to end one’s life. I suppose it boils down to how one handles power tools.

            Your question is good but narrow too-

            Liked by 1 person

          • Stats show that in Australia removing fire arms from general circulation drastically reduced the suicide rate.
            In the USA suicide by firearm is highest among women,so surely you would accept that removing guns entirely or at the very least place severe restrictions on gun ownership would likely prevent such dreadful statistics?
            Or are you not in favour
            of such a positive move?

            Liked by 1 person

          • So based in the number gun related deaths removing firearms from the general populace would be a good thing then.
            I am bemused but pleased we agree on something for a change.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I ‘like’ the fact that you do recognize distinctions- as to ‘removing’ from the average joe- that’s fine and good if it is voluntary and not mandatory- in which case tempers would flare from good people-

            Liked by 1 person

          • Because there are hellish people. If there were trained veterans/ volunteer guards at the recent Texas school/ maybe things would have ended much better, like an incapacitated young punk bent on destruction.

            Liked by 1 person

          • If there were no guns then such retaliatory / defensive action would be unnecessary.
            I never ever feared for my safety from gun death while at school. Or in any other situation for that matter.
            Why is no such action required in the UK, and the rest of Europe neither in Australia or New Zealand?

            Liked by 1 person

          • If there were no guns then such retaliatory / defensive action would be unnecessary.
            I never ever feared for my safety/life from gun death while at school. Or in any other situation for that matter.
            Why is no such action required in the UK, and the rest of Europe neither in Australia or New Zealand?

            Liked by 1 person

  7. Visitors note: CS has put forth several “counter-arguments” related to the points in the video … most of which have NO direct bearing on the actual problem, i.e., mass shootings.

    This is so very typical (and not just him).

    Rather than offer possible solutions to a problem that is undeniably removing human beings –children in particular– from this earth, he (and others like him) attempts to direct your attention away from the TRUE situation and instead brings up Ukraine, members of Congress, sexual identity issues, capital punishment, Home Depot (!), gun-related sports, archery, abortion, the Olympics …

    Viewers may not agree with the points put forth in the video. That’s their prerogative. But if a person can’t offer other reasonable and workable solutions, then please … move on.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  8. Nan, if your post had any logic, which it does not, can you explain how the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting happened? Virginia Tech? Columbine? All gun-free zones, however, gun-related murders happened there. Apply some common sense here.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Take it up with Brian (the person who made the video). I happen to agree with both him and the person in Congress.

      And BTW, you need to look up the meaning of “logic” and “common sense.”

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    • What an asinine dick head comment!
      If there were no guns in the hands of civilians such atrocities would almost likely not happen.
      So the answer is straightforward: Ban the fucking guns!

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      • The part of the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed seems to be very much absolute to me. It does not say anything about infringing upon people’s rights to keep and bear arms to make people who are uncomfortable feel better.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

          • I know what the meaning is and I understand the Constitutional procedure for adding or repealing amendments. Unless and until the 2nd Amendment is fully repealed, which I hope never happens, all restrictions on gun ownership are Unconstitutional, period.

            Liked by 1 person

          • No, all restrictions on gun ownership are NOT unconstitutional. You, along with other ignoramuses, CHOOSE to overlook the original intent of the Second Amendment to satisfy your own personal preferences.

            Moreover, what is so disgusting and nauseating is that people like you prefer to look the other way when children (and adults) are literally SLAUGHTERED by guns that should NEVER be in the hands of the average individual. All because you want to defend your so-called “rights.”

            Liked by 3 people

          • And the gun supporters “clearly don’t read” the INITIAL part: “A well regulated Militia …”

            Moreover, they REFUSE to acknowledge/accept that the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791! Gee. Do you think life might have been a bit different in those days?

            Liked by 3 people

  9. Nan, the video posted is laced with emotional appeal. If anybody is to be blamed for gun violence, blame should be placed at the feet of gangs, the mentally ill and someone who takes pleasure in the acts of murdering people. If someone buys a firearm from Remington, Remington should have no liability for someone who uses a firearm manufactured by them.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Why do you think the USA has the second highest death rate from firearms after Brazil?
      Does America have an inordinately high rate of mental illness in comparison to other nations?
      Is it perhaps a unfortunate by product from your government always being on the verge of tyranny therefore ordinary patriotic citizens must be prepared to quell a rogue US military, hence the need to be armed to the teeth?

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    • It is a bit late, R’bhut, but if you really want to blame anyone, blame the gun manufacturers. Even though their product was not needed in the Wild West, they thrived, and people got killed in such large numbers proto-Americans became used to gun deaths.
      There is no Wild West anymore, but guns have become so prevalent in today’s America because guns are still being manufactured when there is absolutely no need for them in a civilized society. What is needed before banning ownership of guns is the banning of the manufacture of guns. In particular the manufacture of handguns. Handguns are not made for hunting, or anything but killing humans. It is illegal to kill humans. Therefore manufacturing handguns should be illegal.
      But Americans on the whole worship money. And there is a lot if money involved in the sale if handguns.
      Automatic weapons are not used in hunting. They are only used in the shooting of humans. So automatic weapons should also be illegal to be manufactured.
      While guns are a huge problem, especially in the USA, the real problem is the manufacture of handbuns and automatic weapons.
      But no one seems to want to look at that problem…

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    • POW!

      Of course he’s spot-on, but we’re back again to … what can we do about it? I definitely think mental health comes into play … but IMO, this is more of an after-the-fact conclusion. The people that might see the signs are so busy living their own lives that they are blind to the turmoil of the ones who are going through it.

      And one simply CANNOT get away from the very real fact that guns are waaay too available to any and all who want one.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      • You have a bad habit of complicating matters by introducing irritating things like reality.

        “The people that might see the signs are so busy living their own lives that they are blind to the turmoil of the ones who are going through it.”

        This is why the solution will be a very long-term thing, beginning with a bottom-up/grass-roots approach. Wanna pool our pennies and start a humanitarian lobbying organization for rational firearm policy? The mission could be something like, “Reduce the required body count needed to bring reform, through, among other things, universally posting photos of gunfire blown-apart child heads in Uvalde, after the example of Emmett Till.” And give their parents Presidential Medals of Freedom for letting us do it.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        • Revision 1: Post people holding up 3-foot poster sized images of the unrecognizable dead kids at the entrance to the offices of every state, federal, county and city legislator. Every day. Forever. We could get enough pennies for that, no?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

Don't Be Shy -- Tell Us What You Think!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.