Alex Jones goes bat sh*t crazy on Piers Morgan

[TheMan]

In the gun debate I think we need to go beyond just stats. What we need to discuss is the gun culture and how to reduce the unhealthy amount of fear that some have over their government. There is nothing wrong with some fear of the government but with the institutions, checks and balances in place, it seems absurd that people think tyranny can "easily" take root. However, what these same people miss is, that strengthening the institutions, checks, and balances is far more effective in preventing tyranny.

Even if there was no 2nd amendment there would still be gun ownership. For example, Canada has quite a bit of gun ownership but does not have the equivalency of the 2nd amendment. I've said this before but many other nations have produce just as many freedoms as America or actually have freer societies without an equivalency of the 2nd amendment. Yet, there aren't many who have a fear that their government is going to turn on them.

These tyrannical government dudes think that one day they'll wake up to, I'll say Obama as an example because most of those guys are right wing and we all know Obama is a "socialist"...anyways, these doofuses think they'll wake up to see that Obama has thrown all the GOP/opposition/all political foes in prision, now the secret state police is knocking on your door to take your guns away and rush you and your family to the re-education camps. Like this is gonna happen all of a sudden and the only thing between us and that terrible fate is our guns

Checks and balances, numbnuts, it works...if Dick "Darth Vader" Cheney couldn't set up a dictatorship here, no one can

[BlackWhiteGreen]

Didn't catch that part and I ignored all the other BS. Everything in regards to gun control and gun/crime statistics, Alex Jones destroyed Piers on. He's dead on but you and other anti-gun advocates choose to ignore it. If you can't see the point in him addressing the crime increase in Britain after banning guns, there's no helping you.

This guy kinda sums it up a little better. A lot calmer as well.

I live in Britain, and no one I know has been a victim of violent crime (unarmed burglary doesn't count as violent, does it?). I don't know anyone who's been shot, even with an air rifle, or stabbed. Britain, as far as I can tell, is a far safer place to live in than America. But I'm interested to know if there are statistics to show otherwise.

My main point would be: which would you rather be higher, firearm homicides or violent crime? I know what I'd think...

[KevinNYC]

[QUOTE]The CEO of a Tennessee company that specializes weapons and tactical training is threatening to

[KevinNYC]

Here's a video from last week where he says he won't give up his assault weapons and talks about his friends are talking about Civil War. Right now he hopes they can handle this at the "ballot box and not the cartridge box." But if "it comes time, we'll do what we have to do."

He starts the video thanking the folks at Monster Energy Drink for the T shirt he's wearing. I bet they are thrilled.

[KevinNYC]

Also the "Hitler took the guns" argument that Jones was spewing is one those zombie lies you can't kill. It just keeps coming back to life.
If you want the real truth about the history of gun ownership in Germany. You may want to check out these links.

The short version is gun ownership was severely restricted in Germany before Hitler came to power by the Treaty of Versailles under the Weinmar Republic. They may have gone further than the Treaty required and this was primarily because there routine street fighting in Germany by the Crips and Bloods of their day. Except in the case of Weinmar Germany it was the Nazis and the Communists and both would have loved to take over the state.

The laws were relaxed significantly in 1928 and again under Hitler in 1938 and more importantly gun registration played absolutely no part in Hitler coming to power or pursuing any of his programs.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013...in-gun-control
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/fi...rt_fordham.pdf

[kNIOKAS]

He replaced video with another one that edited out his threat to kill people, however Raw Story kept the original.

He's tried to talk walk this back a bit, but he just can't help himself and he sure seems like he wants to shoot people.

And the state of Tennesee has revoked his carry permit.

He tried to maintain himself to the best, but still came out as a gunswinger... It was a bit painful to watch, as I see the guy in him that is not that bright or self-disciplined, yet he talks smooth...smooth... and then slips a bit again
uh uh

[ballup]

Also the "Hitler took the guns" argument that Jones was spewing is one those zombie lies you can't kill. It just keeps coming back to life.
If you want the real truth about the history of gun ownership in Germany. You may want to check out these links.

The short version is gun ownership was severely restricted in Germany before Hitler came to power by the Treaty of Versailles under the Weinmar Republic. They may have gone further than the Treaty required and this was primarily because there routine street fighting in Germany by the Crips and Bloods of their day. Except in the case of Weinmar Germany it was the Nazis and the Communists and both would have loved to take over the state.

The laws were relaxed significantly in 1928 and again under Hitler in 1938 and more importantly gun registration played absolutely no part in Hitler coming to power or pursuing any of his programs.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013...in-gun-control
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/fi...rt_fordham.pdf

The Mao Zedong argument is awfully flawed too. Even if the common Chinese folk had the right to bear firearms, very few would have a firearm anyways because the general population was too poor to afford one for each household.

The "dictators rise from gun control" is a dumb causation argument. Dictators rise because they either have an army, they have a large enough supporting crowd, or the government is extremely vulnerable to be taken over.

[MMM]

The Mao Zedong argument is awfully flawed too. Even if the common Chinese folk had the right to bear firearms, very few would have a firearm anyways because the general population was too poor to afford one for each household.

The "dictators rise from gun control" is a dumb causation argument. Dictators rise because they either have an army, they have a large enough supporting crowd, or the government is extremely vulnerable to be taken over.

just want to add that American constitutions already has checks in place from preventing such take overs. However, if these people were serious about being worried about Tyranny, then why don't they debate ideas to strengthening the constitution instead of scaring Americans to stock pile weapons and ammo.

[ballup]

just want to add that American constitutions already has checks in place from preventing such take overs. However, if these people were serious about being worried about Tyranny, then why don't they debate ideas to strengthening the constitution instead of scaring Americans to stock pile weapons and ammo.

Culturally, we don't see the Cold War as a bad thing. For the American public, it's kind of those grey areas in US history like the War of 1812. That's part of the reason as to why some people don't see anything wrong with two sides building up arms, but not really fighting.

[daily]

I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

...

[Dro]

I actually agree with his general stance. I'm surprised how many people think our government has our best interest in mind. The same government that has sent tens of thousands of lower-class soldiers to die in the middle east for the profit of the elite.

Obviously this guy is passionate, and needs to take a chill pill, but he's right. Placing any type of faith in this government would be a huge mistake. I'm not a "gun guy", I've never even been hunting, but I'm not surrendering my right to own weapons, because I don't trust the government has my best intentions in mind, nor do I think they can adequately protect me against my fellow citizens.

/thread

[ShaqAttack3234]

I live in Britain, and no one I know has been a victim of violent crime (unarmed burglary doesn't count as violent, does it?). I don't know anyone who's been shot, even with an air rifle, or stabbed. Britain, as far as I can tell, is a far safer place to live in than America. But I'm interested to know if there are statistics to show otherwise.

My main point would be: which would you rather be higher, firearm homicides or violent crime? I know what I'd think...

It would be impossible to make the USA like England. There's 53 million people in England, there's 315 million people in the USA. The size difference alone makes it impossible to make a comparison. Especially with Mexico right there. There will always be guns in the USA. If we can't stop people from getting in, then stopping guns from being smuggled in is not going to be too successful. Of course, there will also be dirty cops who sell their guns in addition to many guns already on the street, far too many to possibly get them all.

To answer your question, I'd rather be in a place where the law abiding citizens have a chance to protect themselves against the criminals who will potentially break in to your home.

[MMM]

It would be impossible to make the USA like England. There's 53 million people in England, there's 315 million people in the USA. The size difference alone makes it impossible to make a comparison. Especially with Mexico right there. There will always be guns in the USA. If we can't stop people from getting in, then stopping guns from being smuggled in is not going to be too successful. Of course, there will also be dirty cops who sell their guns in addition to many guns already on the street, far too many to possibly get them all.

To answer your question, I'd rather be in a place where the law abiding citizens have a chance to protect themselves against the criminals who will potentially break in to your home.

Yes you have the right to protect my self should there be a better balance between your personal right and our collective rights???

Irresponsible gun owners and the irresponsible lack of regulation need to be looked at so we can protect the rights of law abiding citizens.

[Dro]

lol @ the government caring about the rights of law abiding citizens...Really, a lot of us must live in different worlds...

[Nanners]

Cory Booker - Gun violence false debate


I think this guy will be president someday