Charlie Kirk: Some gun deaths every year are okay to have so we can protect the 2nd amendment

[Bolzmark]

There was no misquote. I’m not arguing for zero deaths. no reasonable person is. don't know where you're getting that from.

The point is that framing it as simply 'inevitable' is downplaying/oversimplifying the scale of what we have here in the US. Of course some deaths are inevitable but the extremely high number we have in the US is not inevitable. Other countries with gun rights prove it.

Cutting down the high number of gun deaths here isn’t a fantasy it’s very doable with basic common-sense restrictions like other countries have employed. That’s the part you’re missing or

Do you realize you're agreeing with me but you have tricked yourself into thinking you are disagreeing with me? His quote was simple. "SOME GUN DEATHS EVERY YEAR". Then you come back with "I'm not arguing for zero deaths, no reasonable person is" DUDE, you mean not zero deaths as in SOME DEATHS???

Then you go into extremely high number is not inevitable. Point out in his quote or my post where I said ANYTHING about "extremely high number of gun deaths".

I'm not missing or purposely avoiding anything. It seems like you are though, since I asked you a very simple question and you're still giving this general statement. What are these "common sense restrictions" that you have in your head, that are going to reduce gun deaths while still respecting the 2nd Amendment. This is where you get specific.

 

[MisterMajesty]

This oversimplifying an important issue. The point is there doesn't need to be the high amount of shooting deaths in the US that there is. saying "it's inevitable" is just throwing your hands up like it's whatever. mass shootings are not 'inevitable' nor the norm. They shouldn't be. Other countries with gun rights find a way to not have the insane amount of gun deaths we have.

they shouldn't be involving no damn kids either.

 

[the bossman]

Do you realize you're agreeing with me but you have tricked yourself into thinking you are disagreeing with me? His quote was simple. "SOME GUN DEATHS EVERY YEAR". Then you come back with "I'm not arguing for zero deaths, no reasonable person is" DUDE, you mean not zero deaths as in SOME DEATHS???

Then you go into extremely high number is not inevitable. Point out in his quote or my post where I said ANYTHING about "extremely high number of gun deaths".

I'm not missing or purposely avoiding anything. It seems like you are though, since I asked you a very simple question and you're still giving this general statement. What are these "common sense restrictions" that you have in your head, that are going to reduce gun deaths while still respecting the 2nd Amendment. This is where you get specific.

yeah you probably didn't listen to the full quote if you think the pushback from people is simply about him saying "zero deaths is inevitable". That's not what was controversial.

America is not special. other countries have done this. You could even start with just simply reinstating laws that existed here in the past and worked like when large capacity magazines were banned. It was constitutional and legal. We didn't have the mass shootings then that we have today.

 

[Clayton Endicott]

I’m happy Charlie stayed true to his word.

That smug bytch thought he dropped some science too. Absolutely fitting that his neck turned into Old Faithful after that.

 

[Bolzmark]

yeah you probably didn't listen to the full quote if you think the pushback from people is simply about him saying "zero deaths is inevitable". That's not what was controversial.

America is not special. other countries have done this. You could even start with just simply reinstating laws that existed here in the past and worked like when large capacity magazines were banned. It was constitutional and legal. We didn't have the mass shootings then that we have today.

Both on tv and the net, that is the line they quote when discussing that issue. What part was controversial?

OH NO! You mean if I wanna kill a bunch of people I'm going to have to go through the aggravation of changing a magazine?? Now I can only squeeze off 10 shots before I gotta press a button, let the old magazine fall out, and then slap in a new one? Dude, that's gonna take me at least 3 seconds. How inconvenient!

 

[Ducktales]

A real hero. Took the bullet so we can all enjoy our guns and more mass shootings

 

[FaTaL]

 

[the bossman]

Both on tv and the net, that is the line they quote when discussing that issue. What part was controversial?

Having a 2nd Amendment and no innocent deaths is a fantasy.

- Nobody is arguing or disputing this.

It's this in bold:

You will never live in a society when you have an armed citizenry and you won't have a single gun death. That is nonsense. It's drivel. But I am, I, I — I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. Nobody talks like this. They live in a complete alternate universe.

It's this idea of co-signing or endorsing the insanely high number of deaths in the US as “worth it” or “prudent,” and “rational”. That is what garners all the pushback. You're going from stating the obvious (you can't have zero deaths with a lot of guns) to justifying and normalizing easily preventable deaths. That’s why people reacted strongly: it’s not about acknowledging “some deaths,” He's suggesting the number we have now is a worthwhile cost. -- It isn't. and other countries have been able to do it

 

[the bossman]

OH NO! You mean if I wanna kill a bunch of people I'm going to have to go through the aggravation of changing a magazine?? Now I can only squeeze off 10 shots before I gotta press a button, let the old magazine fall out, and then slap in a new one? Dude, that's gonna take me at least 3 seconds. How inconvenient!

clown all you want. the data speaks for itself. worked here and in other countries like Australia

 

[Bolzmark]

- Nobody is arguing or disputing this.

It's this in bold:


It's this idea of co-signing or endorsing the insanely high number of deaths in the US as “worth it” or “prudent,” and “rational”. That is what garners all the pushback. You're going from stating the obvious (you can't have zero deaths with a lot of guns) to justifying and normalizing easily preventable deaths. That’s why people reacted strongly: it’s not about acknowledging “some deaths,” He's suggesting the number we have now is a worthwhile cost. -- It isn't. and other countries have been able to do it

And if you support the 2nd Amendment, you agree with him. There may be a couple things you can do to bring it down a little, but it's never going to significantly change as long as there is a 2nd Amendment. That phrase "common sense gun-control" is very general and imo, kinda bullsh!t. I asked you to give me an example and you said smaller magazines. Ok so a killer has to carry extra clips to make up for them being smaller. Big deal.

No one is "justifying" these deaths. It's just what is to be expected as long as the 2nd Amendment is the law of the land. If you have a lot of guns, people are gonna get shot!

Do you have another solution to these "easily" preventable deaths? You keep talking about what "other" countries have been able to do. AGAIN, only TWO other countries on the planet have a constitutional right to bear arms. THIS is how other countries have been able to do it. Only one country on the planet has more guns than citizens. I'll give you 3 guesses who that is?

I'll wait on your "common sense laws for easily preventable deaths". While you're thinking about it, consider a very important variable - The Black Market in the U.S. Due to the 2nd Amendment, guns are PLENTIFUL. And because of that, the Black Market can take advantage. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that the Black Market is VERY big and powerful. In terms of narcotics, cocaine, heroin, and meth are not legal anywhere. Yet, they are EVERYWHERE. So for guns, its much easier. In many places its easier to get a gun than a drivers license. Due to the 2nd Amendment, the Black Market has all the inventory it can handle.

So back to your common sense solutions - we got:
1. Smaller clips.

2. ?

 

[the bossman]

And if you support the 2nd Amendment, you agree with him. There may be a couple things you can do to bring it down a little, but it's never going to significantly change as long as there is a 2nd Amendment. That phrase "common sense gun-control" is very general and imo, kinda bullsh!t. I asked you to give me an example and you said smaller magazines. Ok so a killer has to carry extra clips to make up for them being smaller. Big deal.

No one is "justifying" these deaths. It's just what is to be expected as long as the 2nd Amendment is the law of the land. If you have a lot of guns, people are gonna get shot!

Nah, this is flawed. The 2nd Amendment has been the law of the land for over 200 years. But the US hasn't always had this record level of gun deaths that it has today. in fact, more people owned guns back in the 50s and 60s yet the gun death rate was way lower then. and mass shootings were extremely rare then too.

The 2nd Amendment never changed. it’s things like what type of guns exist now, how many are available (as you alluded to about the black market), and under what policies that have changed. even societal factors like crime waves or the extreme political polarization we have now.

Do you have another solution to these "easily" preventable deaths? You keep talking about what "other" countries have been able to do. AGAIN, only TWO other countries on the planet have a constitutional right to bear arms. THIS is how other countries have been able to do it. Only one country on the planet has more guns than citizens. I'll give you 3 guesses who that is?

I just gave one example with the high capacity magazines that you brushed off. There are dozens of studies (of course with certain assumptions and limitations) that show when you implement several laws in conjunction then you can make a difference.

Report Recommends States Adopt Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws That Include Five Core Components | Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Report also highlights evidence showing gun purchaser licensing laws effective at reducing firearm deaths.

publichealth.jhu.edu

You can basically assume that on average the states with stronger gun policies usually have much lower gun death rates, and research basically suggests specific policies like licensing, background checks, waiting periods,etc. contribute to those differences. It’s not the only factor, but it clearly matters

 

[Bolzmark]

Nah, this is flawed. The 2nd Amendment has been the law of the land for over 200 years. But the US hasn't always had this record level of gun deaths that it has today. in fact, more people owned guns back in the 50s and 60s yet the gun death rate was way lower then. and mass shootings were extremely rare then too.

Gun violence was certainly less then and you are correct mass shootings were rare. But I need to see some statistics showing that more people owned guns back then than now. That doesn't really add up.

The 2nd Amendment never changed. it’s things like what type of guns exist now, how many are available (as you alluded to about the black market), and under what policies that have changed. even societal factors like crime waves or the extreme political polarization we have now.


I just gave one example with the high capacity magazines that you brushed off. There are dozens of studies (of course with certain assumptions and limitations) that show when you implement several laws in conjunction then you can make a difference.

I brushed it off because its effectiveness would be minimal. Possibly nothing. Think about it - instead of a 30 shot clip I got three 10 shot clips or two 15 shot clips. I'm sure you know how fast you can reload a semi automatic weapon. And lets be clear, the vast majority of gun violence is not committed with guns with extended clips. They are regular guns with factory clips, holding 10 to 15 bullets. And even with a 10 shot clip, that means theoretically the shooter can hit 10 people right?

Report Recommends States Adopt Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws That Include Five Core Components | Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Report also highlights evidence showing gun purchaser licensing laws effective at reducing firearm deaths.

publichealth.jhu.edu

You can basically assume that on average the states with stronger gun policies usually have much lower gun death rates, and research basically suggests specific policies like licensing, background checks, waiting periods,etc. contribute to those differences. It’s not the only factor, but it clearly matters

These factors make a difference yes. But background checks are already standard even in gun states, except for gun shows. I've lived in GA and NY. Of course they have drastically different gun laws. I can get a gun WAY faster in GA than I can a drivers license. And I got a concealed carry license that required nothing but about $80. In NY, you have to get a permit to even have a gun in your home and in NYC permits are denied around 90% of the time. Rare to be able to carry a gun legally in NYC. And I think NY and other places like it are in violation of the 2nd Amendment. American citizens are supposed to have a "fundamental right" to firearms. Not just an opportunity to ask the government and then be denied 90% of the time.

Regardless of what laws your state/city may have though, the Black Market renders them useless. People get shot in NYC every day. Mostly with guns that are illegally owned. The Black Market is able to thrive due to the 2nd Amendment. With an overall USA policy that permits guns, Glock, Smit & Wesson, Colt, etc can now mass produce them, as any capitalistic society would do. And with that, they become available to everybody, one way or another. Whats probably the biggest group who we don't want to have guns? Criminals. And what are gun laws to criminals? Nothing but words on a paper. The 2nd Amendment makes it possible for them to get guns too.