The BEST Gun Control Commercial EVER.

Published On April 17, 2013 | By Veruca |

Short and to the point.

Veruca | Co-Founder | The Everlasting GOP Stoppers

Like what we do?  Make a secure donation here!

facebook.com/TheEverlastingGOPStoppers                                                       twitter.com/theGOPstoppers

Follow her

Veruca

Co-Founder | Thought Instigator and Provacateur Extraordinaire at The Everlasting GOP Stoppers
Like what we do?  Make a secure donation! You can also help support us by sharing our stories on social media using the icons below!
Follow her

  • wesley askew

    Tyranny has not !!

    • John

      Yes, even tyranny has changed. Do you have soldiers living in your home? Must you swear an oath to a monarch? Are you thrown in prison for your debts? Get a clue…move on. Time to evolve, wes.

  • SHAUN PUZIO

    20 shot pistols have been around for 150 years… so, they the only changes are in political advertising and perception. Who needs the second amendment anyway? It’s not like governments have murdered hundreds of millions of people in the last century right? With guns. So maybe we should ban guns from governments.

    • Roxy

      Please.

      Guns are the least of your worries. If our (U.S.) government wants to murder you, your guns and a shed full of ammo are just going to blow up, along with your sorry self, when some joystick jockey in NV points a drone your way.

    • hangemhi

      The 2nd Amendment was written 72 years before your claim. And that isn’t the only change – there were 100x fewer people in 1791, we were largely a lawless land requiring personal protection, and many hunted for food. Unfortunately EVERYTHING has changed except the completely outdated 2nd Amendment.

      • de9802

        You scare me more than the guns!

      • Kei

        Guns will NOT protect a citizen against a tyrannical Government. Governments have F-16s now… the people dont! But you cant beat anything into a brainwashed follower of the Tea Party.

    • Lillian McGee

      You seem to have a firm grip on the situation, thankfully, Shaun!

    • Kei

      Oh? Then show us a 20 shot pistol that was used during the US Civil War…. I am curious to see this proof!

  • John Frazer

    So you’re saying the 1st amendment only applies to manually set print and handwriting and horse-back messengers? Not radio, TV, the interwebz, twitter, or facebook.

    • hangemhi

      Why do you ask? Did someone kill 20 six year olds with a radio?

      • Farfalle

        Somebody did kill over 3,000 people with airplanes. Shall we call for airplane control? More people are killed in auto accidents than with guns, shall we call for car control?

        Holocaust mean anything to you? Hitler took away the people’s guns then threw them in concentration camps and killed them. It wouldn’t have happened if the people could defend themselves from a tyrannical government.

        • gordon

          Yes we do have airplane control. Very tight ones and yes we do have car control. The licensing on both is tougher tan for buying guns. You would not want a mentally ill bus driver driving your kids to school or a deranged pilot flying your plane so why your objection to similar controls for purchasing lethal weapons. The proposals are modest, sensible and proportionate and do not threaten anyone’s rights but merely serve to protect them.

          • Duncan Parcells

            Gordon that comment was brilliant

        • blue

          No, Hitler didn’t. You should question whoever told you this, because they’re lying to you. http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/

        • CCinRI

          Your knowledge of German political history proves you are NOT smarter than a 5th grader.

          • http://TheEverlastingGOPStoppers.com Veruca

            Your use of AOL proves that you are… well, I’m not gonna say.

        • stylusmobilus

          Bullshit. Large sections of German society believed Hitler’s message and saw him as a way of breaking French and British oppression from World War 1. They thought the Treaty of Versailles sold Germany out and wanted an end to the Weimar Republic. There was a lot of chaos in Germany in the 20′s and 30′s and Hitler took advantage of that. There was never any intention of German citizens overthrowing a tyrannical government, and that desire only became reality when it was apparent WW2 would be lost.

        • wargun

          Well, actually, Hitler did fairly well at killing people even when they had an army to back them up, so….

    • Figgs

      Excellent point, John. The advancement of technology matters not a whit to Constitutional rights.

  • Edouard

    hahahahahahaha TRUE but irrevelent…..IT IS NOT THE GUNS>>>IT IS THE CRAZY PEOPLE

    • hangemhi

      News flash, if crazy people didn’t have guns they’d have a much harder time killing so many. And your main point of “irrevelent” – is that the 2nd Amendment is “irrelevant” as so visually stated in the ad. Guess you missed that.

      • Farfalle

        If crazy people don’t have guns, they’ll find something else to kill with.

        Guns don’t kill on their own, they need somebody to operate them. We need criminal control, not gun control.

      • Figgs

        That’s a load of garbage. Crazy people kill many people with bombs. Crazy people kill many people with knives. Crazy people kill many people with airplanes flown into buildings. Crazy people kill people with fertilizer and diesel fuel. There’s a trend among all those statements – statements that never once use the word “gun.” The problem is not guns, it’s crazy and/or evil people. THAT’S the problem. We have gun laws, and more gun laws restricting the rights of lawful users is simply not the answer and anyone who thinks they are is a fool.
        See: Chicago violence in relation to gun laws passed.

        • Lady

          You say people are the problem well background checks the “people” not the gun so now what? A person is always a law abiding citizen until they commit a crime. Background checks don’t put limits on nobody except those who can not pass, and if they don’t pass then you might not want them to have a gun! duh And putting a limit on guns (size and number of munitions) is no worst than the FCC laws that we put on the first amendment you can’t curse on TV or the radio. But as I said before you can’t fix stupid! and no amount of teaching will change a stupid persons ideas and beliefs.

    • Lillian McGee

      You are right about that, Edouard!

  • http://rbutr.com Shane

    I love all the comments dismissing this advert.

    Wesley: Tyranny has not – and people having guns in their daily life stops tyranny? No, it doesn’t. Organised militias and armies MIGHT be able to, but having a gun in your bedside draw does nothing.

    SHAUN: “It’s not like governments have murdered hundreds of millions of people in the last century right? With guns. So maybe we should ban guns from governments.” Absolutely. Wouldn’t it be great if we could ban all guns? Well we can’t. But the idea of you, and all of your friends having guns is somehow any match for the power of modern military forces is laughable. Where are your long range remote controlled drone with heat guided, laser guide smart bombs? Or your tank? Or you ICBM? Guns don’t stop governments from murdering people. Democracry enforced can stop that – and democracy can’t be enforced with guns.

    John: I think this was a light hearted dig. Not a serious argument.

    Edouard: You’ll never get rid of the crazy people. But you can get rid of the guns and reduce the damage that crazy people can do.

    You guys have no idea how crazy the USA looks from the outside. You absolute certainty that guns are essential to the solution, and not part of the problem is …just….dumbfounding.

    • billbilski

      Missiles and tanks would incur undue collateral damage to be used in subversive actions against an uprising and would ensure chaos and only help insurgents. An armed citizenry intent on revolution would be able to do so and have done so in modern history. The Murder rate as of 2011 was below historic averages – why is everyone so irrational about this topic? The answer is simple – Media. Ever since Marshal McLuhan observed the change from “cool” mediums like newspapers to “Hot” Mediums like TV had caused a shift in our perceptions, we have become less able to step back and see the trees and more and more obsessed with the latest “story” or trend. With the Internet and I phones “hot has become “hell fire” and with it the chaotic misinformation we now must sift through. Goebbels would love to have today’s media in Nazi Germany. Small problems become large problems, and action becomes paramount. Action in and of itself is meaningless. The action must be one that will ensure the outcomes without creating new ones i.e. Obamacare. Political differences aside. Will these gun control measures actually provide the results in a significant manner worthy of the sacrifice of certain liberties? Our murder rates on a year by year comparison look much like New Zealand and Great Britain since 1988 . There is little correlation to be found between gun control and Murder rates. Let’s be intellectually honest with ourselves when trying to determine whether there is a problem and secondarily what to do about that problem. Emotional rhetoric has no place in the constructs of a rational society….

      • David A Deal

        Great Britain .25, New Zealand 2.66, USA 10.2 These are the gun death rates per 100,000 people. The USA has a death rate 41 times GREATER than Great Britain and we know they have strict gun laws in England. Germany has a death rate of 1.1 nearly 1/10th that of USA and it takes a year to get a bolt action rifle in Germany. I think it is CLEAR that tough gun laws ARE effective. This issue is NOT about emotion it is about FACTS and LIVES!

  • Farfalle

    News Flash liberals….guns are inanimate objects. If you put a gun on a table it will not jump up and shoot the next person to walk in the door. It requires a human to be operational. You think taking away guns will stop crime? How about this novel idea….get rid of the criminals!

    In case you forget…some non-gun related criminal acts:

    9/11 over 3,000 people killed…by airplanes
    Oklahoma City bombing…168 killed (19 under the age of six)…by a rental truck filled with fertilizer
    Boston Marathon…3 killed many injured…by a pressure cooker in a back pack
    over 30,000 killed by drunk drivers

    • Alex

      And there are laws against bombs, drunk drivers, and flying airplanes into buildings. No one is trying to take away your guns. They just want to make it harder for criminals to get them.

  • Tevis

    If you don’t believe in guns, don’t buy one! (or does that argument only work with gay “marriage”)?

    • Jozee

      That’s just dumb… gay marriage never took a life. I swear you people do more to help the gun control argument than debunk it. There should be an IQ requirement for people to be allowed to vote or have any say in policy, seriously.

  • de9802

    The only improvement to this video would be if any one of the 5 people present, when this obviously deranged individual started to raise the old single shot musket capable of taking a life, had a concealed carry license and responded by stoping the musket shot in the first place! Anyone that thinks a ban on all guns will be effective needs to reconsider prohibition and nearly every other “ban” the the government imposes. Laws only are effective for the law abiding citizen. Laws in and of themselves do not prevent the individual intent on commiting a crime. The law only provides for a means of punishment (which the criminal doesn’t care about since we have become so lax (read PC) on imposing and carrying out punishment).

  • Conrad Smelner

    There is one fatal flaw: if a man was walking around with a long rifle, someone probably would have CALLED THE POLICE by then. Believe it or not, most police aren’t corrupt, ineffectual donut-chompers. They will actually respond to a call and come to help. It’s just 3 simple numbers: 911.

    And knowing is half the battle!

  • FrankTheTank

    all you idiots who think that gun control is going to work obviously haven’t spent enough time listening to rush limbaugh and blatantly ignoring the facts. like that every time gun control has been used in other countries that it has in fact worked and decreased gun deaths by about 60% and mass shootings (5+) by 99% for example. Just because it works in other very similar highly populated modern society’s such as Australia doesn’t meat it will work here in merca! (it just means that it most likely will work but there is no way to guarantee 100% effectiveness) You can not change the 2nd amendment! (even though the word “amendment” is by definition “change”) I am a gun owner, and a hunter. i need for large capacity mags and assault rifles.(i am a terrible shot, it is disgraceful really) since i live in California it is required to get a background check for a handgun, which is not a problem unless you have a violent criminal history or an unstable medical condition and we shouldn’t discriminate against those people it is just wrong to deprive them of guns. and even with those laws there is still a handgun violence problem in California so it obviously does not work.(except that most of the handgun violence is committed with an unregistered handgun purchased out of state from somewhere that does not have gun laws) So you are gonna have to pry my gun from my cold dead hands!!!(even though nobody is trying to take it from me and if they were prying it from my cold dead hands really wouldn’t be much of a problem for their drones)

  • wow

    haha this is a funny commercial. If gun laws should change according to this perception then I guess we need to outlaw every pistol , revolver, as well. Forget an assault rifle , when you put this antique blackpowder rifle into comparison then this guy could have killed or hurt waaaay more people with just a .22 pistol or .22 rifle .. If gun laws need to change this drastically then there is no way the government needs to have assault rifles either, or even pistols for that matter. Because they’d have nothing to worry about. But of course that’s not how it will play out. The government will get more assault weapons and all the military-style assault rifles with 30 round clips will be easier for white suburban crazies to get their hands on in a growing underground market that doesn’t require federal background checks which by the way have already been in place for a long time. But first all the gun manufactures are going to make 10 times as much annual profit in only 1 month due to all the fear kicked up that both sides are responsible for. So you’ll have 10 times are more assault rifles on the streets that get “grandfathered” in as pre-bans (meaning they are not illegal because they were purchased before a ban was effectively in place). The whole debate is a bunch of BS for politicians to make themselves look good and for people to make profit. If you want to stop the gun violence you need to create better jobs, healthcare, resources and social infrastructure. The other interesting thing about this is how gun violence kills many blacks and people of color in more economically deprived (poor, working class, low income) areas but politicians never shed a tear. You don’t see all the fancy gun reform laws and commercials coming out until white folks are the victims. Then they pass laws that ultimately criminalize and target people of color and feed the pipeline directly into the prison industrial complex. What a bunch of political BS to keep folks distracted while companies get rich , politicians deceive and pretend to play a victim card to get brownie points, and local and federal law enforcement agencies buy millions of bullets, assault weapons and drones to kill more (hopefully to them unarmed) people.

  • Greennovator

    I have 90 loaded single-shot muskets! I’ll take you all !! My tin-foil hat can detect the drones !!! Keep sucking their c*%ks (Beck, Limbaugh, Jones, etc).
    [snark, in case you needed that spelled out]
    I think I’ve seen two relatively intelligent comments here. Truly. Freaking. Sad.

  • Donald Hobbs

    If the bastard at Sandy Hook had to spend more time reloading several more people would have lived. To the idiots who say “well what if 12 guys break into my house and I only have 10 shots?” Well then unless the fact that you’re armed scares them off, you could have 100 shots, but chances are they’re going to get to you regardless. They whine that there have been a lot of successful defensive gun uses every year. To that there are two easy counter points to make: one we aren’t trying to ban guns so defensive gun use wouldn’t be hampered, and two if we better regulated who can get a gun then the defensive gun use rate wouldn’t need to be so high.
    “Sweden has a lot of armed civilians and they’re fine!” Yeah well, Japan has very few, and they’re fine too. Those 2 countries also have more equality than us, and both have a lot more atheists per capita than us.
    “But our founding fathers-” weren’t perfect, and times then were different. If our founding fathers established that religion has to stay away from our laws, I sincerely doubt the gun fanatics would also be for that. Oh wait…

    To the idiots whining that we need more guns or that gun laws are bad, stfu, learn a few facts, and realize there is not a single good argument for that side of the debate. Get over it.

    • Phearless

      There are no good arguments for your side, either.

      You mentioned Japan and their gun laws. They have very few homicides, this much is true. But what you’re ignoring is the fact that 31,690 Japanese people committed suicide with a firearm, last year.
      That is at least 31,690 firearms in a country where owning one is illegal. Imagine the absolute havoc even one of those people could have caused in a sardine-can city like Tokyo, if he had decided to bring that gun to work with him, instead of quietly ending himself in his apartment.

      • Derek Tube

        So I had a look for where the figure of 31,690-by-firearms comes from. The closest I could find was a report by the Washington post (March 3, 2011) citing that 31,690 Japanese took their own lives in 2010. That’s 31,690 deaths by ALL methods of suicide, not just firearms, and looking at a study on Japanese suicide methods it appears firearm suicides are a miniscule proportion of the total. Unless you can show me a source (study/ original report) then this figure you quoted is incorrect.

        • Donald Hobbs

          Also, a side note, it has been shown many times that if you make it harder to get guns, suicide rates tend to go down, since shooting yourself in the head pretty much can kill you instantly, so you feel nothing. Sure, many would still kill themselves, just they would choose a different method. BUT a different method would take longer. And in that time the person could cool off and think (something a lot of the righties on this page should try) and would be a lot less likely to go through with a suicide.

          • Phearless

            Wrong, again, Don. Firearms aren’t the only method of suicide. In fact, that is the method that produces the lowest rate of fatal results. People tend to reflexively try to jerk the weapon away from themselves at the moment the trigger breaks. So, you end up with near-fatal head wounds. Buddy of mine in the Army tried to check out, that way. Docs patched him up nice, and gave him his walking papers. He’s recovered pretty well, and regrets not getting help instead of putting a gun in his mouth.

            Your statistics are completely wrong. If I was mistaken on the number I quoted, I can accept that.
            But your utopian vision of “gun control always equals safety” is just plain naive. South Africa has some of the strictest gun control in the world, yet their homicide rate makes us look like Iceland, by comparison. Explain that.
            Better yet, explain the gun violence in Chicago, New York City, and Washington DC… three Continental US cities with total gun ownership bans in place, that, combined, give us nearly half our annual firearm homicides.
            I am nearly certain that if I dropped numbers with irrefutable citations right in front of you, you still wouldn’t back down.

            Let me really blow your mind, here… I’m not even a Republican. Nor am I anti-regulation. Unfettered Access policies are total stupidity… but, likewise, so are blanket type-bans and “gun free zones”. Responsible, law-abiding citizens should be allowed to arm themselves… because, let’s face it… the bad guys are going to get guns, no matter what. And the police are only going to jot down notes where they found your body, and try to look for the guy that did it.

      • Michael Simpson

        So you’re saying that guns are doing Japan a public service by stopping people from committing suicide in public places? Either you’re a troll or you have some severely twisted logic running around your brain.

        • Phearless

          You are obviously drastically short on your comprehension skills. I don’t even know how you managed to glean this from what I said.

      • Donald Hobbs

        You can say there are no good arguments for my side all you want, it’s just another point where you’re wrong. By the way, since you’re probably too misinformed to know this: WE AREN’T TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS! Goddamn, this is why people like you shouldn’t be allowed to vote. We’d have a much better congress if only we only allowed people who actually critically think to be allowed to vote.

        • David Fraine

          See, now this is typical liberal elitist thinking. “this is why people like you shouldn’t be allowed to vote” In other words, if someone disagrees with your point of view then they should just keep their mouths shut. Or, I want to tell you my opinion, but I don’t want to hear yours. People like you would destroy the very foundations that made the USA a the greatest county in the world. Fortunately for the rest of us, you only get one vote and there are some 300+ million US citizens.

          • Donald Hobbs

            No, yet another example of ignorance. Idiots shouldnt be allowed to vote. People who don’t critically think shouldn’t be allowed to vote. People who don’t care about their fellow people shouldn’t be allowed to vote. That should be the case whether the majority of those people end up being left or right. The testing to earn voting rights would not be based on opinions or things like the ability to read, it would be based on ones ability to understand current events and the flows of the country. There is nothing liberal about that. The USA also is far from the greatest country in the world. If you honestly believe the US, as it is now or when Bush was president, is the greatest country in the world then you are too short sighted. Your attempts at sounding like the more mature one here have failed. Your arguments are pathetic and easy to pick apart.

          • patriot 86

            well then if idiots shouldnt be allowed to vote then youd be bitching because your nothing but a blathering idiot that needs to pull her head out of her ass and look around at the world we live in and realize that people cant rely on the cops and need to protect themselves from assholes like yourself and anyone else that wants to take our freedoms away.

          • Donald Hobbs

            When did I say i want to take freedoms away? I AM NOT PROPOSING TAKING AWAY GUNS YOU FUCKING INBRED MORON!

          • Donald Hobbs

            I mean really. This guy, phearless, believes liberals are trying to ban all guns. If someone honestly believes that, there is no excuse, with all the ways of getting information in this country, for such ignorance, and that person should not be allowed to vote because if they can’t understand such a simple fact like that about our politics then they should have no say in what happens in politics, just like how we don’t give people terrible in the field of medicine a license to practice it.

          • Phearless

            When did I say that? Point out where I said that. I challenge you to scoop up my comment where I said anything like that.

            You’re cherry-picking my posts, shifting the focus, and planting words in my mouth. Don’t pretend to know what I believe… that’s for me to tell you all… not for you to make ignorant assumptions and wave it around as though fact.

          • Phearless

            Furthermore, I wouldn’t go insulting the political opinions of someone else, when you have done nothing but show you don’t even see that our government is fascist, and has been since the mid-50′s, if not even long before then.

            But, please… continue to “educate” me.

          • Alexandra North

            America is no longer the greatest country in the world….Mostly because of your kind……& if the right wing had its way liberal supporters would have a tough time casting their ballots….but you won’t ….your on the losing side of the most important issues this country faces

        • Phearless

          I shouldn’t be allowed to vote?
          Friend, what have you done with your life that puts you above me? I can tell you that I served for 8 years in the Army, and I have no delusions that I’m better than you, or more worthy of the right to cast my vote at a polling place… and that’s saying something, because I’m also a documented functional narcissist.
          You elitism puts me to shame, here. How did you come to think so profoundly high of yourself?

          • Donald Hobbs

            your 8 years in the army does not mean you are automatically correct about gun control. However, according to the criteria I would create for voting, as long as you are not also a convicted felon then actually you would be allowed to vote.

    • KPres

      No gun control in any country has ever led to a significant decrease in murder rates. None, zero, zip.

      Go away.

      • Jon Stone

        If that’s even true (and one detects the whiff of horseshit) that would be because countries with gun control have always had gun control, and have avoided a culture of idiots shooting each other.

      • Donald Hobbs

        Wow, thats just full of bullshit.

        • patriot 86

          No your the one full of bullshit.You say you like to debate but its pretty tough to debate someone who has their mind made up that theyre right before the debate even starts.Why dont you listen for once and realize that a gun is only a piece of steel like a hammer or knife that can do nothing until someone picks it up and uses it incorrectly.If a crazed madman had gone to sandy hook with a aluminum baseball bat and before he was stopped ‘ killed 10 kids’ would you all be calling to ban baseball bats.Of course not youd say but the fact that they were killed with a gun makes them somehow deader.Once more so you and all the peabrain anti gunners can understand.The gun is not the killer but the person holding it .End of argument.

  • Tom Hayes

    Crazy shootings media goes gaga for are in GUN-FREE-ZONES and involve heavy prescription drugs. The crazy shootings the media ignores are the trigger-happy cops or the shooters stopped quickly by a licenced citizen carrying a gun.

    • diecuts

      If this guy came into your office, what would you rather be doing, calling 911 or shooting back? Ask the teacher hiding in the closet at Sandy Hook, protecting her kids with her body, watching the bullet holes coming closer and closer to her position. My guess would be that she would rather be returning fire. The 911 call, no matter how prompt, isn’t quick enough, not at Sandy Hook, not at this office. If this were my office, which is almost identical by the way, with 3 ladies in cubicles, the guy would be ‘no more’, and not just by me. We all are decent shots and have concealed weapons permits. The lesson? Perhaps the next guy may be a little hesitant about using the same scenario….and live longer. Since this guy was living in the “civil war’ era of black powder, a 44 remington black powder revolver would have been appropriate to take him down……but a 38 S&W as backup would make sure.

      • Donald Hobbs

        Then its a good thing WE ARENT BANNING ALL GUNS YOU FUCKING MORON!

        • diecuts

          Donald, you are finally getting the point. Glad you could take the time to wake up and figure it out!

          • Donald Hobbs

            UGH no! WE as in the left are NOT trying to ban guns. The RIGHT and people who claim they arent right wingers but are still gun nuts claim WE (the left) are trying to ban guns.And if more people had guns in this country and we regulated them less then it is a lot more likely that one person going on a shooting spree will cause a lot more people to die because of the confusion it would create since this is currently a shitty country with shitty retarded people all over it

          • David Fraine

            Donald, If you hate this country so much, then leave. No one is holding you here (provided you are not in jail or awaiting trial).

          • Donald Hobbs

            Wow what a great argument. Thank you so much, I have been waiting so long to be able to use this comeback. Let me take in this moment before I type it [5 second pause] if you hate our president’s policies so much THEN LEAVE!

            See how that argument can be turned around? And when the hell did I express hatred for this country? I said its a shitty country I never said I hated it. I have read 2/3 of your replies to my comments so far, and I am not at all impressed. You’re just another idiot it seems. I was really hoping for someone with good arguments, because, well, I enjoy debating from time to time. But it seems I’ve picked the side, on this topic, that has 0 points to argue against.

    • Doc Adam Caldwell

      awesome, well said.

  • Phearless

    I keep marveling at the utopian idea that criminals follow laws.
    Do you guys check your brains at the conventions?

    Yes, the Republican agenda is screwed up as all hell… but living in your fantasy world that putting up signs that say “no guns allowed” will stop people from shooting eachother, is just as outlandish.

    It really doesn’t take much thought to understand that the world doesn’t work like that.
    South Africa has some of the harshest gun control laws in the world… they see over 78,000 homicides with firearms, per year. That’s nearly 9 times our number, with less than 1/8th the total population.
    OBVIOUSLY gun laws don’t work.

    Furthermore… imagine someone trying to defend himself against an armed criminal, armed with the weapon in this video.

    • Yeah

      Do you know how easy it is to buy a gun? Especially not on record. Gun laws does not simply mean restriction, but REGULATION of who owns it. If we limit the ease of access, them we could limit potential mass killing sprees.

      • Phearless

        Well, I own a rifle and a handgun. It’s incredibly easy to buy a gun if you’re not a convicted felon. Even easier when you’re an honorably discharged veteran.

        If you ARE a convicted felon, the only way you’re getting your hands on a gun is by stealing it, or by visiting a “back alley dealer”… and those guys don’t do background checks. There is no way of disarming criminals. Get that through your heads. Passing gun laws only hurts the people who want them for self-defense and recreation.

        There has never, in the entire history of this country, been a gun control law that actually reduced crime, nor have any of these laws been a “compromise”. Take a look at the Department of Justice’s statistics, some time… you’ll find out how wrong both Republicans and Democrats really are on the subject.

        • appleblossom

          In the US you can also lose your right to a gun if you have a protective order against you. Did you know that?

          • Phearless

            I think that anyone who speaks up in defense of the 2nd Amendment and doesn’t take the time to know elementary details like that, is probably just some redneck imbecile with more hubris than brain matter.

            There a reason you mentioned that to me?

  • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

    I went to Fort Worth nr Dallas once – there was ‘gun show’ on – people were walking in the street with guns – I left immediately.

    Now I NEVER travel to the US

    America needs to JuMp from the 19th century to the 21st…

    • Phearless

      England, right?
      Where a man hacked a uniformed soldier to death with a hatchet, in broad daylight, in the middle of London, and people just sat there and watched….

      • Phearless

        Don’t misunderstand… I’m a little bit of an Anglophile… and I’m nowhere near as in love with my own country as even the average American… but, goddamn, man. Get the plank out of your eye.

        • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

          I’m glad you are an Anglophile – I went to the States 30 times, had a partner in Sacramento.

          Please compare the act of one mentally misbalanced terrorist with a knife to your country’s most infamus gun attrocity – we have never had a gunmen go into a school and shoot dozens of small children and teachers.

          THAT is why you need to BAN guns. Period!

          • Katherine Walton

            Unless Dunblane is outside the UK, yes, you have. That said? It precipitated laws which made private ownership of a handgun illegal.

          • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

            Well done on finding an example to justify your argument BUT that was TWENTY FIVE years ago !

          • Kerry

            If you want a historical and statistical representation of what gun control does and has done:
            http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

          • KPres

            25 years ago? You apparently don’t know anything about the US or the UK:

            “”"The Cumbria shootings was a killing spree that occurred on 2 June 2010 when a lone gunman, Derrick Bird, killed 12 people and injured 11 others before killing himself in Cumbria, England.”"”"

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings

            2010…not 25 years ago.

          • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

            And I wonder where he got the idea from ?

          • Katherine Walton

            Oh, sure, old Derrick, he was just minding his own business when, one day, he saw a news report about a mass killing in the US and thought, “Gee, what a good idea!”

          • Katherine Walton

            Which argument would that be, Len? You made an assertion, I corrected that assertion. I then pointed out that the UK government reacted differently after Dunblane than the US government reacted after Sandy Hook. Nowhere in those three sentences did I put out any kind of argument at all.

          • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

            It’s sad that people in America clearly cannot resolve the ‘gun crisis’ that goes back all the way to the assassinations of Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy. Such a VIOLENT lesson, not learned after 50 years will never be learned. Yet when I attempt to give an outsiders view of how we see America on this issue, I am ‘shot down’ with pedantic arguments far away from the basic point.

            The only thing shot where I now live (Portugal) is rabbits.

            I’ll leave you to debate/argue this for the next 50 years – I hope you survive to do so.

          • kc2livingny

            Len Groat – You speak as though that guy owned a gun legally! He didn’t. In fact show me where a person who went out and shot a ton of people with a gun who actually owned the gun legally. There’s your proof! Sandy Hook school was a gun free zone, but a crazy man stole a gun, went in and shot a bunch of people. Look at how many people died waiting for the police to get there. Now imagine just one person at that school who had a license to carry. Crazy man would have been shot shortly after his first shot! Or he would have been stopped immediately and had to take cover because someone was shooting at him. Imagine all the lives that would have been saved by that one person with a license to carry.

            In Texas you have the right to carry a gun and they do. Did you notice not one person lost control and started shooting at everyone? Do you think anyone up to no good would have tried anything there? NO! You were probably in the safest place in the US at the time but because you weren’t used to seeing what you were seeing and because the media has scared you to death about guns, you freaked out and left. Too bad you could have learned that there are many many people out there who know how to handle a gun, carry one and still act responsibly.

          • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

            So Texas is ‘the safest place in the USA’ ?

            Top 10 States with Firearm-related Murders in 2012

            1. California – 1,220
            2. Texas – 699
            3. Pennsylvania – 470
            4. New York – 445
            5. Michigan – 450

          • KPres

            Somebody doesn’t know what “per capita” means. And California and New York have some of the strictist gun control in the country. Way to blow up your own argument. You clearly don’t know anything about the US. Please stay in England. Nobody wants you coming here.

          • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

            I’m sure the ONE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY FIVE people murdered by guns in CA and NY in 2012 are delighted those states have “some of the strictest gun control in the country”!

            I’m most happy to ‘stay in England’, what shame John Lennon wasn’t…..

          • Donald Hobbs

            I wish I could join you but I’m in no position to leave America right now. If everyone like me left though then these idiots would destroy this country

          • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

            Thank you. It’s surprising how they can ignore the voice of reason of a nation that’s been around for 1000 years more than their UN united states. They have quibbled, argued and shot each other other for 150 years and not learned the lesson..

            The ‘special relationship’ between the USA and UK is a fallacy pushed by politicians. In reality the UK does not ‘need’ the USA in any way…. Europe is Britain’s future ,and long-term (industrious) China will eclipse every nation.

          • David Fraine

            So, during WWII when we saved your butts from being taken over by Germany should not count ans being needed?

          • http://www.solidgoldgem.am/ Len Groat

            Please re-read this history: America did not even enter the war until after Pearl Harbour, and you did not (as you so colourfully put it) ‘save our butts’, you just dropped a Nuclear bomb. We more subtly (and costing less lives) had the Dambusters and their flying bombs, + Churchill !

          • Donald Hobbs

            Don’t bother with him. I’m not sure how long you’ve been watching American’s argue, but there are a lot, like this kid, who yell and scream crap that they’d know isn’t true if they actually tried to learn something.

          • David Fraine

            Donald, I would love to see the experiment where we divide up the country into 2 separate countries, one for the liberals and one for conservatives. I can guarantee you that the country with the conservatives would prosper for all citizens and crime would be down while the one with the liberals would go bankrupt, poverty would be rampant and crime would be at an all time high and they would be begging the conservatives to defend their boarders (since they would have no military – it’s just not the liberal thing to do) from their enemies.

          • Donald Hobbs

            This is the third and final reply you have written to me, for now. The first two were arguments that were extremely easy to disprove. This time, however, what you have told me is both easy to disprove and completely baseless. No military? Even you aren’t dumb enough to want that. Crime would be down? We’d declare bankruptcy? Yes because clearly the more conservative states are economically all great and have extremely low crime rates. Don’t bother trying to even defend your arguments at this point, you’ll be wasting your time. Its not too late though for you to realize how demonstrably wrong you are. Get away from Fox “news,” go read a book thats not the god damn bible, and try doing some actual research.

          • kc2livingny

            Now compare the population to the murders and take out the police shootings. Oh you might not be able to do that, the numbers like to include all shootings so it looks worse than it is…

          • Donald Hobbs

            Sandy Hook guy took his mother’s guns which were legal. You don’t have an argument

          • kc2livingny

            They were legal for her to own and handle NOT for her son to break in and steal! He did not have a license! You’re twisting the truth to make your point, try to stay with the facts.

          • Donald Hobbs

            No you’re the only one twisting them. SHE had guns even though SHE had an unstable person living in the house and THAT was LEGAL. When I say you don’t have an argument, it is me attempting to save you the trouble of making another misleading claim or shitting more bull. You really should take my advice more seriously. It would save you a lot of time.

          • appleblossom

            You know, there were six minutes between when the first call came in and the shooter shot himself. He killed 26 people in that time. Had he had to have had a musket, he would have been able to kill maybe one-two at the most before being tackled.

            It takes an extraordinary person to be willing to tackle someone actively shooting at them. Or to calmly go and get their gun out of the safe that it is in to keep it out of the kids hands, load it, then aim, then fire accurately enough to avoid hitting anyone but the shooter.

            And shooters will adapt. They already have.

          • kc2livingny

            Once someone shot back at him, he’s hiding and not moving around to do more damage. So he’s either pinned down or if the person shooting is a good shot he’s shot. IF a person gets a gun they learn how to use it and understand if you pick up a gun you better be ready to shoot it and they train to do that. So yes, if a person is license to carry a gun they will be able to go and get it in an emergency and use it if necessary. It can be stored in a locked box and be safe.

          • kc2livingny

            Also how long did it take for the police to get there while all those people desperately needed them? Just one person with a gun could have changed things until help arrived. One person!

          • Donald Hobbs

            Thank you for being a voice of reason here.

    • KPres

      “”"Now I NEVER travel to the US”"”

      Problem solved.

      • Donald Hobbs

        He’s right. For reasons other than lack of gun regulation this has become a horrible country. We need to significantly improve our education systems and media so we don’t have nearly as many idiots like you. Then America wouldn’t suck so much right now

        • Donald Hobbs

          Oh wow, someone disliked my comment. If someone is going to hate a comment that says America sucks right now, come up with a counter argument. It’s too bad there are none though

  • Doc Adam Caldwell

    sure… disarm everyone so that no on can stop the shooter. DUMB ASs peopel

    • Jon Stone

      Fact: far less gun crime in countries with tighter gun rules. No amount of theory-crafting gets you beyond this point. In Britain, you can spend your entire life in an area with a high crime rate and never even see a gun.

      • appleblossom

        I think most people are looking at the “far less death” portion of it.

    • Donald Hobbs

      WE ARE NOT TRYING TO DISARM EVERYONE! GODDAMN WHERE THE FUCK DO YOU IDIOTS COME FROM? Go back to your sister-mother you fucking inbred moron!

  • Albert K

    They forgot that Ed would have had a bayonet on his musket and skewered at least a few people. Then he likely could have turned it around and clubbed a few more people to death.
    If you’re going to try to make a point with your smarmy, smartass video, at least try to get the facts straight.

    • KPres

      Or he’d have set off an IDE. Gun control accomplishes nothing. Never has, never will.

      • Donald Hobbs

        And again we have this baseless statement. The good news though is more and more Americans, and people all over the world, are recognizing that your statement simply is not true. In the end you’ll just be chanting a false mantra, only embarrassing yourself.

      • Donald Hobbs

        And, a minor point, I think you mean IED

  • KPres

    Since most murderers are Democrats, maybe we should just ban guns for them. Let everybody else own what they want.

    • Donald Hobbs

      You need to look deeper into that.

    • David Fraine

      Or we could just ban Democrats all together. Problem solved.

      • Donald Hobbs

        You don’t seem to realize that you accused me (falsely) of saying that anyone who doesn’t agree with me shouldn’t be allowed to vote. Here now you are saying we should ban everyone with the polar opposite political view that you have.

  • ryan miller

    I think only Jews and the gov should have guns Armys and nuclear weapons

  • Pingback: The BEST Gun Control Commercial EVER. | Tasers ...

  • Donald Hobbs

    Another note, does anyone else notice the shot he fires blows a hole in the door frame?