Sporting rifle or " weapon of war" - doesn't matter. The very point of the 2A was to acknowledge that we possess the right to own & bear weapons = to those of the government/military in order to protect ourselves from tyranny.
Quite the contrary, our Right for Self Protection is a GOD Given Right, whereas our 2nd Amendment CURTAILS The Government from Abusing.., Limiting and/or Destroying those Natural Rights we People have at BIRTH!! THAT’s EXACTLY WHAT The Government doesn’t care for ~ OUR HAVING INALIENABLE RIGHTS [OUR OWN POWER!] for which THEY CANNOT TOUCH - NOT without OUR Surrendering said Rights..!!! Don’t EVER EVEN THINK ABOUT IT, Patriots🇺🇸 #2A 🇺🇸
I find it eternally curious (and aggrivating) that the former democracy of Canada has never had, does not have, and will likely never have, anything resembling the 2nd amendment to the United States Constitution. In my sad little country, to the North of the US of A, we the people (sheeple) are expected to let our 'government' do the defending and protecting of it's citizens for us. What a absurd joke. In addition, so as to rub salt into that already open wound of a policy, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has recently made it illegal for Canadian citizens to purchase handguns. Ironic then that he, upon making his journey's to various locations around Canada, should find himself eternally surrounded by what is certain to be a well armed security detail, which could lead one could infer that the PM feels that his life is worth defending, while the lives of the mere citizens ........are not. Canada......a sad country indeed.
I agree completely. As a serious student of the law and the Constitution, Mr. Ayoob stated what I have said for years "Weapons of war are EXACTLY what the Second Amendment protects" Case law proves this as in the case of conviction of a man in the 1930's for having a short barrel shotgun and the judge said this was not in common use by the MILITARY at the time! Why that never comes up in modern cases involving NFA or GCA is beyond me.
i just dont like the disingenuousness of it. Full automatic is never used aynmore. its all single controlled shots. Turns out better for some reason even with low recoil 223. So we could take FA away from regular grunts and we'd still be using them. AR15 is a weapon of war by any measure because its as efficient as possible for today's battlefield. And IF you actualyl believe the 2nd amendment, you have a righto to such a thing.
No person or group can legally or morally decide whether you can defend yourselves. Its up to us just as it was up to those in 1776 and earlier. Stand fast America!
"No person or group can legally or morally decide whether you can defend yourselves" you are wrong my friend. they CAN do it, and they DO do it. almost every damn day. your heart is right, but your head is not. defend yourself with deadly force from a robber or thug. brother, your whole day (life) will be dekcuf up
@ramonazteca " If circumstances should at any time obligate the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of ARMS who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist. " ~Alexander Hamilton Federalist No.28 1788
@@ramonazteca" The CONSTITUTION of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their RIGHT and DUTY to be at All Times ARMED." ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Catwright June 5th 1824
Hi. I’m a civilian gun owner form Poland and fun of the channel. My experience with gun laws is a little different, so I can offer a different perspective. I’m actually pleased with my country’s gun law. In order to buy a gun in Poland you have to get a license. Any Polish citizen without criminal record can get a license. It is comparable to getting a driving license here. You have to pass a theoretical test, practical test, and get checked out by a doctor. So, when I bought my first gun, I knew how to operate the thing safely. When I go to a gun store and show my license, I can buy any non-fully automatic weapon I desire. No background checks. No tax stamps. No barrel length, magazine size, grip or stock restrictions. When I import a gun, I don’t need to get a “kit”, or chop it to pieces to cross the border. I just register it normally like a car. I often recommend going to a range to friends. I would like as many people as possible to learn how to shoot and obtain the license. Gun related crimes in Poland are very low, and school shootings are non-existent, so we must be doing something right.
America can thank Hollywood for glorifying guns and the current gun crime in this country. Smoking cigarettes in the movies made you look "cool" . It took a long time for people to figure out they can also kill you. Maybe its time to "ban" Hollywood movies with gun violence in them. Ask Alec Baldwin and see what he thinks!
The second amendment does NOT give us the right to bear arms, we are born with that right. The second amendment only prevents the government from violating our rights. THAT is the conversation that should be had.
Agreed Also something that doesn't get talked a lot in regards to the 2A and that is *sovereignty.* From chatGPT before it got extremely biased: When the Founding Fathers spoke of "the people could assert their sovereignty," they referred to the idea that the ultimate source of political authority and power in the new nation rested with the citizens. The concept of sovereignty in the context of the American Revolution and the creation of the United States was closely tied to the principles of popular sovereignty and self-governance. In the traditional European model of governance, power was concentrated in the hands of monarchs or ruling elites, who held authority by divine right or hereditary claims. However, the Founding Fathers rejected this notion and believed that political legitimacy came from the consent of the governed, not from any divine or inherited right. They embraced the idea of popular sovereignty, which asserted that the people, as a collective body, were the true source of political power. In other words, the government derived its legitimacy and authority from the will of the people it governed. The citizens, through their participation and representation in the democratic process, could shape the laws and institutions that governed their lives. This idea of sovereignty was deeply intertwined with the concept of individual rights and liberties, as the Founding Fathers sought to create a system that protected the rights of individuals while promoting the common good. The Second Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, was seen as a critical safeguard for maintaining the people's sovereignty. It recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which was instrumental in empowering them to protect themselves, their families, and their communities. The ability of the people to be armed was not just about self-defense against criminals or foreign invaders but also about preserving the citizens' ability to resist any potential future government that might infringe upon their liberties. The Founding Fathers saw the armed citizenry as a check on potential abuses of power by the government, ensuring that the government would always be accountable to the people it governed. By having the means to defend themselves and their rights, the people could actively participate in shaping the course of the nation, thereby asserting their sovereignty in the political landscape. In conclusion, the notion of "the people could assert their sovereignty" meant that the power and authority of the government emanated from the consent of the governed. It emphasized the people's role as the ultimate decision-makers and highlighted their right to bear arms as a means to protect their liberties and participate actively in the governance of the new nation.
Here’s a selection of some quotes directly from the Founders. I like to use these in arguments as well because it is difficult for someone to refute the words of the very men who wrote the Constitution. (I copy and pasted these to notes for easy access whenever I need them) George Washington said: "When government takes away citizens' right to bear arms it becomes citizens duty to take away goverment's right to govern.” Pretty clear John Adams said: "ARMS IN THE HANDS OF INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS MAY BE USED AT INDIVIDUAL DISCRETION FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE COUNTRY, THE OVER-THROW OF TYRANNY, OR IN PRIVATE SELF-DEFENSE." Thomas Jefferson said: "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." “Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.” "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Frederick Douglass, a great African American politician, said: “A man's right rests in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.” Sam Adams, John Adams brother, said: “Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.” "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." Tench Coxe, a PA Delegate to the Continental Congress, said: “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an Americans.” Patrick Henry said:"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
@@bikerbobcat I had compiled them over time onto an album of screenshots on my phone. I don’t have the exact origin of each quote, but they should be relatively easy to look up on the internet using part of the wording. I do that sometimes, and I have had good success finding the author of the quote and where they said/wrote the quote. I have good confidence in the historicity of most of them because many came GunsNGadgets, AZ quotes, or other trustworthy sources. There’s also an app called founders quotes that send a quote each day to your notifications.
@@trev5.566 On a historical note, multi-shot firearms existed at the time of the founding and the Founding Fathers were personally aware of them. The Kalthoff repeater had a 30-round magazine and was invented in 1630. The Belton flintlock was invented in 1777 and was personally demonstrated to the Founding Fathers. Just a few years after the ratification of the Bill of Rights, Lewis & Clark carried the Girardoni air rifle (invented 1779) on their famous expedition and used it to great effect. The Founding Fathers knew technology would advance because they were seeing it happen in their lifetimes. If they only wanted us to have muskets they would have said so. No word in our founding documents is there by accident. I also like Thomas Jefferson recommending to his nephew to constantly carry a rifle on his walks and get good with it. You may wish to add that quote.
Our founding fathers are smiling down on Mas because he’s leading the fight for freedom well, to know that the right to keep and bear arms is the key stone to our sacred constitution.
who defines "a good citizen"? The Constitution doesn't say anything about good citizens only owning guns. You are one of these common sense gun law type.
The media wants people to think AR15 ownership is something recent but I bought my first in 1978 , two years after my discharge and they were commercially available since the late 60s.
The problem with certain members of congess is they either incapable of understanding or they are puppets of the democratic socialist party, on the take!
I love listening to this man speak from all of his wisdom thank you Wilson Combat Channel. Keep on speaking the truth every individual has a right for self-preservation and the right to protect him or herself and their family.
It doesn’t help much as long as States can enact their laws! Question? Can the Supreme Court give a decision on States having their own gun laws? Why is it pick and choose for states to do what they want and ignore the second. Amendment?
@@bradbenson6929Because the constitution is not without regulation whether it be at the state or federal level. You should’ve remembered this from fourth grade US history but apparently 99.6% of all Americans have forgotten that. If the constitution was so absolute then under the verbiage of the first amendment I should be able to hurl threats at you and yell “bomb” on an airplane. No different than how no state or federal entity can actually ban all firearms however some can be restricted. This is indeed legal under the constitution since its implementation. Your First, Second and Fourth amendment rights all have limited restrictions in lieu of the verbiage written as none of those three amendments are absolute. Same as with the fourth amendment on how there are exceptions to search warrants as statistically 89% of all searches conducted whether it be to a vehicle (mobility exception) or in a house warrantless (exigency). And those searches are indeed done legally. If you don’t like it go change the constitution. 🤷♂️🤷♂️ There’s a hell of a lot more to the constitution than the verbiage written for each amendment. People will read the second amendment being “A-well regulated militia……..” as the verbiage that it’s written as all of a sudden they think they’re now all scholars in constitutional law. That verbiage is the basis of laws to pre-exist that of further restrictions by the government. I’m a Texas prosecutor full-time and teach LSU legal part-time during the fall classes. Just over the fourth amendment alone I have 884 questions in my question bank we issue to entry-level legal students along with a seventeen (17) hour PowerPoint over the fourth amendment alone. That seventeen hours of PowerPoint presentation is what actually EXPLAINS the fourth amendment. In a nutshell the general public have no earthly ideas to what they’re talking about. Proof of this is when I issue these quizzes to the public they failed them miserably regardless of which questions I pick out of them. If you can’t pass these quizzes then you don’t know the constitution plain and simple
@@bradbenson6929 The 10th amendment stated that was NOT assigned to the federal government, was left to the states to decide. Guns WERE assigned to the federal government. The states cannot make laws against the U.S. Constitution. Yet, here we are.
Superb, wholly accurate, and - most importantly - fundamental and essential to the preservation of individual liberties in the “great experiment“ we call the United States of America.
Unfortunately, not everybody agrees that liberty and self defense are inalienable rights as stated in the Declaration. Too many around the world believe in various amounts of government control, and self defense is seldom allowed.
@@loboheeler Most developed nations, including the USA, have mixed economies and protected freedoms. Often to a larger degree than the USA. The USA also has as much government control as they do. If you think of how many things would stop working without it you'll see it's not all bad. With utter freedom you should be allowed to drive on whichever side of the road you like. Does that sound like a good idea? Government control means that when you buy milk you probably won't contract tuberculosis of the stomach. Try catching a flight across country without government control. Good luck with that. I'm not sure where you get the idea of self-defense not being allowed, unless by that you mean firearms. Several countries have gun ownership rates up there with the USA, Switzerland for instance. But they are regulated. If you compare the crime rates and number of gun deaths with those countries they are miniscule compared to the USA. maybe you need to do some traveling and educate yourself about the planet. The current population of the earth is 8,076,994,357. The current population of the USA is 331 million. I think that makes it about 4% of the world's population. Just for a bit of perspective.
As i tell most people, "almost every gun today has had it's basis in war"....including the musket, single shots, lever actions, bolt actions (Springfield 1903 comes to mind) and in modern times the self loading rifles...ect.
Every book Mas has recommended I have read. I now automatically purchase these books, I have never been disappointed. Great information. Thank you Mas!
I searched “Commentaries on the common law” is it the same as “Commentaries on the laws of England?” Thanks If u know or any book u liked he recommends I just found his channel. Good day & thanks
I am from Maine, and we are a Constitutional Carry state. The Individual Right to both own and carry a firearm is firmly entrenched. We are a state, outside of cities like Augusta and Portland which have been overrun by Massachusetts leftists, populated by tough people who have always eeked out a living from the land. Firearms have been an integral part of that life. I was 10 years old when by father deemed me ready to learn marksmanship and how to hunt. I was given a .410 bore, single shot, shotgun, and donned my blaze orange and ventured into the woods at my father's side. He also took time to teach me other important woodcraft skills, like using a compass. At 13, I got my first job, saved my wages and then bought a Marlin .22 caliber, bolt action target rifle, which I practiced with constantly. At 14, my dad bought me a model 94, 30-30 Winchester for my birthday. I'm 58 now, and still have my Marlin and Winchester, I gave the .410 to my niece when she was old enough so she could hunt with her dad. I still vividly remember the first Roughed Grouse, we call them pahtridge here, and deer I got. It was a right of passage. Although I can no longer hunt due to physical impairment, my friends rely on the annual, grouse, deer and moose hunting seasons to provide food for their families. Today a good friend, who had no luck this year, was thrilled when a friend of his gave him a whole deer. This meant he had meat to help feed his wife and kids. No politician would dare to utter the words gun control, at least north or west of Augusta. Even Congressman Jared Golden, a leftist politician from Southern Maine, never considered it. That has begun to change, after a deranged, insane man, went into two family friendly establishments, and brutally murdered innocent people in Lewiston, Maine. So now cowards like Jared Golden have joined in the ludicrous rhetoric of restricting gun ownership as means to prevent crime. All guns are inert objects, or tools here in Maine, incapable of doing anything until a human being picks it up and uses it. That human can use it for positive purposes, such as hunting, or competing in shooting sports, this is a responsible, law abiding human being. The opposite is the deranged, insane, or criminal human being who picks up a gun with the intent of harming others. They do not care about any gun laws, this is why convicted felons, or people who have been institutionalized for mental illness, committ crimes with guns. Chicago has the toughest gun control laws , yet to date this year there have been 2879 shootings, with 591 homicides. And for the leftists who love to claim that police shoot innocent people, only 10 of these shootings were by police officers, with only 5 being fatal. Once our Second Ammendment Rights are removed, it will be very easy for the leftists/marxists to get rid of all the others. And they will.
Hoo boy... And people thought the backlash against the View for their witchhunt attempts against Jason Aldeen was bad... I dare say that that show going after Mas would put the final nails in that show's coffin...
Massad Ayoob is so interesting. I'm a Belgian police officer and I think it's so great that the American people can carry a gun. Your constitution allows you an extraordinary thing, fight to keep this right. Long live the United States, long live Belgium and long live the Western world!
My neighbor was a donut shop owner & he was murdered with a horribly stale donut by an irate customer who forgot his clip when he went storming into the shop to blow away my neighbor who he thought was always laughing at him.
As always thank you Mass. You’ve stated before you’re not a lawyer but some of the things you’ve stated from the constitution could be almost as eloquent as a pastor reading from the Bible. God Bless!
One thing i think that gets overlooked in conversations about the AR is... "It was specifically designed for Civilian Use". If you go back and look at what Colt's original statements in advertising it they say it is for the public...that in itself says it all.
Something that doesn't get talked a lot in regards to the 2A and that is *sovereignty.* From chatGPT before it got extremely biased: When the Founding Fathers spoke of "the people could assert their sovereignty," they referred to the idea that the ultimate source of political authority and power in the new nation rested with the citizens. The concept of sovereignty in the context of the American Revolution and the creation of the United States was closely tied to the principles of popular sovereignty and self-governance. In the traditional European model of governance, power was concentrated in the hands of monarchs or ruling elites, who held authority by divine right or hereditary claims. However, the Founding Fathers rejected this notion and believed that political legitimacy came from the consent of the governed, not from any divine or inherited right. They embraced the idea of popular sovereignty, which asserted that the people, as a collective body, were the true source of political power. In other words, the government derived its legitimacy and authority from the will of the people it governed. The citizens, through their participation and representation in the democratic process, could shape the laws and institutions that governed their lives. This idea of sovereignty was deeply intertwined with the concept of individual rights and liberties, as the Founding Fathers sought to create a system that protected the rights of individuals while promoting the common good. The Second Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, was seen as a critical safeguard for maintaining the people's sovereignty. It recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which was instrumental in empowering them to protect themselves, their families, and their communities. The ability of the people to be armed was not just about self-defense against criminals or foreign invaders but also about preserving the citizens' ability to resist any potential future government that might infringe upon their liberties. The Founding Fathers saw the armed citizenry as a check on potential abuses of power by the government, ensuring that the government would always be accountable to the people it governed. By having the means to defend themselves and their rights, the people could actively participate in shaping the course of the nation, thereby asserting their sovereignty in the political landscape. In conclusion, the notion of "the people could assert their sovereignty" meant that the power and authority of the government emanated from the consent of the governed. It emphasized the people's role as the ultimate decision-makers and highlighted their right to bear arms as a means to protect their liberties and participate actively in the governance of the new nation.
Another comment. Has Massad ever been on Fox News or any other sources? Why aren’t we getting him out there more? Joe Rogan podcast as an example? He is a tremendous historian! A super brilliant debater! Tremendous common sense! Just plain down right Smart! How can we do this?
@@Damonbird775 It’s simple. Because they are more likely to give him a forum. They will listen to a conservative point of view! But you already knew that. !
@@bradbenson6929 I respect him far too much to wish that he appears on fox news which has a long established track record of lying. Him going on fox news is preaching to the choir. What does that do? If you are wanting to change people’s views or opinions and maybe have them vote your way, he needs to go on a channel where he can actually change people’s views. Everyone who watches fox news is overwhelmingly already pro gun. Make sense?
Owning an AR-15 is like owning an expensive sports car. You don't need it, but it's legal to own, has a specific task it does, and it's a hell of a lot of fun.
Great video as usual. Thank you, sir. One other point to make; the 2nd Amendment was carefully crafted to state" ......the right of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall not be infringed.". It did not state ".......the right of the MILITIA to bear arms shall not be infringed." That was clearly done to clarify that bearing arms was an individual right and those individuals would be the ones to make up the militia.
I would love to see a town hall style sit down with the "legend " Massad Ayoob and all main stream media to give them a proper education on the real meaning of the 2A and our rights not our permissions.
Toward the end of his 2nd term as President, Barrack Obama, in conjunction with Anderson Cooper, hosted a 'Town Hall' on CNN all about the 2nd amendment and the gun debate. There was a panel of 5 or 6 'experts' as well. I watched it live at the time, and have since tried to find this Town Hall on UA-cam but have had no luck in locating it. It is very much worth watching if you can find it.
Something that doesn't get talked a lot in regards to the 2A and that is *sovereignty.* From chatGPT before it got extremely biased: When the Founding Fathers spoke of "the people could assert their sovereignty," they referred to the idea that the ultimate source of political authority and power in the new nation rested with the citizens. The concept of sovereignty in the context of the American Revolution and the creation of the United States was closely tied to the principles of popular sovereignty and self-governance. In the traditional European model of governance, power was concentrated in the hands of monarchs or ruling elites, who held authority by divine right or hereditary claims. However, the Founding Fathers rejected this notion and believed that political legitimacy came from the consent of the governed, not from any divine or inherited right. They embraced the idea of popular sovereignty, which asserted that the people, as a collective body, were the true source of political power. In other words, the government derived its legitimacy and authority from the will of the people it governed. The citizens, through their participation and representation in the democratic process, could shape the laws and institutions that governed their lives. This idea of sovereignty was deeply intertwined with the concept of individual rights and liberties, as the Founding Fathers sought to create a system that protected the rights of individuals while promoting the common good. The Second Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, was seen as a critical safeguard for maintaining the people's sovereignty. It recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which was instrumental in empowering them to protect themselves, their families, and their communities. The ability of the people to be armed was not just about self-defense against criminals or foreign invaders but also about preserving the citizens' ability to resist any potential future government that might infringe upon their liberties. The Founding Fathers saw the armed citizenry as a check on potential abuses of power by the government, ensuring that the government would always be accountable to the people it governed. By having the means to defend themselves and their rights, the people could actively participate in shaping the course of the nation, thereby asserting their sovereignty in the political landscape. In conclusion, the notion of "the people could assert their sovereignty" meant that the power and authority of the government emanated from the consent of the governed. It emphasized the people's role as the ultimate decision-makers and highlighted their right to bear arms as a means to protect their liberties and participate actively in the governance of the new nation.
None of us will live long enough to ever see such a thing. The powers that be are not interested (and never are) in actually having a free and open debate on such a topic because they realize that all of the data supports we who support the 2A., and not their warped perspective.
@10:11 .................. "Behold. The embodiment of the right to self defense." I love Mass!! Mr. Ayoob is the most level headed, clear minded, fair, matter of fact, straight forward, down to earth guys of all time.. He's also the coolest. Thank you Mr. Ayoob, for putting this video together and for all you continue to do to educate and help all who'll listen. You are so much appreciated Sir. God bless everyone here -
I’d have to agree with you there. Also funny how some states tried to ban the AR but actual weapons of war like the Garand and others were perfectly fine to own still. Those rifles have millions of deaths attributed to them but they don’t consider it a weapon of war since it doesn’t look scary enough.
Great arguments. The next time I hear people say that assault rifles should be banned, I'll have some questions: Have you ever fired a gun? Have you ever handled a gun? Have you ever been in the presence of a gun? So why do you think you should be deciding things about guns?
I have been a fan of the man since day one. He speaks to the population with nothing but facts. The people of our nation that want to disarm the population should go on vacation or move to the places that they want to be like. They could be subjects, hostages, prisoners, or whatever they like. Our nation is run by a solid 🪨 frame work that is meant for everyone. Your safety is dependent on you and you only. If you want to rely on someone else and be lazy and a slacker who doesn't care about the safety of themselves or their families let them be the prey that since the beginning of time has been plundered, captured, enslaved, and so on. At least they made the bed they would like to sleep in. . God bless, or Allah bless, or Buddah bless everyone who is believing in the higher power of our life and world. Those people who don't believe in anything else but they are supreme, should have no problem defending you or your loved ones. Great evening to you all and may you pay attention to what goes on around you because it only takes 1/100th of a second in time to fall prey, victim, or slave in the world today and back throughout any time in history. Thanks for sharing this with us and I wish you a Happy belated Thanksgiving and Holiday Season plus A Very Merry Christmas too!😊
If it wasn't for CNN I wouldn't believe the ar15 in 5.56 was any good for defense. When CNN found Kyle Rittenhouse guilty and showed the video of him shooting that guy in the arm that was trying to kill him. I was like DAMN, what have I been missing. Ar15 in 5.56 is possibly the best defensive firearm there is.
Sporting rifle or " weapon of war" - doesn't matter. The very point of the 2A was to acknowledge that we possess the right to own & bear weapons = to those of the government/military in order to protect ourselves from tyranny.
And people forget that the original oppressors were Great Britain.
@@RealMTBAddict Sadly, a large % of our population is completely ignorant about American history & civics.
Mine identify as sport utility rifles.....
Quite the contrary, our Right for Self Protection is a GOD Given Right, whereas our 2nd Amendment CURTAILS The Government from Abusing.., Limiting and/or Destroying those Natural Rights we People have at BIRTH!! THAT’s EXACTLY WHAT The Government doesn’t care for ~ OUR HAVING INALIENABLE RIGHTS [OUR OWN POWER!] for which THEY CANNOT TOUCH - NOT without OUR Surrendering said Rights..!!! Don’t EVER EVEN THINK ABOUT IT, Patriots🇺🇸 #2A 🇺🇸
I find it eternally curious (and aggrivating) that the former democracy of Canada has never had, does not have, and will likely never have, anything resembling the 2nd amendment to the United States Constitution. In my sad little country, to the North of the US of A, we the people (sheeple) are expected to let our 'government' do the defending and protecting of it's citizens for us. What a absurd joke. In addition, so as to rub salt into that already open wound of a policy, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has recently made it illegal for Canadian citizens to purchase handguns. Ironic then that he, upon making his journey's to various locations around Canada, should find himself eternally surrounded by what is certain to be a well armed security detail, which could lead one could infer that the PM feels that his life is worth defending, while the lives of the mere citizens ........are not. Canada......a sad country indeed.
I could listen to Massad Ayoob all day.
Was thinking the same thing......
Yup me as well
Agreed. Great presentation. And of course the wonderful speaking voice.
I can. And have. ❤️
Without question, great logical explanations, always. Gotta love it.
Favorite internet quote: Making good people helpless does not make evil people harmless. This applies to the war against AR-15's.
And all firearms
And all firearms
I believe this is the most important video Wilson Combat has ever produced. Share & spread this far and wide!!
I agree completely. As a serious student of the law and the Constitution, Mr. Ayoob stated what I have said for years "Weapons of war are EXACTLY what the Second Amendment protects" Case law proves this as in the case of conviction of a man in the 1930's for having a short barrel shotgun and the judge said this was not in common use by the MILITARY at the time! Why that never comes up in modern cases involving NFA or GCA is beyond me.
i just dont like the disingenuousness of it. Full automatic is never used aynmore. its all single controlled shots. Turns out better for some reason even with low recoil 223. So we could take FA away from regular grunts and we'd still be using them. AR15 is a weapon of war by any measure because its as efficient as possible for today's battlefield. And IF you actualyl believe the 2nd amendment, you have a righto to such a thing.
I concur 🇺🇸
Without a doubt, I whole heartedly agree.
Brownnoser.
No person or group can legally or morally decide whether you can defend yourselves. Its up to us just as it was up to those in 1776 and earlier. Stand fast America!
"No person or group can legally or morally decide whether you can defend yourselves"
you are wrong my friend. they CAN do it, and they DO do it. almost every damn day. your heart is right, but your head is not. defend yourself with deadly force from a robber or thug. brother, your whole day (life) will be dekcuf up
@@ramonaztecaBETTER TO BE JUDGED BY 12, THAN CARRIED BY 6!!!!
@ramonazteca " If circumstances should at any time obligate the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of ARMS who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist. "
~Alexander Hamilton Federalist No.28 1788
@@ramonazteca" The CONSTITUTION of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their RIGHT and DUTY to be at All Times ARMED."
~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Catwright June 5th 1824
@@YELLTELL A sentiment I couldn't agree more with.
Hi. I’m a civilian gun owner form Poland and fun of the channel. My experience with gun laws is a little different, so I can offer a different perspective. I’m actually pleased with my country’s gun law. In order to buy a gun in Poland you have to get a license. Any Polish citizen without criminal record can get a license. It is comparable to getting a driving license here. You have to pass a theoretical test, practical test, and get checked out by a doctor. So, when I bought my first gun, I knew how to operate the thing safely. When I go to a gun store and show my license, I can buy any non-fully automatic weapon I desire. No background checks. No tax stamps. No barrel length, magazine size, grip or stock restrictions. When I import a gun, I don’t need to get a “kit”, or chop it to pieces to cross the border. I just register it normally like a car. I often recommend going to a range to friends. I would like as many people as possible to learn how to shoot and obtain the license. Gun related crimes in Poland are very low, and school shootings are non-existent, so we must be doing something right.
America can thank Hollywood for glorifying guns and the current gun crime in this country. Smoking cigarettes in the movies made you look "cool" . It took a long time for people to figure out they can also kill you. Maybe its time to "ban" Hollywood movies with gun violence in them. Ask Alec Baldwin and see what he thinks!
The second amendment does NOT give us the right to bear arms, we are born with that right. The second amendment only prevents the government from violating our rights. THAT is the conversation that should be had.
Agreed
Also something that doesn't get talked a lot in regards to the 2A and that is *sovereignty.* From chatGPT before it got extremely biased:
When the Founding Fathers spoke of "the people could assert their sovereignty," they referred to the idea that the ultimate source of political authority and power in the new nation rested with the citizens. The concept of sovereignty in the context of the American Revolution and the creation of the United States was closely tied to the principles of popular sovereignty and self-governance.
In the traditional European model of governance, power was concentrated in the hands of monarchs or ruling elites, who held authority by divine right or hereditary claims. However, the Founding Fathers rejected this notion and believed that political legitimacy came from the consent of the governed, not from any divine or inherited right. They embraced the idea of popular sovereignty, which asserted that the people, as a collective body, were the true source of political power.
In other words, the government derived its legitimacy and authority from the will of the people it governed. The citizens, through their participation and representation in the democratic process, could shape the laws and institutions that governed their lives. This idea of sovereignty was deeply intertwined with the concept of individual rights and liberties, as the Founding Fathers sought to create a system that protected the rights of individuals while promoting the common good.
The Second Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, was seen as a critical safeguard for maintaining the people's sovereignty. It recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which was instrumental in empowering them to protect themselves, their families, and their communities. The ability of the people to be armed was not just about self-defense against criminals or foreign invaders but also about preserving the citizens' ability to resist any potential future government that might infringe upon their liberties.
The Founding Fathers saw the armed citizenry as a check on potential abuses of power by the government, ensuring that the government would always be accountable to the people it governed. By having the means to defend themselves and their rights, the people could actively participate in shaping the course of the nation, thereby asserting their sovereignty in the political landscape.
In conclusion, the notion of "the people could assert their sovereignty" meant that the power and authority of the government emanated from the consent of the governed. It emphasized the people's role as the ultimate decision-makers and highlighted their right to bear arms as a means to protect their liberties and participate actively in the governance of the new nation.
Here’s a selection of some quotes directly from the Founders. I like to use these in arguments as well because it is difficult for someone to refute the words of the very men who wrote the Constitution.
(I copy and pasted these to notes for easy access whenever I need them)
George Washington said:
"When government takes away citizens' right to bear arms it becomes citizens duty to take away goverment's right to govern.”
Pretty clear
John Adams said:
"ARMS IN THE HANDS OF INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS MAY BE USED AT INDIVIDUAL DISCRETION FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE COUNTRY, THE OVER-THROW OF TYRANNY, OR IN PRIVATE SELF-DEFENSE."
Thomas Jefferson said:
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
“Every citizen should be a soldier.
This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.”
"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
Frederick Douglass, a great African American politician, said:
“A man's right rests in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.”
Sam Adams, John Adams brother, said:
“Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.”
"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
Tench Coxe, a PA Delegate to the Continental Congress, said:
“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an Americans.”
Patrick Henry said:"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
These are great quotes. Do you have the sources these came from? I like being able to cite those as well.
@@bikerbobcat I had compiled them over time onto an album of screenshots on my phone. I don’t have the exact origin of each quote, but they should be relatively easy to look up on the internet using part of the wording. I do that sometimes, and I have had good success finding the author of the quote and where they said/wrote the quote.
I have good confidence in the historicity of most of them because many came GunsNGadgets, AZ quotes, or other trustworthy sources.
There’s also an app called founders quotes that send a quote each day to your notifications.
Thank you for those quotes!
@@DZ-wh6kv absolutely!
I love to post these during comment section 2A arguments. Most times nobody responds back 🤣
@@trev5.566 On a historical note, multi-shot firearms existed at the time of the founding and the Founding Fathers were personally aware of them. The Kalthoff repeater had a 30-round magazine and was invented in 1630. The Belton flintlock was invented in 1777 and was personally demonstrated to the Founding Fathers. Just a few years after the ratification of the Bill of Rights, Lewis & Clark carried the Girardoni air rifle (invented 1779) on their famous expedition and used it to great effect. The Founding Fathers knew technology would advance because they were seeing it happen in their lifetimes. If they only wanted us to have muskets they would have said so. No word in our founding documents is there by accident.
I also like Thomas Jefferson recommending to his nephew to constantly carry a rifle on his walks and get good with it. You may wish to add that quote.
We also have a right to own an M4.
Correct but the media goes for the AR
@@zachg9065 which the people misinterpret the initials as “assault rifle” (which we also have the right to keep and bear)
"When they don't listen to logic, maybe they will listen to plain English". Excellent 👍
Our founding fathers are smiling down on Mas because he’s leading the fight for freedom well, to know that the right to keep and bear arms is the key stone to our sacred constitution.
Clear, concise, common sense, and accurate. Massad Ayoob.
Filming this content with Massad is always an enlightening experience. He is a true professional.
Thanks for being a great advocate for the 2A and for good citizen’s rights to defend themselves and their communities! 👍🇺🇸✌️
who defines "a good citizen"? The Constitution doesn't say anything about good citizens only owning guns. You are one of these common sense gun law type.
The media wants people to think AR15 ownership is something recent but I bought my first in 1978 , two years after my discharge and they were commercially available since the late 60s.
This is outstanding. Thank you so much for posting. Every member of Congress should have to watch this.
Most of them could watch this, and still not have a clue. Or if by some miracle they did understand they'd deny it.
Search 'Jerry Nadler's brain explodes' , you can tell by his expressions that he thinks semi-auto means full auto.
The problem with certain members of congess is they either incapable of understanding or they are puppets of the democratic socialist party, on the take!
The master in explaining why and how. Our community is truly blessed to have such a treasure. Thank you Mas!
Shall NOT be infringed 😉👍
I love listening to this man speak from all of his wisdom thank you Wilson Combat Channel. Keep on speaking the truth every individual has a right for self-preservation and the right to protect him or herself and their family.
2nd Amendment has a reason for existing. And it’s gonna get tested
It doesn’t help much as long as States can enact their laws! Question? Can the Supreme Court give a decision on States having their own gun laws? Why is it pick and choose for states to do what they want and ignore the second. Amendment?
@@bradbenson6929Because the constitution is not without regulation whether it be at the state or federal level. You should’ve remembered this from fourth grade US history but apparently 99.6% of all Americans have forgotten that. If the constitution was so absolute then under the verbiage of the first amendment I should be able to hurl threats at you and yell “bomb” on an airplane. No different than how no state or federal entity can actually ban all firearms however some can be restricted. This is indeed legal under the constitution since its implementation. Your First, Second and Fourth amendment rights all have limited restrictions in lieu of the verbiage written as none of those three amendments are absolute. Same as with the fourth amendment on how there are exceptions to search warrants as statistically 89% of all searches conducted whether it be to a vehicle (mobility exception) or in a house warrantless (exigency). And those searches are indeed done legally. If you don’t like it go change the constitution. 🤷♂️🤷♂️
There’s a hell of a lot more to the constitution than the verbiage written for each amendment. People will read the second amendment being “A-well regulated militia……..” as the verbiage that it’s written as all of a sudden they think they’re now all scholars in constitutional law. That verbiage is the basis of laws to pre-exist that of further restrictions by the government. I’m a Texas prosecutor full-time and teach LSU legal part-time during the fall classes. Just over the fourth amendment alone I have 884 questions in my question bank we issue to entry-level legal students along with a seventeen (17) hour PowerPoint over the fourth amendment alone. That seventeen hours of PowerPoint presentation is what actually EXPLAINS the fourth amendment. In a nutshell the general public have no earthly ideas to what they’re talking about. Proof of this is when I issue these quizzes to the public they failed them miserably regardless of which questions I pick out of them. If you can’t pass these quizzes then you don’t know the constitution plain and simple
@@bradbenson6929 The 10th amendment stated that was NOT assigned to the federal government, was left to the states to decide. Guns WERE assigned to the federal government. The states cannot make laws against the U.S. Constitution.
Yet, here we are.
You've been failing the test for nearly a 100 years.
@@jhutch1470 'Militia" was based on the Militia Act of 1792 at the time of the writing.
Superb, wholly accurate, and - most importantly - fundamental and essential to the preservation of individual liberties in the “great experiment“ we call the United States of America.
Unfortunately, not everybody agrees that liberty and self defense are inalienable rights as stated in the Declaration. Too many around the world believe in various amounts of government control, and self defense is seldom allowed.
@@loboheeler Most developed nations, including the USA, have mixed economies and protected freedoms. Often to a larger degree than the USA. The USA also has as much government control as they do. If you think of how many things would stop working without it you'll see it's not all bad. With utter freedom you should be allowed to drive on whichever side of the road you like. Does that sound like a good idea? Government control means that when you buy milk you probably won't contract tuberculosis of the stomach. Try catching a flight across country without government control. Good luck with that. I'm not sure where you get the idea of self-defense not being allowed, unless by that you mean firearms. Several countries have gun ownership rates up there with the USA, Switzerland for instance. But they are regulated. If you compare the crime rates and number of gun deaths with those countries they are miniscule compared to the USA. maybe you need to do some traveling and educate yourself about the planet. The current population of the earth is 8,076,994,357. The current population of the USA is 331 million. I think that makes it about 4% of the world's population. Just for a bit of perspective.
Excellent content. As massad always delivers.
Massad Ayoob is great, he has exceptional and unexpectedly funny (at times) presentation skill.
Truth, logic and wisdom.
As i tell most people, "almost every gun today has had it's basis in war"....including the musket, single shots, lever actions, bolt actions (Springfield 1903 comes to mind) and in modern times the self loading rifles...ect.
This man has been my mentor from the first time I read gun magazines from the 1980s he's full of commonsense and wisdom
Yes Sir, me too-I have washed every one of his videos at least 15 times😂
At least every single American home should have one. Foreign and Domestic'' Long live the Republic ✝️🇺🇸✝️
Thanks Massad, once again you speak words of wisdom, truth, and direction
Bless You, Wilson Combat.
Sir that was really awesome I thoroughly enjoyed that
My very favorite human rights video ever. Thank you and God bless.
Thank you sir. It's an important and needs to be said more often!
Every book Mas has recommended I have read. I now automatically purchase these books, I have never been disappointed. Great information. Thank you Mas!
I searched “Commentaries on the common law” is it the same as “Commentaries on the laws of England?” Thanks If u know or any book u liked he recommends I just found his channel. Good day & thanks
Outstanding video and presentation.
So well articulated, thank you!
When guns are Outlawed, We will become OUTLAWS ! ❤
Thank you for continuing to be quality, reliable, level headed content about important issues like this one.
I am from Maine, and we are a Constitutional Carry state. The Individual Right to both own and carry a firearm is firmly entrenched. We are a state, outside of cities like Augusta and Portland which have been overrun by Massachusetts leftists, populated by tough people who have always eeked out a living from the land. Firearms have been an integral part of that life. I was 10 years old when by father deemed me ready to learn marksmanship and how to hunt. I was given a .410 bore, single shot, shotgun, and donned my blaze orange and ventured into the woods at my father's side. He also took time to teach me other important woodcraft skills, like using a compass. At 13, I got my first job, saved my wages and then bought a Marlin .22 caliber, bolt action target rifle, which I practiced with constantly. At 14, my dad bought me a model 94, 30-30 Winchester for my birthday. I'm 58 now, and still have my Marlin and Winchester, I gave the .410 to my niece when she was old enough so she could hunt with her dad. I still vividly remember the first Roughed Grouse, we call them pahtridge here, and deer I got. It was a right of passage. Although I can no longer hunt due to physical impairment, my friends rely on the annual, grouse, deer and moose hunting seasons to provide food for their families. Today a good friend, who had no luck this year, was thrilled when a friend of his gave him a whole deer. This meant he had meat to help feed his wife and kids.
No politician would dare to utter the words gun control, at least north or west of Augusta. Even Congressman Jared Golden, a leftist politician from Southern Maine, never considered it.
That has begun to change, after a deranged, insane man, went into two family friendly establishments, and brutally murdered innocent people in Lewiston, Maine. So now cowards like Jared Golden have joined in the ludicrous rhetoric of restricting gun ownership as means to prevent crime.
All guns are inert objects, or tools here in Maine, incapable of doing anything until a human being picks it up and uses it.
That human can use it for positive purposes, such as hunting, or competing in shooting sports, this is a responsible, law abiding human being. The opposite is the deranged, insane, or criminal human being who picks up a gun with the intent of harming others. They do not care about any gun laws, this is why convicted felons, or people who have been institutionalized for mental illness, committ crimes with guns. Chicago has the toughest gun control laws , yet to date this year there have been 2879 shootings, with 591 homicides. And for the leftists who love to claim that police shoot innocent people, only 10 of these shootings were by police officers, with only 5 being fatal.
Once our Second Ammendment Rights are removed, it will be very easy for the leftists/marxists to get rid of all the others. And they will.
Jared Golden can go pound sand, he's only there because of ranked choice voting.
@@garyh1449 he needs to go, and we have to get rid of ranked choice voting
I could not love this video or what it stands for more, thank you sir!
Great argument...
And you are 100% right... is a lifetime fight for our civil rights!!!
I'd love to see Mas on the "View"!
Hoo boy... And people thought the backlash against the View for their witchhunt attempts against Jason Aldeen was bad... I dare say that that show going after Mas would put the final nails in that show's coffin...
Beautifully put Mas. Beautiful.
Excellent !!!!!!! This should be nationally televised
As a lifelong shooter and hunter, this man is right on the money. As a retired trial attorney he is right on point. Carry on my friend. And thank you!
I learn so much from these videos! Thank you for putting out such great content.
Glad you enjoy them! More are on the way.
I like the way that you have defined the AR-15.
Thank you for taking the time and effort it takes to do these videos.
He reminds me of my late grandfather, calm, methodical, full of wisdom. God Bless America 🇺🇸
Anti-gun logic: The entire Bill of Rights protects individual rights...except for the 2nd.
Mass is such a legend. Who else could look into both cameras at once? Straight up legend 🫡 🇺🇸
Mr. Ayoob's logic is irrefutable. Human rights is exactly the right term. Ayoob is a national treasure. GREAT and very timely content!
You hit it out of the park once again, Mas. Thank you for all you do.
Massad Ayoob is so interesting. I'm a Belgian police officer and I think it's so great that the American people can carry a gun. Your constitution allows you an extraordinary thing, fight to keep this right.
Long live the United States, long live Belgium and long live the Western world!
This explanation is so simple it's brilliant 👍🇺🇸
This video should be nationally televised and broadcast over the emergency broadcast system.
Anything that can kill your enemy is a "weapon of war". (that's a very long list of things)
Including your bare hands.
My neighbor was a donut shop owner & he was murdered with a horribly stale donut by an irate customer who forgot his clip when he went storming into the shop to blow away my neighbor who he thought was always laughing at him.
the second amendment does not protect your right to several large rocks!!!
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻Thank you again for another very informative and truthful video ❤️
As always thank you Mass. You’ve stated before you’re not a lawyer but some of the things you’ve stated from the constitution could be almost as eloquent as a pastor reading from the Bible. God Bless!
This man is calm and peaceful to listen to
Nice explanation. Thanks for that.
One thing i think that gets overlooked in conversations about the AR is...
"It was specifically designed for Civilian Use". If you go back and look at what Colt's original statements in advertising it they say it is for the public...that in itself says it all.
Well said as usual!
I liked the video before watching because of the Title.🇺🇸
Another great talk!!!! Thank you!!!
Knowledge is power listen and learn..
Very well said. Thank you
"The right of The People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
TRUTH!! AMEN!!! 🙏🇺🇸🇺🇸
Every American needs to sit in a class with you just for the education of the 2nd amendment alone!
Something that doesn't get talked a lot in regards to the 2A and that is *sovereignty.* From chatGPT before it got extremely biased:
When the Founding Fathers spoke of "the people could assert their sovereignty," they referred to the idea that the ultimate source of political authority and power in the new nation rested with the citizens. The concept of sovereignty in the context of the American Revolution and the creation of the United States was closely tied to the principles of popular sovereignty and self-governance.
In the traditional European model of governance, power was concentrated in the hands of monarchs or ruling elites, who held authority by divine right or hereditary claims. However, the Founding Fathers rejected this notion and believed that political legitimacy came from the consent of the governed, not from any divine or inherited right. They embraced the idea of popular sovereignty, which asserted that the people, as a collective body, were the true source of political power.
In other words, the government derived its legitimacy and authority from the will of the people it governed. The citizens, through their participation and representation in the democratic process, could shape the laws and institutions that governed their lives. This idea of sovereignty was deeply intertwined with the concept of individual rights and liberties, as the Founding Fathers sought to create a system that protected the rights of individuals while promoting the common good.
The Second Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, was seen as a critical safeguard for maintaining the people's sovereignty. It recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which was instrumental in empowering them to protect themselves, their families, and their communities. The ability of the people to be armed was not just about self-defense against criminals or foreign invaders but also about preserving the citizens' ability to resist any potential future government that might infringe upon their liberties.
The Founding Fathers saw the armed citizenry as a check on potential abuses of power by the government, ensuring that the government would always be accountable to the people it governed. By having the means to defend themselves and their rights, the people could actively participate in shaping the course of the nation, thereby asserting their sovereignty in the political landscape.
In conclusion, the notion of "the people could assert their sovereignty" meant that the power and authority of the government emanated from the consent of the governed. It emphasized the people's role as the ultimate decision-makers and highlighted their right to bear arms as a means to protect their liberties and participate actively in the governance of the new nation.
I love this guy.
This video should be played everywhere,nothing but the facts here.
Well regulated actually means well equipped and up to date in Ol English' not Gov over reach‼️💯
It's a sporting rifle but it's the best we've got since our right to own weapons of war are being trampled on.
Well said, sir. Well said.
Thank you sir, you are a true patriot 🇺🇸
Another comment. Has Massad ever been on Fox News or any other sources? Why aren’t we getting him out there more? Joe Rogan podcast as an example? He is a tremendous historian! A super brilliant debater! Tremendous common sense! Just plain down right Smart! How can we do this?
Is you respect him as a truth teller, why would you want him to go on Fox News?
@@Damonbird775 It’s simple. Because they are more likely to give him a forum. They will listen to a conservative point of view! But you already knew that. !
@@bradbenson6929 I respect him far too much to wish that he appears on fox news which has a long established track record of lying. Him going on fox news is preaching to the choir. What does that do? If you are wanting to change people’s views or opinions and maybe have them vote your way, he needs to go on a channel where he can actually change people’s views. Everyone who watches fox news is overwhelmingly already pro gun. Make sense?
Owning an AR-15 is like owning an expensive sports car. You don't need it, but it's legal to own, has a specific task it does, and it's a hell of a lot of fun.
YES the AR-15 is semi-automatic, but these dudes on line with 3D printers will fix that.
Same for the Glock...
Great video as usual. Thank you, sir. One other point to make; the 2nd Amendment was carefully crafted to state" ......the right of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall not be infringed.". It did not state ".......the right of the MILITIA to bear arms shall not be infringed." That was clearly done to clarify that bearing arms was an individual right and those individuals would be the ones to make up the militia.
Keep bringing the good content
Massad Ayoob is a national treasure.
You and Mr. Hackathorn are getting a little growly in your older years.
I’m all in…
Massad Ayoob is like ASMR for gun enthusiasts, not to mention he is a great teacher and instructor.
I would love to see a town hall style sit down with the "legend " Massad Ayoob and all main stream media to give them a proper education on the real meaning of the 2A and our rights not our permissions.
If that were to actually happen you can bet the house that all of a sudden there would be "technical difficulties" with Massad's microphone too.
Toward the end of his 2nd term as President, Barrack Obama, in conjunction with Anderson Cooper, hosted a 'Town Hall' on CNN all about the 2nd amendment and the gun debate. There was a panel of 5 or 6 'experts' as well. I watched it live at the time, and have since tried to find this Town Hall on UA-cam but have had no luck in locating it. It is very much worth watching if you can find it.
the "main stream media" wants to literally kill us, they dont care about a logical argument from an expert
Something that doesn't get talked a lot in regards to the 2A and that is *sovereignty.* From chatGPT before it got extremely biased:
When the Founding Fathers spoke of "the people could assert their sovereignty," they referred to the idea that the ultimate source of political authority and power in the new nation rested with the citizens. The concept of sovereignty in the context of the American Revolution and the creation of the United States was closely tied to the principles of popular sovereignty and self-governance.
In the traditional European model of governance, power was concentrated in the hands of monarchs or ruling elites, who held authority by divine right or hereditary claims. However, the Founding Fathers rejected this notion and believed that political legitimacy came from the consent of the governed, not from any divine or inherited right. They embraced the idea of popular sovereignty, which asserted that the people, as a collective body, were the true source of political power.
In other words, the government derived its legitimacy and authority from the will of the people it governed. The citizens, through their participation and representation in the democratic process, could shape the laws and institutions that governed their lives. This idea of sovereignty was deeply intertwined with the concept of individual rights and liberties, as the Founding Fathers sought to create a system that protected the rights of individuals while promoting the common good.
The Second Amendment, as part of the Bill of Rights, was seen as a critical safeguard for maintaining the people's sovereignty. It recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which was instrumental in empowering them to protect themselves, their families, and their communities. The ability of the people to be armed was not just about self-defense against criminals or foreign invaders but also about preserving the citizens' ability to resist any potential future government that might infringe upon their liberties.
The Founding Fathers saw the armed citizenry as a check on potential abuses of power by the government, ensuring that the government would always be accountable to the people it governed. By having the means to defend themselves and their rights, the people could actively participate in shaping the course of the nation, thereby asserting their sovereignty in the political landscape.
In conclusion, the notion of "the people could assert their sovereignty" meant that the power and authority of the government emanated from the consent of the governed. It emphasized the people's role as the ultimate decision-makers and highlighted their right to bear arms as a means to protect their liberties and participate actively in the governance of the new nation.
None of us will live long enough to ever see such a thing. The powers that be are not interested (and never are) in actually having a free and open debate on such a topic because they realize that all of the data supports we who support the 2A., and not their warped perspective.
@10:11 .................. "Behold. The embodiment of the right to self defense."
I love Mass!! Mr. Ayoob is the most level headed, clear minded, fair, matter of fact, straight forward, down to earth guys of all time..
He's also the coolest.
Thank you Mr. Ayoob, for putting this video together and for all you continue to do to educate and help all who'll listen. You are so much appreciated Sir.
God bless everyone here -
The 1911 Wilson Combat sells is closer to the war version of that platform than the semi auto only AR-15 is to the war version of that platform.
I’d have to agree with you there. Also funny how some states tried to ban the AR but actual weapons of war like the Garand and others were perfectly fine to own still. Those rifles have millions of deaths attributed to them but they don’t consider it a weapon of war since it doesn’t look scary enough.
@@F80mthreeIt's only scary when It's a black rifle. 🤷🏻
Great arguments. The next time I hear people say that assault rifles should be banned, I'll have some questions: Have you ever fired a gun? Have you ever handled a gun? Have you ever been in the presence of a gun? So why do you think you should be deciding things about guns?
Thank you Mas for this item of distinction. Very important!!
Another great legal argument supporting civil rights.
This man is a national treasure.
well said sir. I am thankful for all the work you guys do
I want to hear a podcast with Mas and the guy from gunguyTV
I have been a fan of the man since day one. He speaks to the population with nothing but facts. The people of our nation that want to disarm the population should go on vacation or move to the places that they want to be like. They could be subjects, hostages, prisoners, or whatever they like. Our nation is run by a solid 🪨 frame work that is meant for everyone. Your safety is dependent on you and you only. If you want to rely on someone else and be lazy and a slacker who doesn't care about the safety of themselves or their families let them be the prey that since the beginning of time has been plundered, captured, enslaved, and so on. At least they made the bed they would like to sleep in. . God bless, or Allah bless, or Buddah bless everyone who is believing in the higher power of our life and world. Those people who don't believe in anything else but they are supreme, should have no problem defending you or your loved ones. Great evening to you all and may you pay attention to what goes on around you because it only takes 1/100th of a second in time to fall prey, victim, or slave in the world today and back throughout any time in history. Thanks for sharing this with us and I wish you a Happy belated Thanksgiving and Holiday Season plus A Very Merry Christmas too!😊
If mas speaks it is truth ..i genuinely think he could turn water into wine
Thanks for keeping us informed on the facts Massad.
Every time this guy speaks nothing but logic is what I hear
The great Massad Ayoob .....1000%fact...
If it wasn't for CNN I wouldn't believe the ar15 in 5.56 was any good for defense. When CNN found Kyle Rittenhouse guilty and showed the video of him shooting that guy in the arm that was trying to kill him. I was like DAMN, what have I been missing. Ar15 in 5.56 is possibly the best defensive firearm there is.
Plus most ARs can hold 30rnds
It would have been worse (for the perps) had it been an AR-10 or an M1A. Both get the job done.
well spoken ! forever vigilant!
I've been saying for years... they didn't add the 2nd amendment after returning from deer camp.
My only problem with this video is I could only like it once. Well spoken my Good sir!!!
This nation,as a whole, needs to view this segment and every other segment that Massad has to offer.
Love Massad Ayoob, been following him since his work was articles and pieces in gun magazines when I was a kid in the 80s.