WATCH: Colion Noir vs Bill Maher – No Contest

Colin Noir NRA TV Bill Maher Real Time

courtesy youtube.com

NRA-TV’s Colion Noir sat down for a segment with Bill Maher on HBO’s ‘Real Time with Bill Maher’ last night and it’s hard to see how the self-proclaimed gun nut could have acquitted himself any better. He parried Maher’s usual oleaginous smarm with a command of the facts and a sense of humor that few on our side of the argument seem to be able to muster when given the opportunity.

Props also to Maher for recognizing at least one glaring contradiction that the anti-gun left regularly glosses over. If the current administration is truly as lawless, oppressive and tends as far toward the totalitarian as they claim, why would they want to limit the civilian ownership of the one effective means of countering that kind of tyranny and oppression? Anyone? Anyone?

comments

  1. avatar barnbwt says:

    So how racist was Maher this time?

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      seemed a bit cautious with the guy…and perhaps a bit intimidated…going so far as to say “I don’t want to make you mad”….hilarious!….whoever this guy is we need to see a lot more of him…..

      1. avatar Joe Davis says:

        He has a show on NRA TV called NIOR and it is AWESOME !

      2. avatar doesky2 says:

        Uh….really? You’re into guns and don’t know Colion Noir?

        At NRA conventions I don’t know who has bigger waiting lines than his. Maybe Dana.

    2. avatar Mmmtacos says:

      I felt a slight bit of racism at the very end when he tried to tell Noir that the 2nd amendment only exists to quell slave rebellions in the early days of America.

      Noir responded very well however pointing out that he’s a gun advocate and is able to be there, on the show, because of the 2nd.

  2. avatar Michael says:

    Drain the swamp…All of those FEMA camps aren’t going to fill themselves. 30

  3. avatar Texican says:

    I think he was afraid of Colion.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “I think he was afraid of Colion.”

      Maher was clearly intimidated by Noir, not so much in a physical way, but that he was fully aware Noir would be debating him at an intellectual level.

      And that was a good thing…

      1. avatar Rad Man says:

        I didn’t know CN was a lawyer.

        1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

          I didn’t know you were a lawyer until you had mentioned it, Rad. I thought you were just a regular Joe who ran a kitchen-table FFL as a side business…

        2. avatar Rad Man says:

          I try but it’s very difficult to make a living selling guns in MA. As they say, if you want to make a small fortune peddling guns, start with a big fortune. Practicing law is dreadfully boring but it pays the bills. Fun, exciting jobs normally don’t.

      2. avatar Greg says:

        Buying guns in Mass is a challenge, one of the reasons I relocated after retirement.

    2. avatar Bloving says:

      He was absolutely afraid of him and with good reason – he was completely outmatched, both intellectually and factually.
      What shocked me most was that Bill had the courage to have Colion on the show knowing full well that he didn’t stand a chance of talking him onto a corner and “winning” the debate.
      🤠

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        I know maher can be infuriating, at times….but his show is still worth a look…he does deviate from the liberal script from time to time….

  4. avatar Rocketman says:

    Mr. Noir did an impressive job, no doubt about that, but I think when he was trying to make a logical rational argument against what Maher had just accused gun owners of and Maher interrupted him, I wish that instead of letting it go and moving on that he had been a little more forceful and gone back to the original question at hand and finished his rebuttal.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      They were both aware this would be an 8 min. segment, and Maher used that to make a hit-and-run attack that Noir wouldn’t be able to address in the limited time remaining…

      1. avatar T bill says:

        This ^^^^^^^^^
        It was apparent Maher changed course every time he was losing and time constraints meant hit and run. Nothing positive from this segment for either side. Just hurling fire bombs corner to corner.

  5. avatar tdiinva says:

    I will give Maher credit for giving the otherside their turn to speak. If all our political opponents were like Maher, as infuriating as he might be, political discourse would be much better today.

    1. avatar How_Terrible says:

      I don’t agree with a lot of Bill Maher’s politics, but I have noticed that he tends to be a lot more fair to all sides of a debate then a lot of people in the media are. He might be completely opposed to what one of his guests has to say, but he will generally let them say it.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        It depends on who Maher is around at the time. Around his fellow Leftists, he spews bile…

        1. avatar tdiinva says:

          It’s ok to spew bile as long as you don’t keep other people from speaking and don’t whine when your target spews back.

    2. avatar Ragnar says:

      Watch the other video Noir posted on YT. It is a “round table discussion” where Colion was 1 vs. 5 ( not including the obviously anti-gun audience). The “lady” on Maher’s right was extremely condescending and clueless.

      1. avatar coagula says:

        This one pissed me off. They kept walking all over him and Bill was shutting him down when he would try and respond… What happened to the days when a shows host was unbiased and open to discussing both sides…

  6. avatar How_Terrible says:

    I don’t really care for most of the stuff that Colion Noir makes for the NRA, but I do have to say that he is one of the better spokespersons for the the pro-gun community. He doesn’t resort to fear mongering, or spouting paranoid conspiracy theories like so many in our community tend to embrace. Instead when he engages people in public about the pro / anti – gun divide he always uses well thought out and well reasoned statements to support any argument he makes. Between them Colion Noir and Rob Pincus might well be the best public faces the the pro-gun community has.

    1. avatar CC says:

      It isn’t a conspiracy theory nor “paranoid” to note all the gun control groups have complete bans as their target. Can you name one that did not support DC in Heller? ie total handgun ban, including for revolvers, regardless of full background check and training requirements? And any other firearm rendered useless for self defense with even 22 cal rifles and break shotguns required to be locked up and unavailable even if no children or prohibited persons have access to the home.

  7. avatar RA-15 says:

    Maher is an admitted pothead , I think he may need another puff on a joint 🙂 Cudos to Colion Noir. I noticed a lot of laughter from the audience when Maher joked about guns. Pretty good indicator of how many libtard snowflakes there are in this country. Will they be laughing when they are the victims of some crazy home invader pointing a gun In their face , taking what they please , and possibly harming or killing them.

  8. avatar i1uluz says:

    Maher admits he smokes pot, can NOT buy a firearm per question 11 e on the 4473.
    How times have changed, Maher lost his job years ago being “radical” at the time, now he is a moderate liberal.
    The woman is rather annoying, OK, a LOT. They cut it short before Colion is about to set her straight. This is the rest of the show that is not broadcast I think, called Overtime.

    1. avatar ELKII says:

      Recap it cause that woman is getting on my last nerves.

    2. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Maher admits he smokes pot, can NOT buy a firearm per question 11 e on the 4473.”

      *Currently*, correct.

      I fully expect pot to be legalized, or at the least, decriminalized at the federal level in the next 10 years. Then the 4473 will need to be changed somehow.

      You can’t be an alcoholic and legally possess firearms. But being a social drinker does not disqualify you. Something along those lines will need to be developed…

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        To further amplify –

        Canada just legalized it at the federal level. 30 grams ‘cleaned’ or 4 plants grown at home.

        That’s going to increase the pressure to at the least decriminalize it here.

        I predict Vancouver, BC will soon be a very popular weekend vacation destination for the Sea-Tac area, and Toronto – Montreal for the NYC area…

      2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Form 4473
        11 e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?

        ( https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download )

        There is no mention of alcohol as a controlled substance in the DEA’s Definition of Controlled Substance Schedules ( https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/ ), so therefor, there is no prohibition at the federal level of alcoholics possessing guns.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Alcohol qualifies as a medical depressant. Being an alcoholic is an addiction to a depressant.

          “… or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant,…”

          Ergo, a ‘prohibited person’…

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Alcohol cannot be a depressant because it is also a stimulant at the same time. Alcohol is an intoxicant and being intoxicated amplifies whatever mood you happen to be in. This does not qualify it as a depressant and considering that it is far more commonly used than marijuana or any other drug, any court of law with a scrap of integrity would rule that if the intent of the law was to include alcohol it would have been expressly listed as a disqualifier for weapons possession.

        3. avatar VerendusAudeo says:

          Wrong. The primary mechanism by which ethyl alcohol acts is when it binds to gamma aminobutyric acid receptors, causing increased transmission of the inhibitory neurotransmitter. Simply put, it inhibits brain function, and as such is a ‘depressant’. If it INCREASED brain activity, it would be a stimulant. But it doesn’t. I’ve completed coursework in physiological psychology as well as drugs and behavior, and you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.

        4. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          VA, so why did the ATF specifically single out marijuana yet fail to mention the far more common substance of alcohol. This alone seems definitive.

          Also, whenever I see video of a soccer riot it’s due to those drunken Irish being so damn depressed? And cocaine makes you smarter?

        5. avatar Tom in NC says:

          The effects of alcohol appear to initially be stimulative, but those effects are the result of depressing inhibition. When you are less inhibited, you are more impulsive and appear to be stimulated. But the biochemical effect is one of depression of various pathways.

      3. avatar frank speak says:

        think he admitted to owning one at some point in the past…clearly “pot” ranks at the top of his priority list…

    3. avatar Quasimofo says:

      I have no idea why Tanden, CAP, or anyone else who was far up Team HRC’s @ss is still given a media plarform. Maybe it’s just a side effect of TDS?

      When she says that no one on her side wants to ban guns, she is either disengenuous or ignorant of what many of her cohorts have been saying and writing over the past 4 months. I wish Colion had the opportunity to slam her with that…

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        it’s a blatant lie…they’re just trying to achieve “end game” incrementally….think more and more people are coming to realize that…

  9. avatar former water walker says:

    Maher is convinced of his own intellectual brilliance-like a lot of potheads. Can’t bring myself to watch this fool as I’d end up wrecking something! Good for CN…

    1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      Maher is the definition of artificial intelligence.

  10. avatar New Continental Army says:

    Noir should be the president of the NRA. The left didn’t know what to do with itself then.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      I was thinking the same thing…hope they are too…

  11. avatar KWOW says:

    Oh brother
    http://forums.previously.tv/topic/71400-s16e20-colion-noir-michael-pollan-michael-smerconish-neera-tanden-and-josh-barro-20180622/?tab=comments#comment-4437666

    “I was snorting in derision the preciousness of the whole ‘if you don’t know about guns you can’t legislate them’ argument Noir was making. Quick, sir: correctly identify , oh, say, a salpinx and describe how it functions in the female reproductive process. Step off and have a seat, then.”

    “I want to give Colion Noir the benefit of the doubt that he’s sincere. But his perception reeks of paranoia no matter how calmly he expresses it. His answer to everything is “my right to own a gun, my right to own a gun.” No matter what someone says he hears “they’re going to take my guns away.” And I find it highly ironic for a black man to sit there and say this country was “founded on” gun rights. The country was also founded on slavery so maybe you should think again buddy.”

    You get the point.

    1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

      You’re not being paranoid when they are out to get you.
      Many people in the gun Community simply don’t understand the different dynamics that exist and other cultures in the United States.

      Because of History, blacks, Chinese, Filipinos, and others have all experienced racial discrimination and domination from outside of their culture. Once you understand the Second Amendment is for you as an American citizen, then yes you want to protect your rights and can become very vocal about it. And for some reason if you’re very vocal about Defending Your Gun rights people get very nervous.
      I wonder why???

      Historian Clayton Cramer opened my eye’s back in the early 1990s.

    2. avatar CarlosT says:

      Yeah, as if the kind of gun knowledge we were talking about were on the level of “what does a salpinx do”. We’d like something at least on the level of “when Mommy and Daddy love each other very much.”

    3. avatar Huntmaster. says:

      One of the bloodiest wars in all of human history was fought with over half a million men dying to settle the question of whether or not our country was founded on slavery. The overwhelming majority of the men who gave their lives in that war were never slaves or slave owners. The results of that war pretty much settled the question. Even though slavery existed at the birth of the country, the nation itself was founded on something altogether different.

    4. avatar CC says:

      1. The Us was foudned on slavery
      Gert a refun on your edcuaion since you clearly don’t know much at all. Virtually all major countries had slavery when the US was founded. The most developed and advanced ones, France, Spain, the British empire, Holland, Portugal each had way more slaves than the US. To say the US was founded” on slavery is ridiculous since any and every virtually every country for millennia had slaves as a core part of their economy until long after the US was founded. Of the 16 million slaves brought from Africa; about 700,000, one in 20, were brought to what would be or was the US. More slaves went to single islands in the Caribbean in the 18th century than to all of North America from in the entire period from 1500 to 1860.

      2. But his perception reeks of paranoia no matter how calmly he expresses it. His answer to everything is “my right to own a gun, my right to own a gun.
      Except he is 100% correct. again you don’t have any facts or history on your side. It isn’t a conspiracy theory nor “paranoid” to note all the gun control groups have complete bans as their target. Can you name one that did not support DC in Heller? ie total handgun ban, including for revolvers, regardless of full background check and training requirements? And any other firearm rendered useless for self defense with even 22 cal rifles and break shotguns required to be locked up and unavailable even if no children or prohibited persons have access to the home.

    5. avatar Mark N. says:

      I live in California. And yes, they very much do want to take my guns. The newest version of the “assault weapons” law requires ALL “assualt weapons to be turned into the police or transferred outside the state. the cannot be sold or transferred to anyone else residing in the state while you are alive. They are trying like hell to write a law so that no new AR stule rifles can be sold in the state–but their success is so limited that everyone is waiting for the presumptive next governor to sponsor a bill to ban all semi-auto rifles. Former State Attorney General deceptively and fraudulently interpreted the microstamping law in such a way that no new model semiauto pistols can be sold here. Sooner or later, manufacturers will move on, and the ban on new guns will be complete, leaving us with only used pistols and new and used revolvers. They passed an ammo law to (essentially) ban internet sales of ammo, and supposedly beginning July 2019, every gun owner will have to buy a $50 license AND pass a new background check to be able to buy ammo. EVERY ammo transaction in the state will be electronically recorded and sent to the state DOJ. Most urban counties will issue few (and some no) concealed carry licenses. Total gun registration–even of older guns previously purchased and not registered–is on the horizon. All of the old guns with no serial numbers will have to be serialized, and the owner will have to pass a background check if he or she wants to keep it. More liberal counties are passing ordinances intended to block guns stores from opening or even from operating. Just think of NYC and then apply it to an entire state, and that is California. Yes Virginia, they want our guns in the misguided belief that doing so will somehow reduce the murder rate.

      1. avatar Scoutino says:

        Yes Virginia, they want our guns under pretense that doing so will somehow reduce the murder rate.

        1. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

          Find a lawyer or NRA rep and check out Article 1, section 9, clause 3 of the U.S. No Bill of Attainder OR ex post facto Law shall be passed. Ex post facto is after the fact, they can’t pass retroactive laws. If it is legal today you can’t make it illegal yesterday. They cannot legally confiscate and the 14th amendment assures that all U.S. laws apply to all citizens. I’ve discovered that many local politicians haven’t read that Section and most state constitutions have the same kind of section. That’s part of what makes Leftifornia really suck and Jerry Brown twice a jackass SON of A Bitch!

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “If it is legal today you can’t make it illegal yesterday.”

          You have correctly identified an ex post facto law. However, what was legal yesterday, can be illegal from today forward. You would not be charged with a crime for your actions yesterday and earlier, but you would be charged today and going forward without coming anywhere near “ex post facto”.

          Once an activity (or item) is declared illegal today and going forward, that illegal activity or item is subject to sanctions, including confiscation (without compensation) of the illegal item(s) [the Volstead Act settled that]. Thus, if a firearm sound suppressor (silencer) was legal to own without restrictions yesterday, and a prohibition law was passed today, your legal suppressor becomes illegal contraband, and government does not owe you compensation for taking that suppressor away from you (and putting you in jail for possession of an illegal item). This scenario does not introduce an “ex post facto” law.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Yes Virginia, they want our guns under pretense that doing so will somehow reduce the murder rate.”

          Actually, no.

          They want to confiscate your gun for two reasons: reduce the number of guns in private control; reduce the number of deaths and injuries where a gun was involved. There is no intent to reduce the overall rate of violent crime, nor the general murder rate.

  12. avatar FedUp says:

    Salon.com sez Bill Maher fails to stand up to the evil man from NRA:

    https://www.salon.com/2018/06/23/bill-maher-goes-easy-on-nratv-host-colin-noir/

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      maher tends to back off when he sees a black face…his big mouth has got him in trouble more than once…

  13. avatar Nanashi says:

    If Maher really wanted to win, all he had to do was ask “The NRA has agreed that fully automatic weapons aren’t protected by the Second Amendment, why are semi-automatic ones?”. He didn’t want to win.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      “Win”? My understanding of the whole clip was that it discussed firearm ownership, not the NRA. 2A definitely *does* protect private ownership of full-auto weapons, what the NRA says does not matter.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        well,..sort of…sold us out back in ’86 though…congress never has been comfortable with easy access to automatic weapons…a statement was made that most of the guns in the country are semi-automatic…not sure that’s true…but if it isn’t, we’re certainly getting there…

    2. avatar CC says:

      Colin noir and the NRA speak for most gun owners so NOir is talking as a gun owner. Gallup shows 58% of all Americans approve of the NRA. How many gun owners do you think disapprove? 1% 5%? he does speak for gun owners.

    3. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      The “gun community” failed to support the Bump Stock. The poor mans machine gun. That was before the NRA statement about them. I was very disappointing with my fellow TTAG commentators back then.

      http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/10/robert-farago/question-day-defend-bump-fire-stocks/

      http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/10/foghorn/bumpfire-stock-exist/

      Maybe all that indignation over Obama sending free machine guns to police and schools was just bull sh*t. The gun community needs to have a honest conversation about new technology and ALL guns. Not just your grandfathers shotgun or hunting rifle.

      So its OK for police to have machine guns and grenade launchers but not civilians???

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/18/us-school-districts-given-free-machine-guns-and-grenade-launchers

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “So its OK for police to have machine guns and grenade launchers but not civilians???”

        Chris, that decision will come back to haunt them in the future. I believe in the future the ‘test’ as to what weapons civilians can own as protected under the 2A will boil down to what weapons the police carry on patrol in their cruisers.

        AR-pattern rifles with standard capacity magazines. Pump or semi-auto shotguns, and handguns like Glocks.

        If civilian police can have select-fire, the public should as well…

        1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

          as long as police can’t have civilians.

      2. avatar CC says:

        That is what I am saying. The NRA works with a concentric circle set of who and what it represents: its voting life members, its rank and file members, gun owners in general. Within each of those three groups opinions varied widely anyway.

        it has to and does play hardball tactically and strategically in some aspects, and like any large group dealing with a very contentious political subject literally in one way or another on the front page of news opposing gun rights a few times a week, and under massive attack from much larger and vastly more monied gun control lobby it also has take some positions that are controversial among some as well.

        The people who criticize the NRA generally are just rubes. The fact is one has to work in the real world, not the worldview of a handful of deep red districts.

        All the whining about the NRA promoting fixnics as part of gun legislation that also reduces some gun control is particularity idiotic.

  14. avatar John Locke says:

    Maher bringing up a quote from some guy in regards to the slave patrol/uprising thing as to why we have the 2nd Amendment is completely and utterly false. Why is that nonsense still being trotted out as historically accurate?

    1. avatar Quasimofo says:

      A quick googling shows that the “2nd Amendment was only meant to protect slavery” argument pops every few years in order to make the case that the 2A is just an evil anachronism. Now, slavery could have been a factor with the 2A for some Founders, but it was clearly not the primary basis for the 2A for anyone with familiarity with the Founders’ positions on philosophy and governance. I was disappointed that Maher used it to gain some cheap points, and this sort of thing is short in the telling and too long in the refuting for that segment.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      probably because it was an ever-present fear in the south prior to the civil war….and disarming blacks continued during the jim crow years….

  15. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    The answer to anyone, anyone is “illiterate hypocrite”. Illiterate because they don’t know the Constitution, as well as they, think they do and hypocrite because they say tyranny or despotism cannot happen here without understanding that banning guns IS a frigging form of TYRANNY, damn it!!! I read one idiot not long ago who said the vote was the best way to overcome tyranny. I laughed for a while. When was the last time a tyrant left office because he lost an election? Hitler, Stalin, Amin, Mugabe. He demonstrated a severe form of ignorance and a special kind of stupid. He may not have been an American, though.

  16. avatar SkyMan77 says:

    Bill is such an evil lying [email protected]… I love how Colion takes him down with ease by sticking to the truth… A Lion’s got to roar and Colion did so without raising his voice…

    If anyone here isn’t aware of just how the whole “guns are a crutch” narrative started, you owe it to yourself to watch this clip. Eric Holder was dumb enough to lay out the core of this propaganda campaign publicly decades ago. Bill’s attempt to double down on Holders concocted hosesh*t is clear as day…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXwo9lARAgg

    Carry on TTAG and God Bless…

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      loved his concession that gun-banners often appear ridiculously stupid when they adopt an authoritative air on the subject…something that’s all too obvious…

  17. avatar DD says:

    Why any firearm owner/2nd amendment advocate would have a subscription to hbo/cinemax/showtime is beyond me.

    1. avatar Hiroshima survivor says:

      Watching movies without commercials.

  18. avatar Sam I Am says:

    The headline for this posting is a bit supercilious. There was no contest for the headline to declare, “…No contest”. The video was a discussion, a review of the political landscape. Maher was not condescending, disdainful, or insulting. He did not fling talking points, but put some out there for discussion.

    Maher is a dangerous fellow. He can seem insightful, engaged, interested, sometimes even-handed, accommodating. Looks good, might even consider him reasonable, but…..

    Maher is an actor, the Greek word for which (using Roman characters) is “hypokritḗs”.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Did you notice Maher’s body language, his whole demeanor towards Noir?

      Noir flat intimidated him. Maher was visibly uncomfortable at the beginning and was treading very carefully with Noir…

  19. avatar Don from CT says:

    I don’t know this but Mr. Noir is a practicing attorney in the Houston area. Its no surprise his grasp of persuasive argument creation is very good.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      That skillset definitely helps him. And he’s getting better at it as time goes on.

      I really hope the NRA has some debate coaches on staff to help out folks like Noir refine their skills…

  20. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Bill Maher is a racist.
    He is a great example of the soft bigotry of low expectations. He and most white Liberals and the Left are racist. You don’t have to were the uniform of the brown shirts or the KKK to be an anti-gun civil rights racist. Malcolm X was wrong. Only the white Liberal is the devil.

    L.A. Burning: The Riots 25 Years Later – Gun Store Manager David Joo Looks Back | A&E

    Civilians with a uzi sub gun in L.A. california

    I have had people on TTAG actually tell me the Korean Americans never had guns to defends themselves.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      visual evidence contradicts that…once it became apparent the police were not going to respond…they did what they had to do…and prevailed…it’s also good to remember a lot of these koreans had prior military experience….

  21. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Not bad, overall, but Noir did slip up twice.

    The first was in allowing Maher to waste 30 to 45 seconds–not an insignificant amount of time in an eight minute interview–struggling to get laughs out of the word “show” in “gun show.” Yes, a show can mean an entertainment performance, but it can also mean any kind of public exhibition or exposition of products by various manufacturers in a particular industry.

    Right down next to where the Houston Texans play at NRG Park is where they also hold the annual boat show, the car show, the gem and jewelry show, the bridal expo, and even the gun show. There’s no singing or dancing at any of them, but yes, ha ha ha, nice play on words. May we continue the adult discussion without lame distractions now, please? Jacking around over the word “show” allowed Maher to make his point without Noir making a rebuttal.

    Second, Noir let go unchallenged Maher’s perpetuation of the gun show loophole myth. Every law that applies outside of a gun, still applies inside of a gun show. Federal firearms licensees must conduct a background check regardless whether they’re selling at a gun show or in their own gun store.

    What is really meant by gun show loophole is the fact that federal law does not subject all firearms sales, whether private or from a licensed dealer, to background checks. So what? Nine states composing a quarter of the nation’s population impose universal background checks per state law. So there is that.

    Aside from that, background check or not, it is still all kinds of illegal to sell or buy a gun if the would-be buyer is prohibited by law from buying or possessing a firearm. That is, if they couldn’t pass a background check, it’s illegal to sell to them, anyway, regardless whether there’s a background check conducted.

    So what’s a background check going to do? Nothing. You’re either going to sell that gun illegally, or you’re not. A background check requirement is just another law to break while they’re already breaking several others.

    Moreover, criminals don’t get their guns through legitimate sources, anyway. They steal them. They buy them on the black market. They get them from friends and family. All if this is illegal if the person is a probited possessor. They get someone to buy them from a legitimate source on their behalf, which is also a crime. So what gooed does a background check do? Law abiding people adhere to them. Criminals don’t.

    Noir failed to address this and allowed Maher’s deception that there’s some loophole out to persist.

    What universal background checks really means is banning private sales of guns, since only FFLs may access the background check system. That’s the real goal, because then the government can choke off licensed sales and all of gun sales because they control who gets and keeps their federal firearms license.

    Noir missed this opportunity and instead allowed Maher to make it look like the NRA was for background checks before they were against them. Thatmakes them look foolish, because the issue is more complicated than that.

  22. avatar george lortz says:

    With all the talk about ‘universal background checks’, I have yet to hear how that would be accomplished. I once had an FFL. I was the proverbial ‘kitchen table’ dealer. I would have to call Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement to run a check on any buyer. I was able to do this because I was ‘registered’ w/ FDLE as a licensed firearms dealer. Any private seller at the local gun shows has to take his buyer to a licensed dealers table to have them call in a check on the buyer, which would increase the price of the firearm by whatever the dealer wants to charge for this ‘service’. Under the latest proposals, how would any ‘civilian’ be able to get a check on a purchaser of their firearm, if they are not at a show? It seems like this is a “clusterf**k” waiting to happen.

    1. avatar Paul McMichael says:

      I don’t even really go to gun shows anymore, but you’re right about background checks. When you walk in the door in Tallahassee the first table on the left is taken by several FDLE admin people there to conduct background checks on their laptops. Most of the expo tables are local FFL dealers that cleared their shelves of their stock of ARs and this week’s flavor of the week polymer pistol. Why do I want
      to pay $10 to look at them on Saturday when I can look at them for free on Monday in the store? When I used to go to gun shows it was ordinary guys buying, selling and trading stuff. Not even necessarily a firearm. I especially looked for the no longer imported, or manufactured.
      I remember the one time I rented a table at a gun show. A friend and I combined a bunch of “gun junk” to sell. Of course this junk consisted of things like a HK 91 retractable stock, a Leupold scope, some high quality knives, etc, and a couple of firearms. Stuff we weren’t using, or wanted. My brother-in-law came up from Ocala and helped out. It was like a feeding frenzy. At the end of the day (Saturday) I took what little I had left and told Victor Beane he could give the table to someone else the next day. I wasn’t coming back. Mike and I were sitting in the den watching a killing channel and enjoying an adult beverage when the girls came home from shopping. After my wife dropped her shopping bags and purse in our bedroom she came back into the den and asked, “Where did all that money on the dresser come from?” A little less than $10,000 dollars as I recall. I said, “From the stuff I sold at the gun show today.” She said, “I don’t make that kind of money when I have a garage sale!” I took a sip of my bourbon and said, “You just need to sell a lot more $5.00 lamps.” Mike had to make another toddie. He had spewed his all over the room.
      Those were gun shows.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      asking to see a ccw permit does a lot to ease your mind when making a private sale…they’re never going to be able to totally regulate this because a lot of people just ignore the law…not because they have any sinister intent but because they think it’s silly and unnecessary…

    3. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      Exactly. They WOULDN’T be able to run checks as just a private citizen and not an FFL. The whole point of UBC is to ban private sales and force all sales through FFLs. Then the government can choke FFLs out of existence.

      The proof? The GOP has offered, repeatedly, to agree with universal background checks, provided that everyone, not just FFLs, has access to NICS. The Dems have shot this idea down as recently as post-Sandy Hook and as far back as the original 1993 background check law.

      The Dems want that fatal funnel of sales through FFLs only, so they can regulate all gun sales out of existence.

  23. avatar Paul McMichael says:

    First, what the left really hates, and I mean hates, is a minority conservative. Especially when it comes to the second amendment. “But, but, you’re supposed to be on our side, or a gang banger! Both strengthening our position on gun control.” Bullshit! I spent this afternoon hanging out at the hunting camp/farm with Obie. Yeah, it’s not hunting season, but we use the the place to decompress year round. Just sitting on the deck with a cold one listening to the cock quail trying to whistle up a hen. Anyway, Obie is black. (And a hell of a hunter.) He doesn’t refer to himself by the current politically correct term. Retired military. He was showing me his newly acquired Colt Government Model. I showed him my newly acquired Randall knife. (I have an affinity for them. Florida and all that.) We talked about the schools in this country, race relations, (His take on slavery was, “That shit is history. Lets talk about what we’re going to do tomorrow.”) Politics. He makes Regan sound like a liberal. Religion. He’s a fundamentalist Christian. You should have heard him when he went off on preachers and money.
    This is the thing. Embrace our allies. And at the risk of sounding a little racist, especially if they don’t fit the mold that the leftists want to put us in.
    When we parted company late afternoon we shook hands and I said, “Love you like a brother.” He responded in kind.
    If you would like to get shot in a couple of different ways, i.e. quickly and often, raise a hand to Obie in my presence. It will happen before you can say, “Don’t do it!”
    This is what we should all aspire to.

  24. avatar Larry says:

    As I expected, Colion did a great job.

  25. avatar Eric O says:

    To the question regarding citizens vs army, navy, air force, I think requires a reading of Federalist 46, wherein James Madison himself explains how the citizens would defeat any standing army the “traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment” never be able to win:

    “The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence.”

    That’s Madison. Then there are rice farmers in Vietnam and cave dwellers in Afghanistan, who, using small arms, have either effectively defeated or stalemated the world’s premier military.

  26. avatar David says:

    One thing that bugs me about the argument about teachers not wanting to be armed because they don’t want that task is that this argument stereotypes teachers. You can give them the option to do so. You don’t have to force it. Those who want to carry will and those who don’t won’t. This is the beauty of freedom.

    Even having the option will deter would be school shooters as they would have the chance of facing opposition.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      It’s important to remember the national teacher organizations…the AFT…and the NEA…by no means speak for all their membership…something the left conveniently ignores…..

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      The usually implied, unstated oppo to armed teachers is that teachers are a nurturing lot, a caring demographic, people wanting to protect and insulate children from all the bad stuff in the world. Teachers, people who are all about protection from bad, do not want to introduce bad into the classroom in the form of guns. And teachers who would want to have a firearm to use to shoot someone are not the kind of people good citizens want supervising their children.

    3. avatar Eric O says:

      It also fails to note the differences in school shootings prior to the Gun Free School Zone Act of 1990 and after.

    4. avatar CC says:

      You can give them the option to do so. You don’t have to force it.

      This is one of the problems with the gun control lobby and the pres that is abetting them. They pathologically lie about the position of the NRA. You don’t even see factcheck, politifact or snopes ever dealing with the gross lies.

      In fact NO ONE, certainly not the NRA, is proposing forcing all teachers to be armed whether they want or not. It is likely 10% to 15% would want to be, and a slightly lower number would qualify. And even 5% to 10% would mean a huge deterrence against school massacres. would it stop all of them? No. Is it 100% foolproof? No. Would it deter, limit or stop a whole boatload? Yes.

      Imagine you are on a class trip on Utoya Island in Norway (the largest student shooting by an individual anywhere, ever) . Breivik was able to identify the one cop there and shoot him first. But if there had been one or two trained teachers there is a good chance even if none shot him that Breivik would have moved slower and been able to kill less, and there is also a good chance one would have shot him limiting the number of people he could kill.

      Imagine you are on the Va Tech campus (the largest US school shooting). Va Tech had allowed firearms for adult students and teachers, both carry and in dorms until just a few years before the massacre there but had banned them. That shooter walked by uniformed security covering his handgun, but if he had to worry that any possible victim or teacher might have been armed, he would have moved slower, with less killing and also there was a chance an armed person would be able to disable him.

      At the huge Columbine campus those killers clearly chose the exact opposite of the campus from the known position of of the uniformed SRO.

      The NRA’s position is to train and allow some teachers and administrative staff who want to be armed.
      The average cop does NOT have useful training in dealing with active shooters in situations with bystanders anyway, it is ludicrous to think a one week or two week course for select teachers would mean those teachers are less qualified at a specific situation than cops are.

      When I was in NYC a few years ago two cops engagingly a single active shooter ended up shooting nine, yes nine, bystanders while engaging a single armed suspect. And those two cops had just spent a month at Quantico being trained as anti terrorism specialists. So the idea that cops and cops alone would be better is not supportable.

  27. avatar Matt from Florida says:

    Nior could have tea-bagged Bill and he would have smiled and asked for more. Let’s be honest here, if Nior was a white guy he’d have been booed off the stage. White Liberals have to keep up the whole I love black people image even though they’re secret racists… An articulate black guy is very dangerous to the liberal agenda….

  28. avatar samuraichatter says:

    The a-ha moment came @3:21 “There are guns around here.” “I hope so”.

  29. avatar Jimmy james says:

    Sorry, can’t stand either one of them.

    1. avatar cc says:

      And you cite no reason.

      1. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

        cc, it’s his problem if he can’t. We can ignore him.

  30. avatar Anonymous says:

    Collins did a great job. Great job. Epic. I need to send him some money for this level of entertainment and advocacy. Does he have a patreon or something?

  31. avatar X. TTAG Lover says:

    FAKE NEWS, Zimmerman! Maher was not “vs.” Noir at all.
    Maher opened by saying that he’s been watching Noir’s videos, and that he thinks they’re very good, and that Noir is right about a lot of things, and that he can’t deny it. He was not only polite, he kept pointing out that he agreed with Noir on most things already…before the interview, not because there was any “vs.” conflict.
    But y’all love it when that box tells you what to believe. You actually don’t even want to be smart. You’re un-American. You want to be LED by other men. As long as lies come out of a box, that’s good enough for you.
    Maher IS a gun owner, stupid…and only so he can actually shoot people, too. He doesn’t like guns…well, that’s American freedom.
    And you hate it.
    Buhbye, Losers. Get off your fat and get a job.
    Buhbye, LIAR Dan Zimmerman.
    Buhbye, FAKE news TTAG. First time I read you in weeks, and look what you turned into. You used to be the best website. Now you’re just the sneakiest.

  32. I’m a “production assistant” on the documentary film “Good Guys With Guns” (in production now). After watching this clip of Colion Noir, I recommended to the producer/director that he interview Colion Noir for the movie, and guess what? He took my suggestion, and he’s asking the NRA to let them interview Colion Noir rather than Wayne LaPierre. As a result of my suggestion, the producer just sent an email to the NRA saying,
    “Instead of Wayne LaPierre as we discussed on 10 May, could you get me Colion Noir to interview for GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS?”

    Up until now, “Production Assistant” was just an honorary title for my donation, but I think I earned my title today, if I do say so myself! I suggested they interview Colion because so far, all 15 people they’ve interviewed for the documentary film are the same shade of white, so I said it would lend more credibility to the film if they had a little diversity. And the director/producer took my suggestion! Now let’s hope the NRA makes him available for an interview (hopefully for free, as it’s a low-budget documentary).
    See http://www.mecfilms.com/good-guys-with-guns.html#excerpts

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