'How Many Times Each Year Does An American Use A Firearm In Self-Defense?': Lee Questions Witness
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 лис 2023
- At today's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) spoke about gun violence and self-protection with a witness.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
account.forbes.com/membership...
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com
My son in law was lured into a stairwell by an "out of order" sign on the elevator. He was attacked by 2 young men with knives. He pulled his legal concealed handgun and the attackers fled. He filed a police report and gave a description of the attackers. They were picked up a short time later. My son in law came home to his wife and children that day. He didn't have to use his weapon, he just had to have it.
This story plays out every day in this country. Blessings on all of your family
Now imagine if his two attackers had guns
@@ProtectChildrenNotGuns indeed, thank God they didn't and thank God the law abiding citizen exercised his right
@ProtectChildrenNotGuns they didn't pass the background checks
@ProtectChildrenNotGuns thankfully they didn't, though that wouldn't have been a reason to keep the victim unarmed.
It’s ironic that these clowns with armed security everywhere are trying to tell citizens what personal security they can have.
This!!!!!!
And they all live in gated communities ....also known as "building a wall" !!!
@@pepeshadilaygated communities don't work. It's there for the safety illusion. You pay more for less
Whats even funnier is the same folks who want to take the kinds of guns needed to fight tyranny are the same ones crying about Trump throwing out the Constitution and becoming a dictator...
Since they seldom, if ever, need their personal security, do away with them.
You can add a MILLION LAWS, but NO LAW ever stopped someone from breaking the LAW.
The 2nd Amendment isn't about self defense on the streets. It is about self defense from these very people deciding whether or not to restrict our ability to defend ourselves from them. That is why it is a 'right', you can't decide anything because it has already been decided, in perpetuity. It is also inalienable; meaning, not even the possessor of the right can give the right away. You cannot take this right away and I cannot give this right away.
I'm curious as to how you came to hold the position you do. Is there a reason you ommitted the "God given" part about the nature of rights? Is it perhaps because it would hinder the argument you're making by introducing the absurd notion that God granted every human with the right to hold a gun in their hand?..
You get that right from being a citizen. Don't need to bring religion into it.
"I cannot give this right away"? It's true, although you might FREQUENTLY be asked to kowtow to various "reasonable restrictions" on that right, such as carrying a sidearm at the post office or onto a commercial flight.
@@SineEyed
I don’t believe in gods or anything supernatural so why would I use gods in an argument?
I feel like an individual can, based on their own behavior and actions, can lose rights.
All rights do come with personal responsibility too.
The biggest threat to the law abiding citizen is our own government.
Very true and our states have been breaking the law for many years !!!
Fact
Unless you live in inner cities where crime is prevalent. Like Washington D.C.
Amy Swearer - a Heritage Foundation Lobbyist, provided complete misinformation testimony during that Senate Hearing. Forbes and the lobbyists are playing w/ the stupid Republicans voters minds and emotions.
@@kellyarnett4062 - You said "Unless you live in inner cities where crime is prevalent. Like Washington D.C."
Funny - Gun Violence crime is down in most Blue states per capita and it's up in most Red states. More guns equals more gun violence... Simple.
Keep in mind that almost all crimes where a victim brandished a firearm and scared away the perpetrator, without firing it, are not considered "self defense with a gun."
Yes they actually are. They are just under reported for fear that they [the person defending themselves] will end up the one going to jail. That is why the numbers for self defense are so wide. There is no real numbers to go by, only those willing to admit they pulled a gun [fired or not] to defend themselves.
While it’s not legally considered an act of reported self defense, the statistics quoted are generated by surveys of gun owners. Not by police reports or some other means of any legal reporting of firearm presentation to ward off a potential assault or robbery. And fyi “brandishing” is a legal term that describes the presentation of a firearm in a manner that is illegal. Pulling a firearm out on someone who is threatening to assault you with some kind of weapon isn’t brandishing.
They would not report it in fear of them getting in trouble.
But they ARE considered part of the at least 500,000 events a year where Armed Citizens ... Either prevented or interfered with Criminal Activities.
Like Rape, Robbery, Car Jacking and so on. According to old CDC Stats.
also so many of them go unreported so the true number of these instances is much higher than we think
The question should be. How many times a year does law-abiding citizens protect themselves from criminals?
Most shootings, especially in red states, are carried out by "so called" law abiding citizens with legal guns. Or are you going to ignore that too like you ignore the fact that guns kill more children than anything else in America?
She answered that, 2021 there was 1.6 million cases of self defense with a firearm. Did you not watch it?
@@davidd8892 Many years ago experts were already stating that the civilian use of firearms to stop crimes was more than ten times the instances of such use by law enforcement. That would mean that disarming the civilians could lead to ten times as many crimes not being stopped...
Of course, we can only guess at how many million times a crime was thwarted because the criminals THOUGHT the victim was armed, or proved to be armed, but it was never reported.
When the City of London confiscated all individual firearms, violent street crime quickly rose by 10,000 percent, according to the Wall Street Journal.
@@UpnorthHere
The City of London wouldn't have the authority to do any such thing !!
So it makes me wonder if you read it right or if the article even exists.
10,000 % I'll bet that's a made up figure ??
Strange how in the UK if we are living in such danger why don't we have mass shootings and in particular school shooting ?
Even knife is less here than in the USA.
Since our 1 and only school shooting in 1996 you've had over 400 I believe.
It doesn't matter how many times that you did or did not use it. The important thing is that it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it
In California a couple weeks ago a man was walking into his home when two criminals jumped his fence and tried to rob him at gunpoint. The home owner had a legal carry/conceal license and pulled his personal firearm and fought off the intruders……the result California REVOKED his license…..insane
America has become " The Twilight Zone"
yeah you're not telling the whole story here. Someone using their gun for self defense when a gun is pointed at them doesn't lose their license
@@bgbgbg123 It does in California. He isn't lying and there have numerous news reports about it. I live north of LA where this happened and they in fact pulled his permit because he used his gun against 2 armed robbers at his residence. Even the NRA has a huge right up about it. Do a two minute google search before accusing someone of not being truthful.
@bgbgbg123 actually they are telling the story. Yhe sheriff's department revoked his carry license after they looked bad on television for not responding faster. The man used his weapons in self defense and the sheriff department revoked it in california period.
@@bgbgbg123 And yet he did. The media reports are there.
Everyone opposed to gun ownership for common citizens should proudly put a sign on their lawn, front door or window stating "THIS HOME HAS NO FIREARMS OR GUNS" right next to the "we believe" signs and Black lives Matter signs.
Only problem is, THEY all have armed security...
💯agree with you @christina
@@markc2786She said common citizens, not politicians and celebrities.
@@markc2786 just the politicians......he said everyone. That means all of the anti gunners should do it.
Why not. Apparently the liberal courts have made it possible for states to share gun owner data.
Ive used my gun to diffuse two separate situations heading towards violence in the last three years. All I did was clear my shirt for a faster draw and that exposed my holstered weapon. Immediately the situation ended with all parties going their own way. Once was a road rage incident where a gentleman tried to attack me with a tire iron. The other was a group of young gentlemen surrounded me in a parking lot at night. Both instances ended when I cleared my weapon to draw. Not even placing my hand on my weapon, just moving my shirt out of the way. I have never committed a crime, I’ve never inflicted violence on another person (outside of a hockey rink), please explain to me why I should have my civil liberties curtailed because someone else abuses theirs.
😄 "outside of a hockey rink" 😂 Love that! "Old time hockey" yeah! Eddie Shore!
The fact that you refer to them as “gentlemen” is troubling
This is incalculable not only due to the unreported incidents of pulling a weapon and the attack ends, which may not even get noted on a record anywhere... but because of all the incidents that never happen because you're armed and someone notices this.
Even more so, the fact that you MIGHT be armed, is itself a deterrent, especially when it comes to how the government interacts with the citizens.
Coming from a state-level firearms instructor: the only fight you're guaranteed to win is the one which you prevent. Open carry should be legal across the country.
But if you’re attacked by someone unarmed , couldn’t that mean that gun laws ARE working. Maybe that individual couldn’t get one
1. Murder, assault, robbery, etc. are already against the law.
2. Criminals don't obey laws.
3. New laws that will be ignored by criminals won't make anyone safer, except possibly criminals.
Jarts. An Ikea bookshelf. Pulled because a couple people got seriously injured.
@@luciusblackwood2640None of which are rights. Car accidents kill more people, and that's with all of those safety features. They should ban all motorized vehicles.
@@section8usmc53You people are beyond insane. No getting around that by arguing. Lost cause as well.
@@backagain5216that went over your head didn’t it? I see American education is still redacted.
This is the point. They want you disarmed and afraid. Victimized. So that you'll scream for more government control and give up your few remaining rights.
The government does not have the right to make victims of law abiding citizens.
.
You misspelled anyone. Being law abiding is actually a negative when the legal framework is full of special interests, tyranny, and fictions.
Government can kill you but it can’t protect you.
The double egded sword that is tech and media, we now see what was easily hidden at the will of the perpetrators in the past when you knew nothing. Now you know too much, and propaganda is the defence for you knowing too much.
Most laws are unjust. So law abiding is a fucked terminology
@@antilaw9911 Laws are laws, thousands of pages, many vague, conflicting… but what when they are corruptly enforced, applied selectively, twisted, biased, partisan by a political weaponized police state, DOJ, FBI.
Stalin’s secret police head Beria: “Show me the man and I’ll find a crime.”
Robert Jackson: “Any prosecutor can rummage through the thousands of pages of vague & conflicting laws & find something that a political opponent did”.
Banana Republic Dictator: “For my friends everything, for my enemies the law”.
I'm not an American...but even I know it's irrelevant how many times a firearm is used in self-defence. The purpose is to have a possible check against a government that employs overreach on its citizens.
The American people have been very tolerant of their government and could have easily justified an uprising many years ago against their government.
The irony too about self-defence and government is that so many of the governments policies have resulted in the generation of many criminals that the average good hearted American has to deal with.
Bingo! As I commented before!
"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."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776
You're not an American but if you ever want to be, I'll vouch for you.
im pretty sure in early american times if someone killed someone in self defense they were justified. the cities like where im from were dangerous then, maybe even worse per capita.
Sounds good in theory but you’re little pea shooter deer rifle isn’t going to hold off an Abrams tank
@@Jleed989 Your point is irrelevant since it has nothing to to do with what I said.
But since your introducing a new side argument.
If the government is going to use Abraham tanks on citizens...it clearly won't work(the Abraham tanks) - They would have created their own death penalty that a tank can't help them. If you can't see that, it's your brain that is like a pea.
I want so bad to hear what their response would be too someone saying "maybe we should make murder, stealing, illegal".
I am a citizen of the US but this country acts like i am the property of it.
You are. They own you. Just try to assert anyone of your supposed "rights"...............................................
Y'all read No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority - Lysander Spooner
It depends. It isn't the country, it's the STATE you live in. My state is very supportive of CCW, castle doctrine, and stand your ground.
I get what you mean, but
You should try living in China.
@@ExtreamClownTown Or, better yet, North Korea.
My rights do not come from government, but they sure want to act like they do.
Exactly right! The second amendment isn’t a permission slip, it is a restriction on the government
You rights are Protected by the government. Be grateful!
I use my firearm in self defense 100% of the time I holster it when I carry. You don't have to fire a firearm to have it used as self defense.
You know, that's a good point, and it's reminded me of a few things, thank you.
It seems a bit of a stretch. If I have a fire extinguisher in my house, hanging on a hook, am I actually "using it" for home security, or does that only start when I unhook it, pull the pin, push the trigger and aim the stream at a fire? Am I really "using a firearm" when carrying it concealed or only when it is displayed to potential criminals? Yes, a properly displayed fire extinguisher does help others to see it for future reference, but is that a "use"?
I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.
One thing I found remarkable about the New Mexico Govenor's unconstitutional ban, was that even David Hogg condemned it saying, "There is no such thing as a public health emergency exception to the constitution."
New Mexico is America's Anus !
@@user-mm1se7gy7e I live in NM and I agree 100%.
And to this day....that order still stands.
POWER GRAB AFTER COVID! SHE THOUGHT IT WOULD FLY,... IT DID NOT.
@@falcon127 what are you talking about, "it did not fly"? The ban was recently renewed. Its still going on to this day this very minute.
Chinya admits it can't invade us while we all own guns. That's good enough for me.
Not only from a direct invasion, but also from within. Our own government would love to have that advantage on its people.
Now do you understand why they’re trying to disarm us? So we can be invaded and killed without a fight.
Especially since considering the fact that FBI heads admitted there was a document alleging that current President Joe Biden took millions of dollars in bribes from China, everyone would do well to maintain hold of their rights.
When did they admit that?
If they did admit that you would think that our government would be glad to have us ?
God given unalienable rights. Shall not be infringed. Where have I heard these words?
well said all around.
BRING ON THE FACTS,
what part of "SHALL NOT be infringed " don't you all understand?!
5/8ths (around 135 million people) of american adults own around 650 million++ firearms. 85% of those guns are owned for self defense. 75% of them are handguns. And about 80% of the handguns owned are semi automatic. According to the CDC (up to until biden took office and had it removed) showed over 2 million uses of firearms every year for 20 years prior on average for self defense. That is 181 lives saved with the use of a firearm for every life taken in a crime in the US on average every year. In the last 120 years, around 220 million people were murdered by their own government after being disarmed by their government...
I immediately laughed and said go figure when she said she didn't have that statistic, how typical.
@@hreindustries She's got one job and instead takes the average of a bunch of "experts" who she probably handpicked.
When a government moves to disarm their population, they intend to reduce the population and/or take their freedom. Which is why our founders built the government they did. Read real truthfull history in "The American Story" it has footnotes proving the content. The truth will withstand scrutiny.
@@hreindustriesyea, she sounded just like a Democrat on the stand at an inquiry! 😮
@@peterbolinski6706 Huh?
It's weird to see a congressional hearing where the people give straight answers. I've never seen that before.
Refreshing isn't it.
1 in a million
So guns are helpful assuming that the owner is a stable, responsible gun owner 100% of the time. I assume you would support universal background checks, safe storage laws, and routine mental health evaluations... right? Because right now virtually any unstable, irresponsible American can own a firearm.
That's because she's not a Demonrat, she's a Conservative
She still rambles on instead of giving a short straight answer.
Great info, great video!
She makes no sense keep the criminals in jail longer and don't try to take away my self protection does that make sense?
Laws are not obeyed by people who are intent on breaking the law. There are plenty of laws already covering owning a gun.
There's only ONE law concerning guns. It's called amendment 2. Everything else is abhorrent to amendment 2, not a law, and not to be obeyed
I'm pretty sure murder is already illegal in all 50 States and carries some of the stiffest penalties.
Has that stopped any murderers from murdering people?
Maybe if we make murder “double extra-special illegal…”
making it as easy as possible for psychotic people to get an armalite in an afternoon does not follow from your point. protect yourself, abide by the laws. don't think that alone means you can otherwise insist on being an idiot.
@@laurenfazenbaker9777well said. Here in New York they put up billboards stating the possession of a loaded firearm without a permit gets 3 years in prison, the permit is unconstitutional,yet people obey, it’s called intimidation and by the state.
States explicitly do not have the right or the privilege to legally license anyone for anything having to do with the second amendment. No government entity can delay and require alms for any right in the first 10 amendments of the Constitution. A right delayed is a right denied. It is that simple.
if one's other civil rights were being violated, say, a person of color is deemed inappropriate to sit in a restaurant or purchase property would not leftists become unglued? A civil right is simply just that and not something that's earned or given out for good behavior...
35 years without mine.
Very true!!
Can I see your speech permit please.
@@sealer3553 [shows you the end of a .45 barrel] "Here's my permit, oh and over there." [Points to the Constitution on the wall]
So glad I live in one of the free states.
Who was the lady speaker? She seemed very much in favor of law abiding carry/ownership.
I do not own a gun myself, but taking firearms away from law-abiding American CITIZENS is unconstitutional and makes no sense.
The people have the right to any weapon the government has. There are no moral geniuses in government, no rationality required in law, and they are not better people than ordinary citizens. There is no legitimate state and all authority but legitimate expertise is imagined into being.
You should think about owning 1, or 2, or 3.
@@paulsturgill8848 Yeah, if my wife wasn't 100% against it, I would.
@@SLVBRZ18-wf8ws Fair enough.
@SLVBRZ18-wf8ws just own one. How will she find out if you keep your mouth shut? It is better to have one and not need it than need it and not have it.
“Used for self defense” is not the same as “discharged in a self-defense incident”. A firearm held or carried or stored in the home “used” for self defense, even if it is never discharged (or even presented to an attacker). Thus tens of millions of firearms are “used” every year for self defense.
Peace of mind, deterrence are those uses.
Yes, that's where the 500,000 to 3 million stat comes from.
Isn’t that the best case scenario though and is the biggest support and point to firearm rights
if this were the case, the number would be MUCH higher. brandishing (drawing with intent to discharge) is the stat that they are attempting to establish. the problem is that a lot of these uses go unreported because the victim would end up in jail since brandishing a deadly weapon is illegal. this however can also be a good case for open carrying a firearm as just seeing a weapon can be a deterrent however that comes with being more situationally aware, so your weapon isn't stolen from you.
Any incident where the firearm is not discharged is NOT reported or logged anywhere.
The police only come out and write a report when someone is shot or shot at and in very rural areas, no police will be called.
With this fact, numbers used by gun grabbers will be manipulated to seem like very few people use guns to protect themselves.
There are 400 million firearms in USA and 40 million gun owners out of a population of 330 million with 73 million being underage and another 56 million seniors, leaving 201 million able bodied citizens to carry.
That's 2 guns for every one of those adults.
Most guns are owned by collectors vs everyday use.
Basically 320(2 guns per owner) to 360 million guns are in a collection somewhere & in a store inventory though they may all eventually be lost in a boating accident.
49,000 gun deaths 54% are suicides.
21k gun deaths distilled down 13% being drug & gang related deaths.
Most gun deaths are by know persons, family, spouses, dating, exes etc..
Mass shootings by FBI were 103 in 2021
Mass shootings(4 or more people shot) by Gun Violence Archive is 706 In 2021.
*So for around 2,000 RANDOM acts of violence (What the MSM and activists scare the public with to push gun control laws) they want to impede on 330 million citizens protecting themselves and expose roughly 2 million self defense incidents into new victims for the statistics.*
Don't let anybody take your constitutional rights away from law abiding citizens.
They should Imprach anyone NOT upholding the constitution.
Ask her will she personally insure that the police show up before the crime is committed
Per combat veteran and former police officer Clint Smith: "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away."
30 minutes on a good day
This talk went in a better direction than I expected. Of course restricting laws on gun ownership (even more) won't stop any violent crimes - it just makes a law-abiding citizen unable to defend themselves against the criminals who will get whatever tools they need regardless of what the law says.
Isn't the ATF, supposed to "help" people obtain class III items or know about tobacco‼️💯
Such a failure of public trust & Oath of office
Most of the data I have looked up says that aproximately 3 million people used a firearm to save their lives each year; HOWEVER, many citizens do not report an incident to the police if they used a firearm in self defense. Most will tell their family and friends, but never tell the police. The numbers of those who used a gun in self defense is much higher than reported.
Involving the police can only get you arrested and prosecuted by a power-drunk D.A. There is no upside.
percentage of people who told researchers they used a gun in self-defense is similar to the percentage of Americans who said they were abducted by aliens.
@@riverotter68 By that reasoning, the percentage of people killed with a firearm is far less than that, so why worry about it?
@@teekay_1 other countries have far fewer guns and far fewer gun deaths. Coincidence?
you raise an intriguing point, the US -- hands down -- has the most freedoms than any other nation it also is the world's police force and most humanitarian nation when it comes to $$ to list a few, with these freedoms there is also the ability to abuse and cheat as witnessed in the '20 election; the founders were well aware of possible nefarious actions by some therefore the 2nd A exists for that specific purpose... @@riverotter68
I wish that congressional "Democrats" (communists) would just stop with these hearings. The BOR expressly prohibits the kind of intrusion that is being attempted. It's that simple!! The government has no standing to impose restrictions on gun owners, PERIOD!!
The American populist as a whole needs to "replace" our current tyrannical system.
Your notions that Democratic politicians are communists and that all gun laws are unconstitutional are false.
The Second Am. states, that the people's RKBA "shall not be infringed." We should expect courts to uphold our rights under the standard of "strict scrutiny" as would similarly apply to evaluation of other proposed "restrictions" on our other fundamental rights. Hint: the laws must be proven to be the least restrictive means tailored to achieve the purported objective for the public good. When Vermont had only one gun law ("don't give guns to felons, children or mental patients") they maintained the lowest gun-homicide rate in the country. One could argue that they "did just fine" without MORE gun laws of any kind, meaning that the solution must lie elsewhere.
Those 'communists' & fascists, etc. are most probably - simply 'practicing' for when they surrender the governance of the US to the New World Order.
Government has no right to tell me how I decide to protect myself from danger. I will protect myself, family, friends, and those in danger as I judge fit to save mine or others lives.
And who decides who's mentally stable enough to be able to defend themselves 🤔
Okay how about live by example every member of all the political factions no longer have armed security protecting them
Bill of rights negates any and all of this theater. PERIOD!
Wow, someone who actually answers the questions they’re being asked. Amazing.
not really -- she dodged the plain answer that 1.6 million more crimes against defenseless civilians would occur with the new law
There's no such thing as gun/knife/baseball-bat violence, only criminal violence...
This is something most people just don't understand. It's the verb or action of assault making the object used rendered useless unless someone picks it up and uses it as a weapon.
Why have a gun then? Just have a baseball bat for protection. Or just use a knife if the need arises. You won't. Hell, I won't either. You and I will get a gun because it is much more effective weapon. That said, criminals would rather have a gun also to be more effective. And in that sense, law-abiders have all the more reason to be armed with a gun.
But it makes no sense to pretend a gun is just an inanimate object. While technically it is just a piece of metal we can all see that it is a highly efficient and powerful weapon far surpassing bats and knives.
There is such a thing but the problem is they lie about gun since 2/3 gun crimes are actually suicide. You cannot committ suicide with a knife or baseball bat without assistance.
@@thunkjunkI think the point is that “gun violence” is a pointless term. It’s fundamentally dishonest that tries to ascribe the cause of the violence to the gun, not the specific criminal action.
Yep - so get rid of the gun bit.
Just seen 3 times between Friday and Saturday in Pittsburgh. Happens every day.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
it has already been infringed. I have a list of guns I can’t buy. And now in the state I moved to the magazines are illegal. It is insane that states can void the bill of rights.
That doesn't make it a good idea.
@@viasevenvai Guns? Physically you're probably capable of keeping and bearing a MANPAD
Those people wearing those shirts that say "Ban Assault Weapons" aren't aware that any weapon can be used to assault so that would cover every firearm. Thank God for our Second Admendmant!!!!!!!
If they are ever assaulted, they will beg for an assault weapon to be available.
We should definitely ban assault fries and assault cheeseburgers. They kill many people every day. 😂 leftists really are clueless.
Those chicks need to look up the definition of weapon! Virtually ANYTHIING on the planet CAN be used as a weapon! In and of itself, there is no such thing as an assault rifle (contrary to the belief of idiots, AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle). There is NO assault weapon, until it gets into the hands of an unstable individual that perpetrates an assault and uses a weapon. How about we ban criminals? Let's get the heart of the matter....it is NOT guns!!!
Don't forget hammers....assault hammers kill more people. 😉
Those who don't know the basic differences between male, and female have no business telling us what the 2nd amendment means.
It's very difficult for a gun owner to use a fire arm. The DA's use every thing they can do and several days to find a charge if a fire arm was used by someone trying to protect themselves and their families. Criminals have more rights than a honest person.
WAY more rights, sadly. And that insanity really needs to stop. Victims need to be granted at least as much rights as the accused, if not more.
Never fear made up rules as much as someone trying to do you harm. Defend yourself any way possible.
It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6...
She’s Spot On!!!
In a country where the #2 constitutional amendment states "shall not be infringed," why is this even a conversation?
No permission is required from the Government to have freedom. That is the whole premises of the US Constitution. If that didn't make sense, you are a free person, just because a bunch of humans got together and created a law, doesn't magically make you a slave. The most confusing thing here to most humans is that they think they must follow the laws made by humans that work for an organization called Government.
Amen!
Maybe you’d rather live in a perpetual state of anarchy. I wouldn’t
A firearm is like house or car insurance. You only use it when it is needed, but you better have it, just in case that need arises.
That's totally not accurate. Home insurance does nothing to stop your house from burning down. Car insurance does not prevent anyone from being in a accident..
@@SineEyed True, insurance doesn't "prevent" your house from burning. Similarly, a camera doesn't prevent thefts. You're better off putting in a fence, window bars, high-end door locks, and an automatic sprinkler system, to obtain better "home security".
Also, criminal laws generally do not "prevent" anyone from committing a crime; they are designed to catch, try and punish offenders AFTER THE FACT, which may serve to deter the NON-criminals who do not wish to undertake the risk of being caught.
@@SineEyed A gun does not prevent house intrusions or attacks from taking place, but, like insurance can certainly correct the situation by eliminating the potential consequences, just like insurance.
@@archiebald4717 guns don't prevent people from being victimized? Ok... so why is everybody "up in arms" over their ability to own them? The #1 argument I hear is that so people can protect themselves; you're saying they believe something which isn't true?..
@@SineEyed They want to protect themselves from danger, I do too. We cannot rely on the police to protect us 24 hours a day, everywhere. People want to carry a gun or own a gun, because they cannot carry a policeman or own a policeman. That is why owning a gun is like insurance. We don't want to use it, but we want it in place and ready, in case we need to. I think you need to read through again.
In a town in the UK burglary & theft decreased by 85% when two offenders were eventually jailed. Many crimes are concentrated on relatively few groups or individuals.
But in the US, it’s more like the Wild West days
Sen. Lee cited the police officer in DC as saying that if the people committing gun crimes are incarcerated, and kept incarcerated....the number of homicides will decrease dramatically. A major problem is that they are not put away and kept there because of plea bargaining. Perhaps our congress might pass a law in which they convince the states to pass laws that prohibit plea bargaining in gun related crime.
I wouldn't. Plea bargaining is often used as an intimidation tactic when the court isn't confident in the guilt of the defendant. There's a reason why 95% of prisoners never received a trial, and it's not cause they're all guilty.
2.5 million times, according to Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun,” 86 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, 1 (Fall 1995)... and that was nearly 30 years ago.
FSU came to similar conclusions.
Here in SC we had 2 guys both out on bail for crimes committed while out on bail for earlier crimes which they were out on bail for after even earlier crimes, they committed murder during a home invasion. Bail on bail on bail for violent crimes until this happened. And these guys weren't a team getting bails for the same crimes, those were all separate crimes, they didn't even know each other until just before their home invasion where the murder was committed.
I was walking out of BURLINGTON COAT FACTORY in Saginaw, Michigan. As I was, A car full of people pulled up along side my car, 2 passengers got out and ran toward me. I dropped my bag and pulled my weapon. They turned immediately, got back in the car and split! I'm a LEGAL GUN OWNER, plus I'm licensed to carry concealed. This was in broad daylight, 10:15am. I called 911 right after. The police officer who responded told me I was fortunate to have had my gun on me because the car and suspects were already on their radar. They had done this several times over the past few months in the shopping district along Tittabawasee Rd and Bay Rd in Saginaw! I walk with a cane, so I probably looked like an easy target. My Dad was a NRA Instructor for about 10 years. My brother and I have been shooting fire arms since we were about 9. We were taught SAFETY, first and foremost, SAFETY!
*Amen!*
I now have a much better appreciation for Senator Mike Lee.
He's always been an excellent representative of my state of Utah. He's also our best apology for Mitt.
Very sad that this actually has to be explained to some people. Just goes to show that the gungrabbers are plain stupid or evil.
I'd say both.
"shall not be infringed". The NFA needs to be repealed.
By the time the criminal has pulled the trigger he has probably broken several other laws leading up to that. Gun Controllers say, "Yes, but adding this ONE more law will stop them."
The CDC complying with pressure to remove the defensive uses (estimated 60k-3.7+million) shows how corrupted it is.
Complicit Deceptive Corporation.
Because their goal is to disarm and dumb down/nerf the right. They don’t want people knowing how many democrats frequented Epstein Island and want to make sure we don’t have the capability to make this country free again someday if it ever was.
The CDC even weighing in on firearems as if gun ownership is related to diseases or viruses and then render a healthcare opinion is the most assinine thing I have since the covid-19 scamdemic. But then again, look at joke that the CDC perpetuated regarding covid-19 and still do today.
There is a little girl in California that is crippled from gun violence. The man that did it was sentenced to sixty four years Gov. Neusom gave him a pardon after eight years and also a very high paying government job !
How many violent criminals did President Trump pardon, not including several war criminals?
Exactly the reason why California is flushing down the toilet, and he should NEVER be allowed to run this country!
Bravo
Utah baby. We’re truly free here! Constitutional carry and practically no violent crime.
'No state shall make OR ENFORCE any law which abridges the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States' - United States Constitution.
Any state which violates this is guilty under United States Code Title 18 Sections 241 and 242- Conspiracy Against Rights- the very same charge they are trying to go after Trump for!
Crisis? Well guess who's to blame for all this crisis? I think most rational Americans have a pretty good idea who THEY are.
This is a really interesting snippet of testimony and questioning. I wish that the name of the witness was available, as well as the committee and the topic being discussed to give it context.
I own several firearms, but have never had a self defense situation, but use mine about once a month at a firing 🎉 range on paper targets to keep up my skills I learned in the Marine Corps and my Concealed Carry Permit which I keep up to date.
Them requiring a permit is treason and extortion....A permit is permission to do an act that is NOT against the law....
You are being extorted by traitors.....
The constitution is your permit
if most of our population was like that crime would become rare.
youre about the only person who should legally have a firearm. I've been flagged more times than I can count by "responsible" gun owners. The only people that should be able to get one are people that can prove they can shoot straight in a life or death situation
@@longshucksgaming I learned while a Pistol Instructor in the Marines then working as a armored car guard for twenty years and having a Concealed Carry Permit
I was 6 years old once. My retired military serving/police officer father left guns up high and occasionally, hidden under things. I always knew where they were, and I definitely knew how to manipulate and safely handle/fire them. I now own a business manufacturing holsters, and I also own an armed security company...
The best gun control is teaching gun safety
FTT, FTP
@@DurtyDog I understand "File Transfer Protocol", but not sure about why it is used here...
I can defend myself, the ones I love, and my property because I live in a sane state,.. that still believes in the Constitution. Fix the one's that you live in,... then you won't have to move to mine.
By your profile pic, I'm guessing you live in Wyoming. Wyoming has the fourth highest firearm death rate in America per capita- 22.3 per 100,000 people. In fact 9 of the 10 states with the highest firearm death rate are generally considered red states with lax gun laws. Conversely, 9 of the 10 states with the lowest firearm deaths per capita are blue states. Vermont for example has a population similar to Wyoming but a death rate of 9.3 per 100,000- less than half Wyomings rate. So more guns don't equal less crime.
@@bgbgbg123 The number of guns in private hands have increased dramatically since the early 1990s yet the violent crime rate has fallen by half. Guns are used to protect life and prevent crime between 250,000 and 3,000,000 times each year. Many of those incidents go unreported because the aggressor runs off at the sight of the gun and the victim doesn't need to fire a shot. Some state has to have the worst X. So what?
@@bgbgbg123 What percentage of that is suicides? And how many more people save themselves with guns?
@@jhutch1470 so why does it matter how many were suicides? Does their death not "count" since they took their own life? If they didn't have a gun, they'd probably still be alive since other methods of suicide usually aren't as lethal as firearms.
@@bgbgbg123 if you're bringing red vs blue into it at least be honest and look at the crime in major cities in those states and how they vote. it's no coincidence cities that vote a certain way have high crime rates, and it's almost always cities that are lax on crime
Other people who have a problem, HAVE NO EFFECT ON MY RIGHTS!
When seconds count, cops are minutes away.
We AS AMERICANS WILL NEVER GIVE UP OUR 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS AS LONG AS THE BORDER STAY OPEN AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ARE HERE !!!!!
So if they close the border and remove illegal immigrants you will give up your 2A rights? I'm not sure I understand.
Geography might have something to do with that. lol
Using all caps doesn't make you more right.
@@section8usmc53he’s still right though and I would add even if their were no illegals and the border was closed we still won’t give up our guns never will until Jesus says we shall not learn of war anymore
If we had no licensing ccw laws country wide and a stand your ground america wide along with no sueing of a person killing a criminal in the course of a crime we would see a drastic decrease in crimes across america and alot less criminals taking up space in our prison systems.
Go Mike Lee!!!!
Look, the Constitution says the the Right of the People to Keep AND BEAR Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!! End of Story!! 😮
POLITICIAN CONTROL NOW!!!!
Self defense is a human right. Every creature was endowed by it's creator with the ability to defend itself. Only psychopaths would take away the ability of a wild animal's, much more a human's right to self defense...
and that doesn't mean 1.6 million people shot, the presence- display- of the gun usually stops the threat.
I'm shocked! How did this happen? Intelligent conversation in the Senate? I've never seen it, hope it continues on this and many other subjects.
It's nauseating that the very people living in gated communities who can afford fancy security systems and sometimes even armed security guards want to disarm us peasants.
Once every 50 years is enough if you were able to protect yourself.
as it says in the Bill of Rights ....... *"the RIGHT of the PEOPLE, to keep and bear arms ....."* , meaning essentially that any and all "bans" on Firearms, regardless of type, make, model, style etc and any of the accessory's for them are ...... unconstitutional !
@ComeonmenID10T The Declaration of Independence, "Whenever any form of government becomes distructive of these ends, it is the right or duty of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government and to provide new guards for their future security". And that is protected by the Constitution, where the right to use the Second Amendment against the government comes into play. Now if schools would still teach that, and the people were NOT so dumbed down from the government it's own self. America might have a chance.
Its better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.
Its already illegal to kill isnt it? Im pretty sure it is
Illegal to murder
@@gregblum7484Homicide is illegal in almost all cases, intentional or not. Murder is one type of homicide.
@@section8usmc53justified homicide isn’t illegal though
@@austindecker7643 The point was more than just murder is illegal.
Wow. This is a very impressive young woman.
Theres no such thing as gun violence.
It doesn’t get any more clear than that does it. We need more law abiding gun owners.
Woman get to your point….
I don't carry, but I'm a strong supporter of those who choose to! Those that do carry, does so so that they don't have to use it, but it's there if they do need to!
"more legal guns equal less crime" John lott
Come And Take It!