I’m developing a serious man crush on amidsthenoise. There’s something to be said for presenting solid facts in a calm and even tone, using that rule of thirds to its fullest extent.

Post Views: 27

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

48 COMMENTS

  1. He’s an NRA member though. He’s obviously been brainwashed by this powerful gun lobby.

    I’m sure that there are many that will discredit his objectivity after he waved the NRA card though. Personally I’ve shared, liked, posted his vids numerous times on my own FB.

  2. Gordon Freeman up there in the video box has a point about terms and uses, especially when it comes to the media’s yard stick rule.

  4. “I have a serious man crush on this amidsthenoise.”

    +1

    We need to get guys like this into the headlines, into the mainstream, into the living rooms and iPhones. People are easily manipulated, but they don’t like it when they know they are being manipulated. THAT, my friends, would be one effective way to fight the gun grabbers. Make sure the masses understand that Obama, Feinstein, and the like are manipulating them. I don’t think a lot of progressives and independents realize how heavily they are being used.

  5. Absolutely spot on.

    Language is everything. Don’t believe me? Start calling the crab grass in your yard “elf grass” and see if your opinion of it changes.

    (A cookie to whoever gets it)

    • The international language of violence is spoken and exchanged world wide, that is in over one hundred and ninety different countries you can walk the talk all over your debate partner and they will understand exactly what you are attempting to convey.

      Violence, its the new VISA MASTERCARD.

  6. This person is a better speaker than any politician, I hope if he starts getting too many views on his channel he doesn’t have an “accident”…
    ***Folding Tin Foil Hat Now***

  7. I only have four YouTube subscriptions. Prior to discovering this guy about a week ago, I only had three.

    I really liked how he walked “Weapon of War” into “Weapon of the State.” Things that make you go, “Hmmm.”

  9. Here is the question for all gun rights advocates and hopefully one person here is either in marketing or knows someone who can help, how do we change the labels?

    For example, they “the grabbers” like to use “Assault Rifle” for AR, we know its stands for Armalite, but can we all use “America’s Rifle”.

    We have to counter the emotions and these labels with something that evokes a similar emotion so politicians are forced into a moral dilemma or forced to used false facts that we can counter. It is no mistake that the Democrates are close to the Hollywood and Lawyer crowd who can help create and spin these labels.

    For example, instead of gun control, we should start using “Citizen Disarmament”

    Someone smarter than me hopefully can help the community to use different labels.

    It a propoganda war we are fighting — logic and qouting the Federalist Papers mean nothing.

    • If the Right would give up their Militaristic love of a Standing Army and it’s liberty-crushing military-industrial-complex by understanding the complete 2A, the propaganda war to preserve the 2A could be won.

      “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty….”

      ~Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789

      As long as the Right pisses on the first part of the 2A, expect the left to follow suit with their disdain of the last part.

      The 2A and Constitution understood holistically gives us:

      • No Standing Army or military industrial complex.
      • Any raised Army to be disbanded after 2 years.
      • Citizen-soldier militia on the Swiss model of defense.
      • A small officer cadre to well-regulate and drill the militia on the Swiss model of defense.

      Or sell it as the Martha Stewart Euro-Swiss Chalet Home Defense System that costs 1/7th the money squandered on the military-industrial-complex.

      • The liberal womenfolk and over-domesticated MetroMales wouldn’t be scared of a hyper-militaristic right.
      • The right wouldn’t be scared of the Big Gummit agents confiscating their guns.

      It’s a good thing.®

      • OK, Ivy Mike. You had your argument with… whoever the hell it was in the other thread, during which you posted almost that exact word-for-word quote and comment at least twice, maybe three times. It’s not even a direct response to the person you replied to, at this point. Can you at least find a new way to say the same f*cking thing?

        • You don’t like the anti-Standing-Army aspect of the Second Amendment either, huh?

          Weird, I’m in support of it, and you’re telling me to shut up.

          Just like Difi.

      • I am thoroughly fed up with the “standing army” (or as I like to term it, using Eisenhower’s term, the “military industrial complex”) and the drain on our tax monies.

        But the situation is getting worse, not better: I posit that there are now two standing armies: the classic military, covered by UCMJ and restricted by laws against domestic operations, and the law enforcement army in our midst, made up of federal agencies (eg, why does the FDA have people with guns on their hips, hmmm?), SWAT teams and the cast-off gear from the other standing army and new developments cross-bred for foreign military operations and domestic military operations (eg, unmanned drones).

        The level of waste in spending is absurd, the numbers of lives lost on utterly pointless operations (eg, trying to teach “democracy” to nations that, when given “democracy” use it to vote for sharia law – making the point of pursuing “democracy” rather pointless) and the ceaseless absurdity of ongoing “peace keeping” operations when there is not and has not ever been any “peace” to “keep” – all infuriate anyone who is paying real attention to the issue.

        We can see this issue forming rapidly in DC with the nomination of Hagel to SecDef.

      • I am no fan of the repub war machine, they have been fu.king us for decades. So who do you vote for? the guys that will kill your kids & save your weapons or the guy that will take your weapons & let minorities kill you. I’ll battle that twerp in the WH so we don’t need to order so many body bags, Randy

    • Ivy Mike- The Swiss model of defense means that all able bodied men are conscripted, and no military alliances can be made. Just how do you plan to sell conscription and abolishing military alliances?

      • I am strongly opposed to military conscription.

        By “Swiss model,” I and the Founding Fathers of this nation offer the best real-life (but not perfect) example of a citizen-soldier MILITIA, which our Constitution and 2A were supposed to maintain.

        “The inhabitants of Switzerland emancipated themselves by the establishment of a MILITIA, which finally delivered them from the tyranny of their lords.”

        ~Representative Jackson, first U.S. Congress, when it met and turned to defense measures in 1791

        “A well regulated MILITIA…” ~2A of the Bill of Rights

        As far as military alliances, we could spend 1/7th of the money and still be as well-, nay, better- defended (they have 110% of their population protected by blast/fallout shelters, we have near 0%) as the Swiss, if we would follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice:

        “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none.” ~Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

        _______
        * “Guns, Crime, and the Swiss”
        a.k.a. “Armed to the Teeth, and Free” (Wall Street Journal, European Edition) or “Where Kids and Guns Do Mix” (Wall Street Journal, US Edition)
        by Stephen P. Halbrook, Ph.D., J.D.
        http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/articles/guns-crime-swiss.html

        • So you’d tell all our allies, “Sorry, we changed our mind” and walk away, pulling all the troops from places like the DMZ between North Korea and South Korea?

        • What part of…

          “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none.”~Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

          …don’t you understand?

          It’s Militaristic Interventionists like you who have shredded the first part of the 2A, which calls for a Swiss-model citizen-soldier militia, that necessarily results in “armed neutrality;” DiFi and her Leftist Collectivists are merely finishing the job you started decades ago.

      • I start by pointing out that every military alliance we have with anyone benefits them more than us. We’re paying the lion’s share of the UN budget. We’re paying the lion’s share of the NATO costs, and so on.

        So… what, exactly, are we losing by dissolving these alliances?

      • They aren’t conscripted. They volunteer for service. They don’t get military training if they are pacifists as long as they do something else of worth to the country. I would suggest you read up on the Swiss systems of defense and government. Plus, the Swiss only have about 400 active duty soldiers. Everyone else are considered militia. Another interesting fact about the Swiss is that they were at one point the best fighters in all of Europe. The very best. They even rented themselves out as mercenaries. To this day the Pope’s bodyguard called the Swiss Guard are only Swiss citizens. They saw the futility of constantly fighting foreign wars and so decided to stop fighting in every war that came around and develop their system of armed neutrality. Other countries don’t leave Switzerland alone because they are neutral. They leave them alone because they know if they attacked Switzerland they would get their butts handed to them. We, as Americans, don’t need alliances because no country could prosecute a war against us. Ever. It would cost too much. No country could afford it. Not even an alliance of the top 25 richest countries around the world could prosecute a war against us. Plus, if we stopped meddling in other countries business, they wouldn’t have any reason to get mad at us. Then, if they attacked us (muslims), we would have the moral high ground to defend ourselves. Here’s an article from 1990 that sheds light on the Swiss system: http://www.guncite.com/swissgun-kopel.html.

        Best Regards,

        David
        USN Ret.

        P.S. – I didn’t learn about this myself until I was almost retired from the Navy. And that’s an indictment on our govt. run education system.

    • It is a propaganda war for the hearts of the Sheeple and our enemy the Ozombies are quite aware that what they are fighting for is the enslavement of America and Only by turning the Gun Control debate into the debate over slavery will the sheeple wakeup

  12. I call them utility rifles.

    I dunno if it’s catchy, but it’s easy to say, easy to remember, and it’s actually what they are. Plus, it bring up the point that *all* the nation’s favorite rifles have always been utility rifles. The Kentucky flintlock. The lever-action rifle. Bolt-actions. Modular semiautomatics.

  14. His first point is very valid. An “assault weapon” is any object that is used offensively to cause harm. By the same token, if the same object is used in defense of an attack it becomes an “anti-assault weapon”.

    Millions of AR-15 rifles are owned by people that would never use them offensively. Only for defense (extremely rarely). SO, the great majority are indeed “anti-assault weapons”.

    And by the by, Here’s how language creates controversy: There are no such things as semi-automatic firearms. A firearm either loads a fresh cartridge into the chamber “automatically” or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t then it is a “manually” loaded firearm. The venerable Colt 1911 uses a cartridge referred to by it’s original military designation: .45 ACP. ACP stands for ….wait for it…. Automatic Colt Pistol.

    There are only three types of light, direct-fire firearms on the planet: Manual, gas or recoil operated. That’s it. A “machine gun” can be any of those three. What is referred to a machine gun is a firearm that fires from the “open bolt” position, the first round round fired when pressing the trigger notwithstanding.

    The first machine gun was the Gatling gun used by the army in 1862. It is defined as a “box fed, MANUALLY operated, air-cooled, direct-fire firearm that fires from the open bolt position.”

    Back to the the 1911, it can be described as a “box fed, RECOIL operated, air-cooled, direct-fire firearm that fires from the closed bolt position.”

    Language is everything.

  18. I used my assault spatula last night to assault some leftover rice with chicken, peas, carrots, green onion, and egg. I continued my assault with a dash of soy sauce and sesame oil. My wok wept. The assault spatula’s assault left nothing but delicious fried rice for myself and my family to eat.

    Salt & pepper, anyone?

    And oh yeah… great video. =)

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here