Hello all! We temporarily disabled comments on this video as some comments violated UA-cam’s community guidelines. The Dartmouth Political Union has no interest (nor time as full-time students) in filtering peoples’ varied views about this debate. We actively welcome diversity of opinion! We do have a responsibility to our mission, however, to provide a forum for respectful political discourse. While the comment section of a UA-cam video is a different medium than our in-person debates, panels, and weekly meetings, we ask you to keep our mission in mind while commenting. An earnest commitment to this mission has helped Dartmouth students from across the political spectrum engage in substantive conversations about contentious issues like abortion, drug legalization, and affirmative action. We are all about practicing dialogue across differences, and we hope our UA-cam videos can be an opportunity to practice and model that for ourselves and our classmates. Thank you again for tuning into our expert debate on gun control with Spike Cohen and David Hogg, and we hope to see you again soon!
Cowards. You're scared of folks who don't agree with you voicing their opinions... well, if voices are silenced there's always direct action as an alternative.
This is the problem, at the end of the day, doing what’s right, supporting freedom, ect. Is often VERY inconvenient. And with multiple generations raised with zero values.. here we are
@@tnh723 You mean Kaitlin Bennett? I don't blame him. Bennett was an attention seeker who knew if she waved her gun around people would like her. Spike actually knows things that aren't used for shock value. Hogg vs Bennett wouldn't have been a debate, it would have been two children throwing tantrums at each other.
No Why doesn't Spike or Colin Noir debate Thom Hartmann who wrote a book debunking all these rightwing 2nd amendment talking points. Instead of a 23 year old who isn't an expert on the Constitution .
I'd like to congratulate all the students at Dartmouth who just learned a Harvard education isn't worth shit. Congrats for not having to go to a safety school.
Most universities are garbage. If your education doesn't require a scientific laboratory and laboratory equipment to complete... then you're wasting your money at a university.
For someone who’s made this his full time schtick, Hogg is surprisingly unprepared wrt statistics. He says “lies damn lies and statistics” yet has no stats of his own and can’t refute those presented. He said if we had country by country homicide it would show … as if that’s not data that’s easily found (and completely shuts down his argument).
Why doesn't Spike or Colin Noir debate Thom Hartmann who wrote a book debunking all these rightwing 2nd amendment talking points. Instead of a 23 year old who isn't an expert on the Constitution .
@@monotech20.14 Colion Noir is not a good debater. Even his own videos where it's just a monologue and he has time to prepare, it's usually more like an unhinged rant than a well thought out and articulated argument.
@@TacticalStrudel Hogg backed out of a debate with Colin. I’ve never heard Colin debate but even if he’s not a good debater I think he could make quick work of David Hogg.
Love that Hogg’s response to Lily was hopeful against the US becoming tyrannical, then immediately mentioned the Patriot Act. So not only is the gun debate truly over, but also why haven’t we freed ourselves from this tyranny already?
No one trains and got too much football to watch and they aren’t willing to give anything up they have to be willing to lose everything including their lives and their families lives
Why doesn't Spike or Colin Noir debate Thom Hartmann who wrote a book debunking all these rightwing 2nd amendment talking points. Instead of a 23 year old who isn't an expert on the Constitution .
He's clearly just programmed to say what he says like a fucking robot. He even bragged about not bringing a single piece of paper. He was bragging about not being prepared for a fucking debate!
He has no substance at all throughout this debate. He keeps repeating the same talking points despite of him saying that he wants to find a common ground from the get go.
I'm glad that Spike called out the "fire in a crowded theatre" statement; I don't understand how anyone who has read Schenck v. United States can support the decision. Charles Schenck was prosecuted for distributing media opposing the draft. Schenck was a peaceful man, and what happened to him was abhorrent.
1:31:00 David is against Fisa and mass surveillance of US citizens but supports a gun registry. How does he not see that contradiction? A gun registry is surveillance of what a person owns.
@nolittering9900 definitely seems to be a case of "Repressive Tolerance". Okay when my side does it, complete intolerance towards the other side doing it.
R's and D's both like their tyranny but want it done in different ways. D's want you to not have the option to defend yourself. R's just want to know what you are going to do before you do it so they can take you instead of the object.
"I am not advocating for any law-abiding citizen to have their gun taken away" -David "We need to ban semi-automatic rifles and ideally, we should Institute a mandatory buy-back on all 'assault weapons.'" One or the other, David. You can claim all day You're not coming for anyone's guns, but you have openly admitted multiple times that your goal is to take away semi-automatic rifles from law-abiding citizens. Have some consistency.
Unironically the people who make this claim not understanding that the majority of firearms readily available to the general public are semi-automatic firearms is the most frustrating. Unless you have an FFL and a lot of money you aren't getting your hands on an automatic firearm. Advocating for the ban of semi-automatic firearms means advocating for the ban of all firearms. I think we should be discussing firearm functionalities to go along with these conversations because so many people are ignorant on this topic.
@@eyeskyoob7374it costs $200 and filling a file 4 form for a fully automatic weapon. Same as a suppressor or sbr. Unless you mean a lot of money as in you will fly through ammo very quick. It’s really not that hard. Find gun..find class 3 ffl..fill out form..pay $200 plus what the gun costs. Done.
@@stevenglasl1443that's correct, but there's already limited supply of automatic weapons, with additional laws not allowing civilians to buy them if they're made after '86. Scarcity drives up prices. And will continue to do so. Stuff like Uzi's and M16' s are in the car neighborhood of pricing. The cooler and older stuff like MG42's are house money. Not really avaliable to most people right? Because when it's a choice of fun stuff versus necessities most people will be picking a home vs being homeless. From what I've heard, if you can afford them, buying rare machineguns is actually a good way to make money.
hogg is repeating talking points, its a dead giveaway in several instances. intellectual light weight. This is the difference between having ideological principles and being a puppet.
Yep. I’ve seen that many times on this issue. The funny thing is that I intentionally avoid conservative “typical pro-gun” talking points and use my own approach. When I do that they have no idea how to respond because I haven’t given any of the talking points they have been pre-programmed to respond to with their own. It forces them to try and actually reason it out from scratch and they can’t because when you first get them to acknowledge that society uses a cost/benefit analysis for everything to decide what’s allowed or banned, and then drop the fact that 2x more people are killed by hands/feet a year than by all rifles combined, the idea we would ban something so prominent for such a comparatively low benefit is absurd. Then I point out the fact that something like 95% of all gun violence is committed by inner city gang members, and that if they really wanted to target gun violence they would need to target them. And since me and people like me are nothing like them in any way, punishing me and taking away my rights for the crimes committed by people I already despise and have nothing to do with is also insane. After that there’s really no response they can give.
Facts, Lost my job, got harassed by police prior to their control curfews, literally followed into my apartment block telling me I'm past curfew before it even began.. Meanwhile i was coming home from work.. within 5km (they also restricted us to 5km travel)... Beat up old ladies, shot people protesting peacefully etc.. and had our government speak down to it's citizens.
Witnessed it. Only worst part is people complied to it. They laughed at us who saw this as a human rights violation, they berated and shutdown people. They defended the indefensible.
D Hogg's father is a former fed. He now runs a "Crisis Training corp" that trains police and municipalities in how to deal with active shooters. David Hoggs child hood photo was used to create Adam Lanza. I don't know how anyone can miss the eyes...
I wish Spike could have responded to David's comment on Australia... you know, the country where the police were posting on facebook photos of tents in the wilderness with the caption "we will find you" (people who left the city to escape the Covid tyranny). That was the absolute most stupid thing David said and Spike never got a chance to respond.
I’m confused. The constitution doesn’t give anyone rights or allow anyone to do anything. The constitution is instructions for what the government can and CAN’T do. In other words, the constitution doesn’t say People can say whatever they want, it says the government can’t limit people’s speech. This is a distinct difference.
A person's right to remain free is absolute. Which means the constitution is there to keep the people free. Which means the people can and say and do whatever they want within the guidelines of freedoms as long as it doesn't interfere with your neighbors freedoms and rights.
@@woahdude3853 what I’m saying is the constitution doesn’t give people anything, it is meant to limit government. We are already free. We don’t need constitution for that. Constitution is instructions for government. Not us.
No you are not confused, you are correct. It is everyone else that is mindless idiots for they have zero understanding of what the CONstituion CONtract that they did not sign really is. The CONstituion is a CONtract. All of its signatories are DEAD! The Posterity would be the bloodlines of the signers. If one did not sign it you are not party to the CONtract, How can someone be party to a CONtract that was signed two plus centuries where all the signers are long dead and before you even draw your first breath?? What is amazing to me is people want to be party to a CON tract they did not sign. Some can even recite the entire CONtract and yet the reality is it has ZERO to do with them other than their beLIEf that it does, so what do people do? Go along with the CONtract even though it was signed centuries before they drew their first breath, and the cretins who drew up said CONtract and those that followed have made it clear that if you do not object to the CONtract at all and or obligate yourself to it (defend the 2nd amendment) you are party to its brutal tyrannical laws....thus you help proliferate all the ills of the government. “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.” ― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority
D Hogg's father is a former fed. He now runs a "Crisis Training corp" that trains police and municipalities in how to deal with active shooters. David Hoggs child hood photo was used to create Adam Lanza. I don't know how anyone can miss the eyes...
Ideologues like David are incredibly dangerous, because there wasn’t a single thing he said in this debate that didn’t involve expanding government surveillance or overreach to achieve his vision. At the same he railed against all forms of totalitarianism, not realizing that’s what he actually stands for. It’s unbelievable what I just witnessed.
Jesus this should have been over in the first minute when he didn't blame LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE FBI for not doing their fucking job! But sure, blame guns
D Hogg's father is a former fed. He now runs a "Crisis Training corp" that trains police and municipalities in how to deal with active shooters. David Hoggs child hood photo was used to create Adam Lanza. I don't know how anyone can miss the eyes...
Enacting Massachusetts firearm laws across our Republic is tantamount to Yankee imperialism and goes against the Constitution of Massachusetts. The assailant who attacked Stoneman Douglass was required to wait for his AR-15 for 5 business days, as per Broward County Ordinance 18-96. Throughout history, violent crime has been a social issue, as evidenced in Ancient Rome. A national registry is the path to genocide or democide. Any doubts? Please examine the 100-day holocaust that occurred in Rwanda in 1994. Criminal evidence disposal functions are what gun buybacks are all about. Mr. Hogg holds the view that the state should be more powerful than its people and I view his declaration as treasonous. Additionally, he displays numerous Rebecca Peters talking points. Anyone who even believes in trusting the government has failed history.
@@benmeltzerlol! No, David literally rode his bike to the school after the shooting. He was never there. That's why he was the first student interviewed by news crews as they arrived. He was already outside the building before the other students were released from lockdown.
"Waah. I'm a victim of people targeting me bc I used a tragedy I wasn't even present for to catapult myself into the public eye, and gift to stroke my own ego... but I totally respect you all."🙄
I facepalmed so hard here when he said that. You can literally sell it, to pawn shops, to FFL dealers, lots of places. His answer shows how absolutely dependent on the government he is, and believes others are.
At the end of the day, one of the men at that table is advocating for the State to use gun violence against his peaceable neighbors, and the other was not.
Sheriff in CO, Republican, big supporter of Red Flag Laws until prisoners had him flagged because they "lived with him." Due process is essential. its around 40 minutes remaining. Red flag laws lack any due process. An anonymous allegation can trigger one.
I am genuinely surprised to see that this debate actually happened. It was a fantastic watch. Regarding firearm training. I think they are incredibly valuable, but I would never want to see them considered mandatory. However, I’d love to be able to write them off on my taxes. THAT would be a greater incentive for people to get gun training.
David hogg in opening statements "Im interested in why people commit violence, parkland was because no ones stopped gim from accessing an AR15." Umm... dude. Thats the how, not rhe why..
Last time I checked, firearms manufacturers don't sell directly to civilians, they sell to FFLs and then the FFLs after getting background check showing the purchaser is not a preventative person, sell the gun. THIS IS ALL LEGAL!!!!
The only way, according to the founders, that any right can legally be limited is, when your violate someone else's rights - you have have all rights up to that disbtinct point. That is where rights are limited. That's why the concept of banning types firearms and automatic weapons is unconstitutional as it relies on the government's ability to regulate interstate commerce (at ratification you could own cannond and literally Warship - in the government even contracted private owners of Gunships and heavy artillery to be pirates for them!)... but not in the original sense, but in the sense thr FDR extorted the court into reinterpretating - when they first rules against him on his interpretation of "interstate commerce", he threatened to stack the courts and destroy the independence of Judiciary. Thus when when he came back to the courts asking the same exact question, the justices did a complete 180, and thus we have the bloated Federal government we have today that can regulate anything under the guise if "interstate commerce". The founders made clear in their writings at the time of the Constitution that, interstate commerce regulation only meant that the federal government could prevent one state from taxing another State's Goods to create unfair advantages and imbalances among the states economically. But thanks to the extortion of FDR, the term "Interstate Commerce" in law now means: if anything is commerce and it crosses a state line, be it transactionally or physically, then the government has complete and utter control over everything about that product and transaction.
We’re STILL not supposed to have a standing army, for the same reasons we didn’t have one in the 18th century. The army we have, with its bases all over the world, is illegal.
The constitution allows for congress to create a standing army. They do this by passing the NDAA every 2 years. You may not like it but the reality is it's not illegal.
@@pjh1663Wrong the constitution prohibits a standing army period, Congress only has authority to create a army in times of invasion and are not supposed to be funding said army for no longer than 2 years. The Pentagon and US military is illegal in violation of the US constitution. Congress only has legal lawful authority to create and fund a navy.
@@dragonf1092 Not quite right. According to our constitution (did you read it?), Congress is given the right "to raise and support Armies, but no appropriation of Money to that use shall be for a longer term than two Years." Where does that prohibit a standing army? It only restricts or requires that funding be for two years. Where does it state Congress is only authorized to raise an Army only for invasion? There is no other prohibition other than having to reauthorize funding every two years. Until WWII we were able to maintain a very small army because of our unique position in the world with two oceans as a buffer. We had time to recruit and train our armies, but it has been shown we no longer have that luxury so yes, we reauthorize the military every two years. As for the Navy, Congress is specifically required "To provide and maintain a Navy." Which would mean funding is REQUIRED (unlike the Army)
@@jimd1944 what's the point of raising a army if there is already a standing army genius. A standing army is not supposed to exist under the constitution of the united states.
Hogg argued at one point that "assault rifles" are not effective for self-defense. Then later he talked about attributes that make them very functional killing tools, saying that they are easy to shoot and can accommodate large magazines. So which is it? Do they have these qualities only in the hands of bad guys?
It’s amazing how neither of them brought up the fact that the CDC DID do a study on defensive gun violence. It was so detrimental to the gun control activists that 2 democrat senators made the CDC take it down.
Exactly. It should also be mentioned that the Dickey Amendment didn't ban research on firearms, but it prohibited a government agency (in this case the CDC) from using taxpayers dollars to advocate for a political agenda.
I think Spike missed an opportunity on the suicide debate. Even if our suicide rate is higher someone else’s inability to deal with life should not reduce my right to own firearms.
I totally agree with you. Suicide by firearm is NOT "gun violence" (a made up term). What is never mentioned is that even though many "Civilized" European countries have way lower gun deaths by suicide, what is not mentioned is that their actual suicide death rates are often more than our total suicide death rate. If no access to a gun, the prefered method is often suffocation or poison. In Australia, with manadtory "buyback (confiscation) they claim that gun deaths were reduced dramatically. perhaps but, their murder rate rmained thee same and, while suicide by guns went down, suicides went up slightly .. just by other means.
I caught the last 40 minutes or so and was impressed with both speakers. The comment of “nobody wants mob rule by force” made me chuckle because sometimes I think that’s what we’re experiencing currently. Idk if it was addressed earlier but the mention of gun laws hindering minorities and their personal safety is something that needs more attention.
The tragedy of this "debate" is that people are even accepting the idea that we should entertain those who seek to make American citizens under ever more control of Big Government.
You are correct. These are people who want to strip away our rights. Their main justification is that every other country does it. These people are our enemies.
Amazingly bad response from Hogg, the police have access to the backing of the military and the national guard that have more than enough firearms back in the 90s to stop criminals even with RPGs, this is a joke of a conversation,
The reason David Hogs school got shot up is because the police , FBI , and many other government agencies didn’t act on many reports using existing laws that could have stopped that shooter from acting on his feelings / mental illness as well as his ability to get a firearm. The issues isn’t the firearm and David proves his lack of knowledge about firearms as well. There big difference between an M-16 and the AR-15. Our military would never accept the AR-15 as a fighting tool. Let’s be real, all guns can be dangerous especially in the wrong hands. And that is where the issue lies is the person not the weapon. Proof is countries that don’t allow guns bad / mentally ill people are killing each other and the innocent with machetes. Recently happened in the UK. And so their response is to ban knives…. So not they will move to bats , clubs , etc. that being said here in the USA more people are killed with bats , clubs , blunt objects and hands /feet by thousands a year. So do we ban all these things???? lol. As for a AR-15 being a 1000 yrd weapon is crazy. lol. Wile you can hit a target at that range it’s not likely and if so its energy is very poor. Let’s also be real and realize most gun owners hunting rifles are 10 times or more lethal then an AR-15 even out to 1000yrds. As for hardening schools that would be easy to do without changing the look or feel of the school and even without a police presence. In fact if the government would hire me to do it I would start a company that would do just that for every school in the country to what ever level is needed. Protecting our kids at school is easy. When I was in school we used to hunt before & after school and come to school with our rifle or shotgun in our rigs and we never had any issues. Let’s also be honest about this entire issue and how much attention we are giving it over an issue that is tiny compared to other deaths every year. Fire arms deaths range from 400 to 1000 a year wile knives kill 1500 + blunt objects / hands& feet kill 2500+ , and distracted drivers on phones kill 5000+ people a year in their cars. Wouldn’t it make more sense to ban phones & cars ?????? Of course not. You do what should be don’t and let the law address the person as it should in all these situations. But we are treating guns as if it’s killing hundreds of thousands of people. As for the red flag laws David Hogg is flat out lying to the people. There is no “due process “ before taking the persons guns. The person doesn’t even know there was a court hearing or a warrant issued and many even get a no knock warrant and end up getting shot or killed because they think a intruder is breaking in at 4am and they are defending their home. David’s lack of real knowledge is shocking & obvious and he is getting owned and loosing this debate. The real reason they are so focused on taking our guns is because “they” ( the government & elites) know it is the only thing keeping them from total control of what they think are a lower class or as they say “vermin / useless eaters” Unjustified gun deaths are mostly a mental health issue. But it’s also a biproduct of the economy and the oppression of the American people. And they feed that by keeping us all divided as well as keep us in their imposed 2 party system so they can bring on a 2class populace….the haves & have nots. And the Asian lady was spot on and said it all. If we give up our gun rights and guns we soon will be just like mao’s Chinese communist society.
1:29:02 the fact he said he cannot guaranteed it shows that his identity ideology is bankrupt, it is a waste of time and has little worth other than authoritarian control.
Honestly we need to bring back the class my grandparents had in public school. They had a gun safety course and were even taken to the range as a final exam. I'd be fine making this an optional class of course.
Lil' bro keeps going back to the crowded theater analogy, forgetting that you CAN and SHOULD shout "fire" when there is a fire. The reason you shouldn't shout "fire" when there isn't one is that by providing false information, you will harm people. Speech that is false and harmful is illegal. It's not just some arbitrary rule to maintain order. The only just limits on our behavior are the equal rights of our neighbors.
"European schools are gun-free zones, too. When is the last time you heard of a mass shooting there?" PRAGUE, 21 December 2023, 18 dead, 25 injured. His arguments are ALL anecdotes, hypotheticals, feelings, ignorance, and lies.
David Hemenway, is a huge supporter of gun control. His analysis found no fewer than 55,000 defensive gun uses a year, which still makes a utilitarian argument to keep arms around.
Wow, that lady talking about her time in China really put an end to the debate as a whole. That was powerful. Respect to her for taking the time to point out just how dangerous it can be with gun control laws.
I love how at least a couple times, David essentially says he thinks there’s a legitimate libertarian argument for basically the most authoritative policy you’ve ever heard of. David, do you have any idea what “libertarian” means?
No government official in the united states of America has any legal lawful constitutional authority or jurisdiction to pass or enforce any form of gun control laws anywhere in the united states of America under the supremacy clause, article 4 section 2 paragraph 1, second amendment,9th amendment,10th amendment,14th amendment sections 1 and 3.
@kiemas12 he didn't. I just watched the hole thing. While many of us disagree with him, we should not claim he said things he didn't. We should have honor and integrity. We can win on the issue. Let's do that instead of misrepresenting our opponents. If you think he basically said "if you don't agree with me, then you're OK with people dying", please timestamp.
@@PrayingPanda Again, I didn’t say he actually said that word for word, I mean I thought that would be obvious, guess I should have been more clear. I’m actually just saying what he clearly means in plain words. I mean for gods sake he brought up the fire in a crowded theatre analogy twice lol this is not a good faith debater. We’ve already won on the issue objectively. Seems like you watched it. So you know. Some people like Hogg, )who lives an exceedingly comfortable life in comparison to most of us) just don’t understand that simply being alive is not the most important thing to a huge percentage of people in this country. And around the world for that matter. This kind of thinking is super dangerous. And I agree with everything you said btw, I don’t think it’s dishonorable to interpret people’s meaning.
This is a strange misunderstanding. The people are the militia. Regulated in the 18th century has a completely different meaning than it does in the 21st century. Well-regulated = well supplied, well trained, etc... your counterpoint is detrimental to the 2nd amendment.
@@Sol_Walker The state has never been an effective protector of property. Bars full of drunk young men are safer than public parks because bouncers are better at protecting property than policemen. PMCs are better operators than US servicemen. Costco's return policy delivers more satisfactory results than courts of adjudication. The state is not only unwilling to protect property, but is also the worst violator of property.
This is a terrible debate format. You can’t have a fully fleshed out debate with someone only 30 second or 2 minute responses. That said Spike Cohen wrecked Hogg.
One of the best ways to curb gun violence; would be mandatory gun education in schools. Teach kids about responsible gun possession and gun usage. In a country with a constitutionally protected right to own a gun; it is kind of a no brainer. I dont understand why people do not implement this nationwide?
It actually used to be a thing in many places. You'd have to look up where. The boy scouts also used to teach gun safety and usage. I don't know if they do that anymore
Hello all! We temporarily disabled comments on this video as some comments violated UA-cam’s community guidelines. The Dartmouth Political Union has no interest (nor time as full-time students) in filtering peoples’ varied views about this debate. We actively welcome diversity of opinion! We do have a responsibility to our mission, however, to provide a forum for respectful political discourse. While the comment section of a UA-cam video is a different medium than our in-person debates, panels, and weekly meetings, we ask you to keep our mission in mind while commenting. An earnest commitment to this mission has helped Dartmouth students from across the political spectrum engage in substantive conversations about contentious issues like abortion, drug legalization, and affirmative action. We are all about practicing dialogue across differences, and we hope our UA-cam videos can be an opportunity to practice and model that for ourselves and our classmates. Thank you again for tuning into our expert debate on gun control with Spike Cohen and David Hogg, and we hope to see you again soon!
If comments violate youtube's guidelines, report them and let youtube deal with it. Don't shutdown the entire comment system.
Cowards. You're scared of folks who don't agree with you voicing their opinions... well, if voices are silenced there's always direct action as an alternative.
So God forbid people have an opinion
@@kyledavidson9449 Dartmouth are cowards who want to suppress expression. When your voice isn't an option... direct action may be needed.
This is the problem, at the end of the day, doing what’s right, supporting freedom, ect. Is often VERY inconvenient. And with multiple generations raised with zero values.. here we are
Hogg did not show respect to Spike. Spike destroyed him. No wonder Hogg backed out of debating Colion Noir.
I was kinda surprised he even went through with this one.
Yeah. He ran away from the other gun girl. The curly one
Lol. He doesn't want the smoke of trying to debate Colion. Spike and Lily destroyed him with ease.
@@jonathanvelez4385David knows is anti gun agenda would be over that’s why he won’t debate Colin
@@tnh723 You mean Kaitlin Bennett? I don't blame him. Bennett was an attention seeker who knew if she waved her gun around people would like her. Spike actually knows things that aren't used for shock value. Hogg vs Bennett wouldn't have been a debate, it would have been two children throwing tantrums at each other.
Hogg not only got out-pointed by Spike, he got out-pointed by the audience during the Q&A.
It's pretty easy to get out-pointed when you've got as many points as a circle.
It's not like hogg presented a high bar to begin with. He's a walking everytown point regurgitator.
No Why doesn't Spike or Colin Noir debate Thom Hartmann who wrote a book debunking all these rightwing 2nd amendment talking points. Instead of a 23 year old who isn't an expert on the Constitution .
@@monotech20.14 "debunk" used very subjectively in this particular case.
I'd like to congratulate all the students at Dartmouth who just learned a Harvard education isn't worth shit. Congrats for not having to go to a safety school.
Most universities are garbage. If your education doesn't require a scientific laboratory and laboratory equipment to complete... then you're wasting your money at a university.
Well in his defense he did learn that Wikipedia isn't a valid scholarly source. But, then again, he didn't bring any sources of his own soooo...
Spike obliterated this dude, holy moly
For someone who’s made this his full time schtick, Hogg is surprisingly unprepared wrt statistics. He says “lies damn lies and statistics” yet has no stats of his own and can’t refute those presented. He said if we had country by country homicide it would show … as if that’s not data that’s easily found (and completely shuts down his argument).
No.
Why doesn't Spike or Colin Noir debate Thom Hartmann who wrote a book debunking all these rightwing 2nd amendment talking points. Instead of a 23 year old who isn't an expert on the Constitution .
@@monotech20.14 Colion Noir is not a good debater. Even his own videos where it's just a monologue and he has time to prepare, it's usually more like an unhinged rant than a well thought out and articulated argument.
@@TacticalStrudel
Hogg backed out of a debate with Colin.
I’ve never heard Colin debate but even if he’s not a good debater I think he could make quick work of David Hogg.
Love that Hogg’s response to Lily was hopeful against the US becoming tyrannical, then immediately mentioned the Patriot Act. So not only is the gun debate truly over, but also why haven’t we freed ourselves from this tyranny already?
No one trains and got too much football to watch and they aren’t willing to give anything up they have to be willing to lose everything including their lives and their families lives
@@austindecker7643Bingo, too comfortable, it’s sad, I’ll die tomorrow for my beliefs.
Well spoken my friend ask myself this daily it seems. Let’s get this Show started
@@alanmeyers3957 no balls, you won't
David Hogg got slaughtered in this debate.
It was going to happen, because Hogg is a LIAR who spews typical false leftist talking points, that have been disproven over and over and over again.
Well... he's a petulant child who's never been required to know anything to spew his ignorance, so...
Why doesn't Spike or Colin Noir debate Thom Hartmann who wrote a book debunking all these rightwing 2nd amendment talking points. Instead of a 23 year old who isn't an expert on the Constitution .
@@monotech20.14 what 2nd amendment talking point is "rightwing"?
the 2nd amendment isn't right or left wing.
David Hogg couldn't understand that Wikipedia has citations to outside sources like he could not understand the nuance of "per capita."
He's clearly just programmed to say what he says like a fucking robot. He even bragged about not bringing a single piece of paper. He was bragging about not being prepared for a fucking debate!
He has no substance at all throughout this debate. He keeps repeating the same talking points despite of him saying that he wants to find a common ground from the get go.
He was foundering early and was grasping at anything he could deflect from his lack of knowledge.
Hogg got owned Pho...funny to watch
It was so devastating to his world view that he had to find something wrong with it
I'm glad that Spike called out the "fire in a crowded theatre" statement; I don't understand how anyone who has read Schenck v. United States can support the decision. Charles Schenck was prosecuted for distributing media opposing the draft. Schenck was a peaceful man, and what happened to him was abhorrent.
Would you be able to give me a general time that this happened? I had to watch this in a few instanced so I think I skipped over that part.
@@Thee_Sinner @26:12
@@Thee_Sinner 26:15 if I recall correctly.
Echos of Hitchens.
@@Pines_Druid did he use that argument before? I thought he would be a bit more quirked
1:31:00 David is against Fisa and mass surveillance of US citizens but supports a gun registry. How does he not see that contradiction? A gun registry is surveillance of what a person owns.
Hogg has the same blind spot inherent in most liberals, a basic lack of awareness of REALITY.
Marxists are very confused.
Yes it seemed to me that he's against tyranny when the "right wing" does it. But for it, when the left wing does it, including Europe and Australia.
@nolittering9900 definitely seems to be a case of "Repressive Tolerance". Okay when my side does it, complete intolerance towards the other side doing it.
R's and D's both like their tyranny but want it done in different ways. D's want you to not have the option to defend yourself. R's just want to know what you are going to do before you do it so they can take you instead of the object.
David is ironically one of the best salesmen for firearms even when he's getting verbally bodied w/ facts & logic
GJ Spike
"I am not advocating for any law-abiding citizen to have their gun taken away"
-David
"We need to ban semi-automatic rifles and ideally, we should Institute a mandatory buy-back on all 'assault weapons.'"
One or the other, David. You can claim all day You're not coming for anyone's guns, but you have openly admitted multiple times that your goal is to take away semi-automatic rifles from law-abiding citizens. Have some consistency.
Classic motte-bailey argument on his part. When he can't defend mandatory gun buybacks, he then says he isn't coming for your guns.
Unironically the people who make this claim not understanding that the majority of firearms readily available to the general public are semi-automatic firearms is the most frustrating. Unless you have an FFL and a lot of money you aren't getting your hands on an automatic firearm. Advocating for the ban of semi-automatic firearms means advocating for the ban of all firearms. I think we should be discussing firearm functionalities to go along with these conversations because so many people are ignorant on this topic.
@@eyeskyoob7374it costs $200 and filling a file 4 form for a fully automatic weapon. Same as a suppressor or sbr. Unless you mean a lot of money as in you will fly through ammo very quick. It’s really not that hard. Find gun..find class 3 ffl..fill out form..pay $200 plus what the gun costs. Done.
@@stevenglasl1443that's correct, but there's already limited supply of automatic weapons, with additional laws not allowing civilians to buy them if they're made after '86.
Scarcity drives up prices. And will continue to do so. Stuff like Uzi's and M16' s are in the car neighborhood of pricing. The cooler and older stuff like MG42's are house money.
Not really avaliable to most people right? Because when it's a choice of fun stuff versus necessities most people will be picking a home vs being homeless.
From what I've heard, if you can afford them, buying rare machineguns is actually a good way to make money.
@@stevenglasl1443 transferable machine guns are insanely expensive
hogg is repeating talking points, its a dead giveaway in several instances. intellectual light weight. This is the difference between having ideological principles and being a puppet.
He's indoctrinated, plain and simple. He probably hasn't had an independent thought in years.
Yep. I’ve seen that many times on this issue. The funny thing is that I intentionally avoid conservative “typical pro-gun” talking points and use my own approach. When I do that they have no idea how to respond because I haven’t given any of the talking points they have been pre-programmed to respond to with their own.
It forces them to try and actually reason it out from scratch and they can’t because when you first get them to acknowledge that society uses a cost/benefit analysis for everything to decide what’s allowed or banned, and then drop the fact that 2x more people are killed by hands/feet a year than by all rifles combined, the idea we would ban something so prominent for such a comparatively low benefit is absurd.
Then I point out the fact that something like 95% of all gun violence is committed by inner city gang members, and that if they really wanted to target gun violence they would need to target them. And since me and people like me are nothing like them in any way, punishing me and taking away my rights for the crimes committed by people I already despise and have nothing to do with is also insane.
After that there’s really no response they can give.
Many of the things he said are downright untrue
Australia is most certainly a police state. Just look at what they did during the lockdowns.
Yep, back to your Covid tents prisoner
Facts, Lost my job, got harassed by police prior to their control curfews, literally followed into my apartment block telling me I'm past curfew before it even began.. Meanwhile i was coming home from work.. within 5km (they also restricted us to 5km travel)... Beat up old ladies, shot people protesting peacefully etc.. and had our government speak down to it's citizens.
Witnessed it. Only worst part is people complied to it. They laughed at us who saw this as a human rights violation, they berated and shutdown people. They defended the indefensible.
Oh hey, it's this goober
What's funny Jack and pho is he keeps talking about Australia when cn32226 prices him wrong.
You don’t have a constitutional right to safety. Safety is your responsibility, and you should have the means to defend yourself.
D Hogg's father is a former fed. He now runs a "Crisis Training corp" that trains police and municipalities in how to deal with active shooters. David Hoggs child hood photo was used to create Adam Lanza. I don't know how anyone can miss the eyes...
I wish Spike could have responded to David's comment on Australia... you know, the country where the police were posting on facebook photos of tents in the wilderness with the caption "we will find you" (people who left the city to escape the Covid tyranny).
That was the absolute most stupid thing David said and Spike never got a chance to respond.
Good job owning him Spike!
Love to see it
I’m confused. The constitution doesn’t give anyone rights or allow anyone to do anything. The constitution is instructions for what the government can and CAN’T do. In other words, the constitution doesn’t say People can say whatever they want, it says the government can’t limit people’s speech. This is a distinct difference.
A person's right to remain free is absolute. Which means the constitution is there to keep the people free. Which means the people can and say and do whatever they want within the guidelines of freedoms as long as it doesn't interfere with your neighbors freedoms and rights.
@@woahdude3853and violating the rights of others is how you can legally lose your rights and/or property.
@@woahdude3853 what I’m saying is the constitution doesn’t give people anything, it is meant to limit government. We are already free. We don’t need constitution for that. Constitution is instructions for government. Not us.
Your confusion is the left believes the government bestows right...so a constitution is basically a document limiting what those believers can do.
No you are not confused, you are correct.
It is everyone else that is mindless idiots for they have zero understanding of what the CONstituion CONtract that they did not sign really is.
The CONstituion is a CONtract.
All of its signatories are DEAD!
The Posterity would be the bloodlines of the signers.
If one did not sign it you are not party to the CONtract, How can someone be party to a CONtract that was signed two plus centuries where all the signers are long dead and before you even draw your first breath??
What is amazing to me is people want to be party to a CON tract they did not sign. Some can even recite the entire CONtract and yet the reality is it has ZERO to do with them other than their beLIEf that it does, so what do people do?
Go along with the CONtract even though it was signed centuries before they drew their first breath, and the cretins who drew up said CONtract and those that followed have made it clear that if you do not object to the CONtract at all and or obligate yourself to it (defend the 2nd amendment) you are party to its brutal tyrannical laws....thus you help proliferate all the ills of the government.
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”
― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority
So this is the one debate David Hogg will use for the next decade to turn other debates down with, by saying he already debated his beliefs lol.
I’m pretty sure universities pay debate participants.
This debate was probably the biggest payday he’s had in a while.
The CDC and NIH should be looking into SSRIs not gun control.
The CDC profits from SSRIs being prescribed.
💯!!!
D Hogg's father is a former fed. He now runs a "Crisis Training corp" that trains police and municipalities in how to deal with active shooters. David Hoggs child hood photo was used to create Adam Lanza. I don't know how anyone can miss the eyes...
Considering withdrawal from.them includes violent tendencies...
The cdc and nih should be obligated as institutions
That question from the Chinese woman 🔥
Shes running for office (NH-02). I wish we could have here here too (MO)
Lily Tang Williams has been fighting for our rights for years. She’s worth looking into.
1:28:30
and shame on that studentr pulling the mic away while she was talking
Lol, being owned by a Chinese woman.. too funny..😅😂
This seems like a great advertisement for Dartmouth, and a terrible one for Harvard...
The reality is that there are millions of examples of defensive use of firearms that never get reported!
Ideologues like David are incredibly dangerous, because there wasn’t a single thing he said in this debate that didn’t involve expanding government surveillance or overreach to achieve his vision. At the same he railed against all forms of totalitarianism, not realizing that’s what he actually stands for. It’s unbelievable what I just witnessed.
The problem with idealists is that they don’t think of the consequences of what their ideals will have on reality.
Wow!! This was in incredible Statement my Brother. Absolutely admired what you wrote. Thank you
This is the results of a Harvard education on top of a public school education.
Seriously, David Hogg is a walking contradiction.
There should be laws for consequences, not laws restricting your rights.
1:28:28 I came here for Lilly Tang Williams epic statement.
Seconded. Absolutely loved it
Jesus this should have been over in the first minute when he didn't blame LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE FBI for not doing their fucking job! But sure, blame guns
D Hogg's father is a former fed. He now runs a "Crisis Training corp" that trains police and municipalities in how to deal with active shooters. David Hoggs child hood photo was used to create Adam Lanza. I don't know how anyone can miss the eyes...
Exactly! Maybe he skipped over that bc his dad was FBI?
My comment got deleted bc I mentioned his dad
@@ca8944 My original comment did as well. I even looked for it through the comments. Then I copied my post and used the reply. Cheers man
Enacting Massachusetts firearm laws across our Republic is tantamount to Yankee imperialism and goes against the Constitution of Massachusetts. The assailant who attacked Stoneman Douglass was required to wait for his AR-15 for 5 business days, as per Broward County Ordinance 18-96. Throughout history, violent crime has been a social issue, as evidenced in Ancient Rome. A national registry is the path to genocide or democide. Any doubts? Please examine the 100-day holocaust that occurred in Rwanda in 1994. Criminal evidence disposal functions are what gun buybacks are all about. Mr. Hogg holds the view that the state should be more powerful than its people and I view his declaration as treasonous. Additionally, he displays numerous Rebecca Peters talking points. Anyone who even believes in trusting the government has failed history.
An expert debate. A boy who wasn’t at a school shooting vs a libertarian with vast amounts of firearm knowledge
Did you not watch the debate? Repeatedly he said he was indeed at the shooting. That's the source of his expertise.
@@benmeltzerwhat expertise does that grant him? The expert knowledge that the government is not there to protect you and has no duty to do so?
@@PAYTONLB999 He was mere feet away, which enabled him to witness the effect of the wopean.
@@benmeltzerlol! No, David literally rode his bike to the school after the shooting. He was never there. That's why he was the first student interviewed by news crews as they arrived. He was already outside the building before the other students were released from lockdown.
@@benmeltzerDoes being in a vehicle accident make you an expert in vehicle safety? No.
"Waah. I'm a victim of people targeting me bc I used a tragedy I wasn't even present for to catapult myself into the public eye, and gift to stroke my own ego... but I totally respect you all."🙄
“There should be a way for someone to remove a firearm from their home if they don’t want one” yes it’s called a pawn shop 😂
Ironically the most recent piece of legislation from the Biden administration makes it significantly more difficult to perform a private firearm sale.
I facepalmed so hard here when he said that. You can literally sell it, to pawn shops, to FFL dealers, lots of places. His answer shows how absolutely dependent on the government he is, and believes others are.
At the end of the day, one of the men at that table is advocating for the State to use gun violence against his peaceable neighbors, and the other was not.
Nicely said Bro but I do believe we witnessed one (1) MAN and a boy. At the table.
The absolute gall Hogg has to call himself a “survivor” when he wasn’t even at the school. The disrespect is disgusting
No kidding. He was in his 20s.
Theyre called crisis actors.
“But you trust government too much “ BIG FACTS RIGHT THERE
Sheriff in CO, Republican, big supporter of Red Flag Laws until prisoners had him flagged because they "lived with him." Due process is essential.
its around 40 minutes remaining. Red flag laws lack any due process. An anonymous allegation can trigger one.
Which sheriff? I don't remember that...
No sympathy to that sheriff.
Treason is a crime with no quarter given...or used to not be.
I am genuinely surprised to see that this debate actually happened. It was a fantastic watch.
Regarding firearm training. I think they are incredibly valuable, but I would never want to see them considered mandatory. However, I’d love to be able to write them off on my taxes. THAT would be a greater incentive for people to get gun training.
Those who give essential freedoms for security deserve neither…. Ben Franklin
Anytime Spike delivers an effective point, David responds with “my classmates were killed with a gun”.
Suicide methods have absolutely nothing to do with my firearms ownership rights. Don't allow them to shift the conversation down paths like these.
David hogg in opening statements "Im interested in why people commit violence, parkland was because no ones stopped gim from accessing an AR15."
Umm... dude. Thats the how, not rhe why..
Last time I checked, firearms manufacturers don't sell directly to civilians, they sell to FFLs and then the FFLs after getting background check showing the purchaser is not a preventative person, sell the gun. THIS IS ALL LEGAL!!!!
Holy crap the gun control debate was nuked in this one. We can just Spike the ball and celebrate folks!
Spike was clapping Hogg’s cheeks so hard, Spike’s wife almost filed for divorce 😂😂😂😂
Shall not be infringed…. There is no compromise
"No right is unlimited "....neither is government power.
💯
The only way, according to the founders, that any right can legally be limited is, when your violate someone else's rights - you have have all rights up to that disbtinct point.
That is where rights are limited. That's why the concept of banning types firearms and automatic weapons is unconstitutional as it relies on the government's ability to regulate interstate commerce (at ratification you could own cannond and literally Warship - in the government even contracted private owners of Gunships and heavy artillery to be pirates for them!)... but not in the original sense, but in the sense thr FDR extorted the court into reinterpretating - when they first rules against him on his interpretation of "interstate commerce", he threatened to stack the courts and destroy the independence of Judiciary. Thus when when he came back to the courts asking the same exact question, the justices did a complete 180, and thus we have the bloated Federal government we have today that can regulate anything under the guise if "interstate commerce".
The founders made clear in their writings at the time of the Constitution that, interstate commerce regulation only meant that the federal government could prevent one state from taxing another State's Goods to create unfair advantages and imbalances among the states economically. But thanks to the extortion of FDR, the term "Interstate Commerce" in law now means: if anything is commerce and it crosses a state line, be it transactionally or physically, then the government has complete and utter control over everything about that product and transaction.
My neighbor was gunned down by the blue terrorists enforcing red flag laws.
We’re STILL not supposed to have a standing army, for the same reasons we didn’t have one in the 18th century. The army we have, with its bases all over the world, is illegal.
The constitution allows for congress to create a standing army. They do this by passing the NDAA every 2 years. You may not like it but the reality is it's not illegal.
@@pjh1663Wrong the constitution prohibits a standing army period, Congress only has authority to create a army in times of invasion and are not supposed to be funding said army for no longer than 2 years. The Pentagon and US military is illegal in violation of the US constitution. Congress only has legal lawful authority to create and fund a navy.
@@pjh1663NDAA is illegal in violation of the constitution.
@@dragonf1092 Not quite right. According to our constitution (did you read it?), Congress is given the right "to raise and support Armies, but no appropriation of Money to that use shall be for a longer term than two Years."
Where does that prohibit a standing army? It only restricts or requires that funding be for two years. Where does it state Congress is only authorized to raise an Army only for invasion?
There is no other prohibition other than having to reauthorize funding every two years. Until WWII we were able to maintain a very small army because of our unique position in the world with two oceans as a buffer. We had time to recruit and train our armies, but it has been shown we no longer have that luxury so yes, we reauthorize the military every two years.
As for the Navy, Congress is specifically required "To provide and maintain a Navy." Which would mean funding is REQUIRED (unlike the Army)
@@jimd1944 what's the point of raising a army if there is already a standing army genius. A standing army is not supposed to exist under the constitution of the united states.
Hogg argued at one point that "assault rifles" are not effective for self-defense. Then later he talked about attributes that make them very functional killing tools, saying that they are easy to shoot and can accommodate large magazines. So which is it? Do they have these qualities only in the hands of bad guys?
It’s amazing how neither of them brought up the fact that the CDC DID do a study on defensive gun violence. It was so detrimental to the gun control activists that 2 democrat senators made the CDC take it down.
Exactly.
It should also be mentioned that the Dickey Amendment didn't ban research on firearms, but it prohibited a government agency (in this case the CDC) from using taxpayers dollars to advocate for a political agenda.
I think Spike missed an opportunity on the suicide debate. Even if our suicide rate is higher someone else’s inability to deal with life should not reduce my right to own firearms.
I totally agree with you. Suicide by firearm is NOT "gun violence" (a made up term). What is never mentioned is that even though many "Civilized" European countries have way lower gun deaths by suicide, what is not mentioned is that their actual suicide death rates are often more than our total suicide death rate. If no access to a gun, the prefered method is often suffocation or poison. In Australia, with manadtory "buyback (confiscation) they claim that gun deaths were reduced dramatically. perhaps but, their murder rate rmained thee same and, while suicide by guns went down, suicides went up slightly .. just by other means.
I caught the last 40 minutes or so and was impressed with both speakers.
The comment of “nobody wants mob rule by force” made me chuckle because sometimes I think that’s what we’re experiencing currently. Idk if it was addressed earlier but the mention of gun laws hindering minorities and their personal safety is something that needs more attention.
David’s answer to the Chinese woman sums it all up…it’s POLITICAL for him, not about “keeping us safe”
nuance is code for 'look, I have no idea what I'm talking about, but my talking points are set in stone and I should win this debate'.
The tragedy of this "debate" is that people are even accepting the idea that we should entertain those who seek to make American citizens under ever more control of Big Government.
You are correct. These are people who want to strip away our rights. Their main justification is that every other country does it. These people are our enemies.
1:21:00 fucking legend
Fuckin legend.
Cool and based. 😎
Amazingly bad response from Hogg, the police have access to the backing of the military and the national guard that have more than enough firearms back in the 90s to stop criminals even with RPGs, this is a joke of a conversation,
1:21:13 to be exact.
💯🤍
The beginning survey answers are pretty surprising for college students
It was probably 8 in the morning
It's new Hampshire, the state with the least gun restrictions. Also home of the free state project.
@@CharlieK-hy3ep it’s academia, and the students by and large aren’t from NH.
The reason David Hogs school got shot up is because the police , FBI , and many other government agencies didn’t act on many reports using existing laws that could have stopped that shooter from acting on his feelings / mental illness as well as his ability to get a firearm.
The issues isn’t the firearm and David proves his lack of knowledge about firearms as well. There big difference between an M-16 and the AR-15. Our military would never accept the AR-15 as a fighting tool. Let’s be real, all guns can be dangerous especially in the wrong hands. And that is where the issue lies is the person not the weapon. Proof is countries that don’t allow guns bad / mentally ill people are killing each other and the innocent with machetes. Recently happened in the UK. And so their response is to ban knives…. So not they will move to bats , clubs , etc. that being said here in the USA more people are killed with bats , clubs , blunt objects and hands /feet by thousands a year. So do we ban all these things???? lol. As for a AR-15 being a 1000 yrd weapon is crazy. lol. Wile you can hit a target at that range it’s not likely and if so its energy is very poor. Let’s also be real and realize most gun owners hunting rifles are 10 times or more lethal then an AR-15 even out to 1000yrds.
As for hardening schools that would be easy to do without changing the look or feel of the school and even without a police presence. In fact if the government would hire me to do it I would start a company that would do just that for every school in the country to what ever level is needed. Protecting our kids at school is easy.
When I was in school we used to hunt before & after school and come to school with our rifle or shotgun in our rigs and we never had any issues.
Let’s also be honest about this entire issue and how much attention we are giving it over an issue that is tiny compared to other deaths every year. Fire arms deaths range from 400 to 1000 a year wile knives kill 1500 + blunt objects / hands& feet kill 2500+ , and distracted drivers on phones kill 5000+ people a year in their cars. Wouldn’t it make more sense to ban phones & cars ?????? Of course not. You do what should be don’t and let the law address the person as it should in all these situations. But we are treating guns as if it’s killing hundreds of thousands of people.
As for the red flag laws David Hogg is flat out lying to the people. There is no “due process “ before taking the persons guns. The person doesn’t even know there was a court hearing or a warrant issued and many even get a no knock warrant and end up getting shot or killed because they think a intruder is breaking in at 4am and they are defending their home.
David’s lack of real knowledge is shocking & obvious and he is getting owned and loosing this debate.
The real reason they are so focused on taking our guns is because “they” ( the government & elites) know it is the only thing keeping them from total control of what they think are a lower class or as they say “vermin / useless eaters”
Unjustified gun deaths are mostly a mental health issue. But it’s also a biproduct of the economy and the oppression of the American people. And they feed that by keeping us all divided as well as keep us in their imposed 2 party system so they can bring on a 2class populace….the haves & have nots.
And the Asian lady was spot on and said it all. If we give up our gun rights and guns we soon will be just like mao’s Chinese communist society.
David Hogg makes me happy I don't have a Harvard degree.
Imagine if this was Colion 😂
Would've been WAY better at clapping back
I never heard of this Spike Cohen dude but he absolutely obliterated Little David.
"But you trust government too much." She summed up David accurately.
1:29:02 the fact he said he cannot guaranteed it shows that his identity ideology is bankrupt, it is a waste of time and has little worth other than authoritarian control.
That was it. Thats all anyone needs to hear. Lily Tang Williams nuked any shred of ligitimacy david hogg thought he had left right there.
How is Hogg considered an expert????
He won’t be in the stack.
Colion Noir would demolish Hoggs. But Hoggs turned him down.
Honestly we need to bring back the class my grandparents had in public school. They had a gun safety course and were even taken to the range as a final exam. I'd be fine making this an optional class of course.
5:45 notice David doesn't clap for Spike, but Spike claps for David.
These time limits were ridiculously too short
Lil' bro keeps going back to the crowded theater analogy, forgetting that you CAN and SHOULD shout "fire" when there is a fire. The reason you shouldn't shout "fire" when there isn't one is that by providing false information, you will harm people. Speech that is false and harmful is illegal. It's not just some arbitrary rule to maintain order. The only just limits on our behavior are the equal rights of our neighbors.
"European schools are gun-free zones, too. When is the last time you heard of a mass shooting there?" PRAGUE, 21 December 2023, 18 dead, 25 injured. His arguments are ALL anecdotes, hypotheticals, feelings, ignorance, and lies.
I don't think I've ever seen a person flail like Hogg did. He realized he was losing and went to "well it just feels this way, you know".
I love how the Chinese lady brought the truth out
Which is quite literally, I don’t want people that I don’t like to have guns. lol.
Suicide does not belong in a debate about gun violence.
Why not? Suicide by gun is gun violence
@@johnhud2536it's not, it's self harm. Whatever tool you use to commit doesn't matter.
David Hemenway, is a huge supporter of gun control. His analysis found no fewer than 55,000 defensive gun uses a year, which still makes a utilitarian argument to keep arms around.
No one has a right to safety, you have a right to defend yourself.
Well regulated militia means well armed people with weapons that are properly sighted and functioning properly.
My goodness, he got less capable by going to Harvard
i tried but i just cant stand listening to david hog.
Me neither buddy.
Neither can any woman in America.
He wasn't bad. Honestly I'm glad they kept it to good faith arguments and kept it civil. The audience stepped in for the smack down.
He’s a paid shill with nothing useful to contribute.
From a logical perspective, Beaker speaks more clearly than this Harvard Law Graduate.
Wow, that lady talking about her time in China really put an end to the debate as a whole. That was powerful. Respect to her for taking the time to point out just how dangerous it can be with gun control laws.
What amendment to the Bill of Rights is “the right to safety”?
Bro really thinks the CDC would stop guns LOL
Guns is one of the only reasons to be happy to be American - otherwise I might as well live in Japan.
2 minutes is not enough time to deliver a nuanced answer.
Your version of "Common Sense" is nothing more than flawed logic.
Well, they survey proved nothing because the same demographic wasn't included.
I had armed teachers in my school. Utah allows firearms in schools and we have almost zero school shootings.
I love how at least a couple times, David essentially says he thinks there’s a legitimate libertarian argument for basically the most authoritative policy you’ve ever heard of. David, do you have any idea what “libertarian” means?
David escaped getting killed at Parkland only to get straight up merked by Spike.
Hogg got absolutely bodied
I am not a fan of using “the reality is . . . “ about annopinion
No government official in the united states of America has any legal lawful constitutional authority or jurisdiction to pass or enforce any form of gun control laws anywhere in the united states of America under the supremacy clause, article 4 section 2 paragraph 1, second amendment,9th amendment,10th amendment,14th amendment sections 1 and 3.
I hate when people are like .. well people died so if you don’t agree with me you’re okay with that. That’s what’s being said by Hogg. And it is.
He literally didn't say that at all during this debate.
@@PrayingPanda verbatim ? No, obviously. But he did say that virtually. I don’t know why you just commented this lol.
@kiemas12 he didn't. I just watched the hole thing. While many of us disagree with him, we should not claim he said things he didn't. We should have honor and integrity. We can win on the issue. Let's do that instead of misrepresenting our opponents. If you think he basically said "if you don't agree with me, then you're OK with people dying", please timestamp.
@@kiemas12 .
@@PrayingPanda Again, I didn’t say he actually said that word for word, I mean I thought that would be obvious, guess I should have been more clear. I’m actually just saying what he clearly means in plain words. I mean for gods sake he brought up the fire in a crowded theatre analogy twice lol this is not a good faith debater. We’ve already won on the issue objectively. Seems like you watched it. So you know.
Some people like Hogg, )who lives an exceedingly comfortable life in comparison to most of us) just don’t understand that simply being alive is not the most important thing to a huge percentage of people in this country. And around the world for that matter. This kind of thinking is super dangerous. And I agree with everything you said btw, I don’t think it’s dishonorable to interpret people’s meaning.
shame on that student for pulling the mic away from Lily Tang Williams while she was still speaking. she singlehandedly killed hogg's argument!
Using David Hogg and the word "expert" in the same sentence. 😂😂
I love that Spike brought a graph for everything lmao
The militia is to be well-regulated, not the people. The right of the people shall not be infringed, not the right of the militia.
This is a strange misunderstanding. The people are the militia. Regulated in the 18th century has a completely different meaning than it does in the 21st century. Well-regulated = well supplied, well trained, etc... your counterpoint is detrimental to the 2nd amendment.
@@Sol_Walker Cry about it. I have zero interest in "the security of a free state," only in the security of my property.
@@TheFlubber06 Good luck securing that property if the state around it isn't also secure.
@@Sol_Walker The state has never been an effective protector of property. Bars full of drunk young men are safer than public parks because bouncers are better at protecting property than policemen. PMCs are better operators than US servicemen. Costco's return policy delivers more satisfactory results than courts of adjudication. The state is not only unwilling to protect property, but is also the worst violator of property.
Second questioner: “are you gonna be in the stack or nah?”🤣
This is a terrible debate format. You can’t have a fully fleshed out debate with someone only 30 second or 2 minute responses.
That said Spike Cohen wrecked Hogg.
Spike is an absolutely incredible human being and this was a blowout. Spike was knocking them all out of the park!
One of the best ways to curb gun violence; would be mandatory gun education in schools. Teach kids about responsible gun possession and gun usage. In a country with a constitutionally protected right to own a gun; it is kind of a no brainer. I dont understand why people do not implement this nationwide?
We used to.
It actually used to be a thing in many places. You'd have to look up where. The boy scouts also used to teach gun safety and usage. I don't know if they do that anymore
@@rodster811They don’t. They still use bow and arrow and BB guns but no real firearms.
Id would add promotion of school, education, MARRIAGE and fatherhood.
Because guns are scawy and make kids feel bad and we can't talk about it