Memo to Young Turks: Mass Shootings Don’t Justify Gun Control [VIDEO]

In the video above, Young Turks commentator Cenk Uygur wonders how many mass shootings would justify new gun control measures. Answer: none. Setting aside the “proper” definition of mass shooting (and the fact that suicide accounts for half of all firearms-related deaths), no matter how many mass shootings occur in the United States there is no legal justification for infringing on Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. As for the “militia clause” argument against individual gun rights . . .

it’s been thoroughly, legally debunked. Not ONE Supreme Court Justice mentioned the militia clause in either the Heller or McDonald decisions. You won’t find it in the majority decision. Nor the dissent. Why would they? The militia clause is an explanation not a condition.

There’s only one reason Uygur and his ilk rely on the militia clause for their anti-gun rights agenda: it’s all they’ve got. Truth be told, they got nothing. It bears repeating: Americans’ gun rights aren’t affected by violence perpetrated by law-breaking criminals, crazies and terrorists. Speaking of attacks, did someone punch Mr. Uyur in the nose? It wazzunt me!

comments

  1. avatar Roy says:

    Let’s see. There’s 1.6 million home invasions per year, hundreds of thousands of rapes, tens of thousands of murders and attempted murders… but let’s take away peoples right to defend themselves from said tragedies so that we MIGHT prevent 2 or 3 mass shootings per year. Genius!

  2. avatar Roy says:

    “There’s only one reason Uygur and his ilk rely on the militia clause for their anti-gun rights agenda: it’s all they’ve got. Truth be told, they got nothing.”

    That was a great line. I’m going to remember that forever.

  3. avatar Sexual Tyrannosaurus says:

    The irony of someone running a channel named after the perpetrators of the Armenian Genocide calling for gun control.

    1. avatar Chris. says:

      According to him the Armenian Genocide never happened.

    2. avatar Brentondadams says:

      Somehow that irony doesn’t seem to strike many people. Troubling

    3. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Well, it could be turned into a most excellent response.

      “The reason why we own guns is because you Young Turks seem to have a habit of killing large numbers of people.”

  4. avatar TFred says:

    Wow. Since I could not stomach reading the dissent in either of those two cases, I never knew that they did not reference the militia clause until now. That is very significant. Thank you for pointing that out. I will definitely use this in the future.

  5. avatar Daily Beatings says:

    Just remember that the name “Young Turks” was taken from a Turkish political movement in the early 1900’s that eventually participated in the Armenian Genocide.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      Actually, I remember the Young Turks as a movement that sought to bring Turkey out of the bondage of an autocratic monarchy that ran the biggest internal spy network in history, and into the 20th Century as a republic. And I’m amazed that someone who obviously wants to drag us back into a 19th century pipe dream of an all-powerful state presumes to take that name for himself.

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        ‘I remember the Young Turks as a movement that sought to bring Turkey out of the bondage of an autocratic monarchy…’

        Yea, the Bolsheviks had similar ambitions. And Hitler just wanted to restore the German people to their rightful place, yada, yada… This is how genocidal regimes come to power. The Young Turks will be forever remembered for slaughtering 1.5 million Armenians, 500,000 Chaldeans and 200,000 Greeks. Coincidentally, all Christian by the way.

        1. avatar Another Robert says:

          True enough, Governor–the road to hell is indeed paved with what may well have started out as good intentions–not that the intentions always start out as “good” by any means.

    2. avatar anaxis says:

      I also remember there being some high-level mafia gangsters in Philidelphia (or thereabouts) during the 80’s who called themselves the Young Turks.

      1. avatar Timmy! says:

        I think it’s a pretty good Rod Stewart song.

        1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          Never understood that song. You’d think a song about genocide would be a little more somber.

        2. avatar 16V says:

          The Rod Stewart song is where their name originates. History means sweet FA in this context, it’s merely an English language reference to rebellious youth.

        3. avatar SteveInCO says:

          Except that Cenk Uygur is Turkish American (that name stood out to me in bright neon as Turkic at the very least), at the very least he’s making a play on that in naming his group the Young Turks.

        4. avatar 16V says:

          SteveInCO, True, true. I was just pointing out that when he put this schtick together, it was meant as a play on the American turn of phrase, not any historical event.

  6. avatar jwm says:

    The stupid is strong with these folks.

  7. avatar James Lee says:

    How long would it take for people to understand correlation doesn’t mean causation? Just because the killings are done with guns it doesn’t mean guns caused it. Just because I eat with a spork it doesn’t mean the spork made me hungry. Taking guns away would not have prevented the killings. Jeez it seems like murica is dying for mandatory college education

    1. avatar 16V says:

      College? Critical thinking was a requirement of getting into HS back in the 80s.

      How far we have fallen.

    2. avatar SteveInCO says:

      I’d be willing to bet most of the schmucks you are complaining about…at least, the ones with a media megaphone…have actually had a college education.

  8. avatar Bob R says:

    This guy Cenk is a know liar and slanderer. Examples: Just about everything he says about Sam Harris is a lie or mis-representation, or ad-hominem.

    1. avatar 16V says:

      Cenk is likely just this side of retarded, scientifically speaking.

      That Harris destroyed him, and that he kept pretending it wasn’t happening is a Dunning-Kruger award nominee.

  9. avatar Bill says:

    None, your chances of getting killed in a mass shooting in 80 years of living in the united states is 1 in 330,000. This is in a lifetime. If you count killed or injured, your chances go up to 1 in 96,000. Nobody cares about these odds. Only ideologues care. The chances are so minute that most reasonable like myself worry about ordinary violence. Focusing on mass shootings is a major waist of your time and resources.

  10. avatar Levski says:

    The topic of Turkey is broad and very interesting. We will hear about it a lot in the near future. One of the Turkish scenarios of conquering Europe and the West is changing the ethnical and religious map of the host countries. If the West is accepting and tolerant but the incoming culture is not willing to adapt. Its goal is to conquer. Turkey will always do what’s in their interests even if it goes against the NATO common goals.

    1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

      The indigenous people of western Europe positively hate the Turks.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      The Turks allied themselves with NATO for two specific reasons 1) The Western European powers were capitalist and therefore better trading partners, and 2) They were scared to death of the Soviet Union following the Second World War based on the centuries of enmity and war between the nations. By joining NATO they thumbed their nose at the USSR and ensured that they would not be overrun by the Soviets.

      Now that there is less advantage to being in NATO as far as protection from Russia they have little use for it and will probably do whatever they feel like and NATO be damned.

      1. avatar I1ULUZ says:

        I am sure NATO courted Turkey to keep USSR bottled up in the Black Sea, North Fleet had to deal with ice. Turkey controlling the Bosphorus strait kept USSR contained. We’re talking late 1940’s vice now with heavy ice breakers keeping those ports open.

  11. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    I quit watching after he said something to the effect “this is not a way to run our democracy”
    And he claimed second amendment supporters can read?
    Maybe he should go live in southern Turkey. I’ll chip in for his air fare.

  12. avatar Paul53 says:

    A little research at the “Comparative Constitutions” site defeats his entire argument. The delegates who wrote the Constitution foresaw an inherent struggle for power between the People and the government. (surprise, surprise). In order to make it clear that all government power is derived at the permission of the governed, they negotiated then wrote the first 10 amendments, a.k.a. The Bill of Rights. In a nutshell, it is the anti tyrant section. Reading the non edited versions of the amendments, it’s plainly stated that all men are expected to maintain firearms. Were this the final version adopted, anybody not possessing firearms would be a criminal.
    http://comparativeconstitutionsproject.org/

  13. avatar Joe R. says:

    Hillary says that motives don’t matter, gun control is just a good idea. She’s running for president, and there are millions of legal (D)head voters out there that are ok with her. She, them, and the usual cast of characters called LIBERALS are flooding our borders with more ‘voters’.

    I’m not saying the whole thing is leading to civil war, only because I’m not that stupid (enough to give you a warning).

  14. avatar AJ187 says:

    That guys always been a waste of a brain.

  15. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    “In the video above, Young Turks commentator Cenk Uygur wonders how many mass shootings would justify new gun control measures.”

    The right question is, how many helpless victims is Cenk Uygur willing to accept, to advance his “gun control” agenda?

    Here’s the problem: Any measure that does some good by removing guns, from gad guys (if there is such a thing) will do some harm by removing guns from good guys (which I’ll claim do exist in the world.) So how many good guys is Cenk Uygur willing to see robbed, beaten, raped, killed, worse or some combination, when they would not otherwise have been?

    How many?

    How’s this. You can have your gun control measures. In return, being all “balanced” and stuff, every single time it is demonstrated that someone suffered because they couldn’t defend their self with a gun they otherwise would have gotten, whatever happened to them, happens to you. Deal?

    I’ll accept criminal prosecution procedures, standards of evidence, and thresholds of proof. 300,000,000+ people in the US and I’m thinking with this deal Cenk Uygur is going to have a short, but interesting life … not in a good way.

    I am uncomfortable being so direct, and frankly brutal. BUT, I am tired of this. These people are OK with other people getting killed and etc. to satisfy their policy proposals. Indeed, they don’t even seem to care if the death rate goes up, as long as they get the diffuse general improvement of “better” gun control. They are willing to see you (meaning us) killed in aid of their policy agenda.

    I am tired of being polite about this. Stop arguing for getting more people killed. Just, stop.

  16. avatar JamesInHouston says:

    I never took the Young Turks seriously. They’re about on par with Vice. Lots of sensationalism but very low standards for being informative.

  17. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    I seem to recall he had a pretty wife. Nice he is admitting she is vulnerable. On the internet.

  18. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    I used to watch TYT when they first came out. While I didn’t agree with most of what they said, I liked listening to their take on events. Now, fast forward a few years and I can’t stand 30 seconds of what Cenk talks about. It’s like he got ahold of newspeak dictionary and have a special leftist hotline thay approves their stories before release. It’s utter garbage.

    1. avatar Phil says:

      It’s always good and important to listen what the other side has to say… Maybe sometimes, some good logic and common sense could come. But unfortunately, regarding guns, I haven’t seen or heard anything from Cenk and the TYT that would make any sense at all.

      He’s just an embarrassing full of lies, manipulations and fake numbers. As usual, anti-gunners will be lead by their emotions instead of facts and logic. Of course, they will still try to have a brand new definition of “mass shooting” to help them to get bigger numbers to scare people and push their agenda. How pathetic they are…

  19. avatar samuraichatter says:

    Even if it was not an explanation you still would not get arms control out of it. It is the Bill of Rights. The citizens of these United States get to have weapons AND they get to train w/ them, store them, organize themselves into units to use them better, and otherwise “bear Arms”. It is an individual right AND a collective one. Bringing your own gear to the fight is what militias do.

  20. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    I like the idea that the militia clause is an explanation, not a condition. In the past I have pointed out that in the time and context it was written, “well regulated” meant something akin to well equipped and trained to ensure proper function. I would also point out that if the anti was not willing to accept this meaning of the phrase, if they were going to bitterly cling to their misinterpretation of “well regulated”, then they should look closely at the 2nd Amendment. When you do that you see that it is the militia that is to be well regulated, not the right to keep and bear arms. That right is so important that it shall not be infringed.

  21. avatar 2maik7 says:

    It was probably an Armenian that punched that POS in the nose.

    Either that or someone who was sick of his apologetics for Islamism.

    Someone should tell him that being intellectually weaned on Noam Chomsky is not an excuse for genocide denial.

  22. avatar Raoul Duke says:

    If you are an American citizen male between the ages of 17 and 45(49?) and not currently in the military/national guard then you are in the militia. Yep, that’s right you antigunners you are in the militia too whether you like it or not. If you don’t want to be in the militia then renounce your citizenship and move to your gun control “paradise” of your choice.

  23. avatar Curmudgeon5462 says:

    Claiming that more white people are shot in the US than Germany because the police assume they are armed is victim blaming. The problem there isn’t more guns, it’s SHITTY COPS.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email