Joe Rogan sat down with Colion Noir, an "unofficial spokesman" for the NRA to talk about gun control, mass shootings, and a host of sub-topics
related to those subjects.
Noir is an attorney in Houston who went from never having even fired a gun up into his mid-twenties to being one of the faces of the gun rights
movement in America in the span of about a decade. During the conversation, they take on several of the left leaning talking points about gun control,
as well as getting in to why the focus is on guns rather than mental health, socio-economic issues, and other things.
They also discuss the NRA itself (particularly how the NRA is racist, and people try to make that point to the black guy who's an NRA
member....), and how big names seem to want to avoid having a debate with Noir. They touch on Hollywood's obsession with virtue signalling from
behind their walled off compounds staffed by armed security, all while taking a break from filming their next gun filled action movie.
I found Noir a pretty interesting guy to listen to, mostly due to his ability to make points, use factual data, and present an entire argument in a
calm, measured way rather than resorting to personal attacks and the shrill, verbal equivalent of caps-lock raging as he speaks. I thought that
perhaps some gun rights supporters who find it difficult to verbalize their opinion on things might find him helpful to listen to. I also think those
who campaign for harsh gun control measures might benefit from hearing the opposition presented in Noir's manner.
Excellent and balanced discussion which, from what I've seen of Joe's shows seems always to be the case. Only around 30 minutes in but it is a good
one. Speaking reason and logic is something the MSM tries to avoid.
ETA In recent memory there has only been one mass-shooting in The Netherlands. 24 year-old suicidal guy with a history of mental problems who was on
SSRI's and was a legal member of a gun-club who the police here had not got round to inspecting. He had 3 weapons at home legally, one of which was an
automatic or semi-automatic rifle type thing. (I know very little about guns so excuse the lack of correct terms)
Tristan van der Vlis killed six people and wounded 17 before
turning the gun on himself in a shopping mall.
edit on 20/4/18 by LightSpeedDriver because: ETA
edit on 20/4/18 by
LightSpeedDriver because: Correction
Gun control....lol...use Canadas method...simply ABBROGATE THE CHARTER RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS of everyone in your Country by using constituency based
civic by-laws which are never successfully challenged due to collusion at the court level.By Federal law every Canadian has the right to carry a
concealed handgun anytime anywhere....however provincial level legeslators put in checks and balances vis so-called provincial Firearms Officers who
decide who can and cannot carry handguns in their provinces and other rules that ABBROGATE these supposedly over-ruling Canadian Charter rights.
It would be like the USA Federal Government guaranteeing Americans the right to carry concealed handguns and then the State legeslators coming up with
BS law that find ways to abrogate these FEDERAL OVERRULING RIGHTS....they do it by burying things in the legal processes and by having Judges and
others help them collude to do such....of course a successful challenge in court would stop this horrible abrogation of citizens rights but the game
is rigged the legal system is rotten and NO ONE IS EVER ALLOWED TO TAKE IT TO THE TOP COURTS AND WIN...ever...ever....it is what it is...sadly
originally posted by: Shamrock6
Was nice hearing reasonable and rational arguments put forth in his manner. Too often folks lose their # from the word "go!" and, as I said in the OP,
resort to caps-lock raging.
And then wonder why people ignore them.
Totally agree. I've stopped having firearms conversations with emotional people becasue they are emotional.
The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of AboveTopSecret.com.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.