TYT University: Pro-Gun Rally at Virginia Tech (Ana & Cenk Discuss)

[ihavenobias]

Run time: 04:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyJWbNhEI08   Posted on YouTube: October 30, 2011 By YouTube Member: tytuniversity Views on YouTube: 76   Posted on DU: October 30, 2011 By DU Member: ihavenobias Views on DU: 4649

 

http://www.youtube.com/tytuniversity|TYT University> is looking for students, faculty members and recent graduates struggling to find work to submit videos from across the globe that might be used on the show each week. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCwjMVBfRqA|Watch Cenk and Ana explain more here>.

Summary: The Virginia Citizen's Defense League is planning a pro-gun rally on the Virginia Tech campus on November 17th 2011. Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian discuss on TYT University.

[Doctor_J]

1. we on the left are fighting against some very sick people.

[RSillsbee]

7. C'mon Cenk and Anna aren't that bad NT

[DemOhio]

2. My family was in the shooting

My aunt and uncle both teach there. My aunt was in the building. My cousin, their daughter, was in class with the shooter.

No one was hurt, thank God.

This is troubling. Just like when republicans were stating that "gun control allowed the shooting to be so horrendous" when there were still kids in surgery.

[RSillsbee]

8. Hate to say it dude but, like a broken clock

The pugs are right twice a day and this was one of their two times

[DemOhio]

10. Ok, but...

Should they have been making such statements on the national news while students were still in critical condition on the operating table? They were almost gloating in their joy over it.


There is a time and place for that debate and the proper time certainly wasnt while bullet fragments were being extracted in an ER.

That is what I am upset about. They saw this is an opportunity that wasnt to be passed up.

[RSillsbee]

12. Ok, now thatI TOTALLY agree w/ you on. NT

[Tejas]

13. Where were you when gun controllers danced in Gabby's blood?

Less than 24 hours after the Arizona shootings, our politicos were holding news conferences to tout new laws for magazine capacity.

HYPOCRITE MUCH?

[DemOhio]

14. ummm...

I wasnt a member of DU then. I just joined like this week.

[Doctor_J]

17. Another Fox "news" talking point reaches DU

seriously, why are you here?

[Tejas]

18. Pesky factual events bother you that much?

You should get out more.

[DemOhio]

20. Wait a second

You are on this guys case for "pesky facts" yet you accused me of hypocrisy when I wasnt even a member of this online community until this week. A look at my post count/profile would have shown that. Maybe you could have done that before insulting with and using ALL CAPS.


Again, if you want to call people out on "facts" then please dont make up your own because it supports your argument.


Cheers!

[Tejas]

27. Google is your friend.

Google any combo concerning

Arizona
shooting
Carolyn McCarthy
magazines

You'll quickly find more than enough links to articles that broke less than 24 hours after the shooting...articles about Representative McCarthy media-whoring like a classic ambulance-chaser in her calls for magazine capacity limits. An appalling display of bad judgement at best.

Concerning your length of membership here as defense for your statements, please know your subject better next time.

[DemOhio]

31. I am responsible for Google?

Your initial post, which was in response to me, stated, "Where were you when gun controllers danced in Gabby's blood? Less than 24 hours after the Arizona shootings, our politicos were holding news conferences to tout new laws for magazine capacity. HYPOCRITE MUCH?"


Notice how you ask where I was? Notice how you call me a hypocrite? Now, when I tell you about that your accusation/claims make no sense, you then state that I must have problems and am ignorant of the subject matter. This thread was about the VT protest NOT Gifford; hence my post was about NOT about GIfford. Nor was it about couches, airplanes, ice-cream, the Cincinnati Reds, or work boots.....because that wasn't what the post was about.

Let me ask you this: Do you KNOW for a fact that I was for the Gabby Gifford laws being proposed? Are you sure about that? Could I, possibly, agree with you on the topic? Where is your proof of how I acted? You clearly know since you called me a hypocrite. Since you say I am ignorant, did I ever say that the Gabby legislation didn't happen? Where in my statements did I make any of these claims?

Here is your logic. Pretend there is a thread about WWII. I comment that WWII was a very long war where many people died, and that is sad. Then you come in and say, "WHERE THE FUCK WERE YOU WHEN SOMEONE POSTED ABOUT WWI LAST YEAR.....YOU HYPOCRITE. WHY DONT YOU LEARN TO USE GOOGLE, YOU ARE SO IGNORANT." See, does that make sense?

Lets review your sound logic here:

1. This was a thread about VT, not Giffords
2. You do not know what my opinions about Giffords are
3. Although you dont know what my opinions are, you list that they are the opposite of yours and you proceed to tell me that I am a hypocrite.
4. I tell you that I did not comment about the Gifford case so there is no way you can know my feelings.
5. You proceed to tell me, again, what my opinions are and that I am ignorant of the subject matter and need to use google.

Finally, you state that the reaction to Gifford was wrong and that I dont know my subject matter very well (again, how the fuck would you know that). However it seems that my opinion was no different than yours. Check out this logic:

1. I said, on a thread about VT, that having the debate was inconsiderate while people were still in surgery
2. You stated, on a thread about VT, that having the debate was inconsiderate while Giffords was still in surgery


Gee, think maybe you could have asked if I agreed with you or not before calling me a "HYPOCRITE" and telling me I am ignorant? I guess we can accuse people of anything we want if it helps our argument.

[classof56]

3. Oh. My. God.

The insensitivity and heartlessness of this is stunning. I like Cenk's comparison to having this rally at the place where Gabby Giffords was shot and all those were killed and wounded. It is difficult to comprehend the mentality that leads to a pro-gun rally at VA Tech. They who advocate this are soulless, in my opinion. Shame on them...words fail me...

Peace.

[SteveM]

9. It's a university. That kind of "mentality." nt

[Rhiannon12866]

4. Oh, boy... Off to the Greatest Page.

This is clearly as bad as the NRA convention in Colorado... x(

[Marazinia]

5. One thing I definitely disagree with you democrats about

Gun control beyond sensible registration procedures for handguns is a no no.

Gun control didn't stop the tragedy in Norway, did it? And their gun laws are much stricter than ours.

Or put it this way, if we ever do turn into a fascist police state, what do you want your options for fighting back to be, the steak knives, or a high powered rifle.

Keep your well-meaning but ignorant hands off the guns, please.

That said, this particular demonstration seems in poor taste.

[Doctor_J]

16. DUmbest post of the month!

The Norway shooting was an anomaly. We have as many every year as they have had in their history.

We are already in a fascist state, the proliferation of guns and gun nuts hasn't done anything to prevent it, has it? Not a single member of the gun culture has fired a single shot in opposition to the right-wing takeover, and I am confident that they never will - the overwhelming majority of them prefer authoritarian rule. And your hunting rifle won't do a thing against tanks, drones, and other military apparatus.

Keep your malevolent but ignorant opinions away from the sane side of society.

[Tejas]

19. A little too eager for the military to vaporize fellow citizens eh?

Project much?

[Ned_Devine]

23. What's your deal?

Do you come on just to rabble rouse? Most of your arguments don't seem to have much merit, yet they seem to be of the "fight provoking" variety. Why don't you let people see your profile? A little peculiar. I'm not even getting into the debate, I'm just noticing that your tone seems downright nasty rather than thoughtful.

[Tejas]

28. I'm not a fan of those who project armageddon against citizens.

Should I assume you are comfortable with the scenario? Stop by the Gungeon sometime, you'll run across the posts like the above that relish in fantasies about da gubmint kicking doors to confiscate firearms from law-abiding citizens.

Yes. All too often fellow members here at the DU expound such wet dreams, stop by the 2nd largest forum here at the DU and take a look for yourself.

[Ned_Devine]

40. I guess I just don't...

...care for your tone. The fact that you keep your profile hidden is a little suspicious as well. You don't need to respond to this either.

[Marazinia]

41. Privacy is nice

And no, I don't need to. But I have, because I care. No need to thank me.

[Ned_Devine]

42. I wasn't responding to your post, Marazinia...

...I was responding to Tejas

[Marazinia]

24. One thing I'm noticing

You Democrats are very civil, not at all like those Republicans.

Until someone disagrees with your cherished beliefs, that is. Then a few of you get nasty. Not all, though. I should have said that to begin with, so I'm editing to say it. Not even most. But some. You, for instance.

Regardless of how well my hunting rifle would or would not do against a fascist regime, I'll still take it over a steak knife any day.

[Lars77]

39. As a Norwegian i´d like to answer your point

It is true that gun control laws did not stop the shooting in Norway. He was using a hunting rifle with various upgrades bought off the internet.

However, one might argue that gun control laws have stopped countless other murders, considering the fact that the terrorist attack was about 10 times the annual murder rate.
It is also worth nothing that the guy went bezerk on a small island with 700 young kids.

Either way it is very difficult to compare, considering the fact that we never had a frontier where people had the need to protect themselves from bandits etc. We just do not have that kind of culture.

[SteveM]

6. Considerable support for a "gun-free" zone -- the year before Cho noticed...

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OpEds/Gun-Free-Zones.htm

"At the time, a Virginia Tech associate vice president praised the General Assembly’s action “because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.” In an August 2006 editorial for the Roanoke Times, he declared: “Guns don’t belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same.”

______________

Less than a year later, Cho committed his slaughter. Perhaps he hadn't read the sign; worse, perhaps he did. At any rate, for some reason he didn't seem to care. It also seems that the so-called "gun-free zones" are a rather recent development, not something chiseled out in Old English in ivy-covered keystones...
______________


"In many states, “gun free schools” legislation was enacted hastily in the late 1980s or early 1990s due to concerns about juvenile crime. Aimed at juvenile gangsters, the poorly-written and overbroad statutes had the disastrous consequence of rendering teachers unable to protect their students."
______________


Perhaps, some four years after the tragedy at Virginia Tech, it is time to look at some alternatives to ink & paper signs which do more harm than good...
______________


"Reasonable advocates of gun control can still press for a wide variety of items on their agenda, while helping to reform the “gun free zones” that have become attractive havens for mass killers. If legislators or administrators want to require extensive additional training for armed faculty and other adults, that’s fine. Better that some victims be armed than none at all."
______________


And at least one gun-control advocate has...
______________


"After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the U.S., long-time gun control advocates, including Sen. Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.), agreed that making airplane cockpits into “gun free zones” had made airplanes much more dangerous for everyone except hijackers. Corrective legislation, supported by large bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress, allowed pilots to carry firearms, while imposing rigorous gun-safety training on pilots who want to carry."
_______________


Maybe it is time that a discussion can take place about the policy of "gun-free zones." This is far better than tagging fellow citizens as "sick people."


"

[RSillsbee]

11. I see their point but I also see that their point is wrong.

I mean they hit pretty much every Brady canard they could in four minutes.(BTW bombing Hiroshima saved about a million Japanese lives)

Clearly, gun free zones did not work on VT all it did was allow Cho the freedom to kill people, unopposed, for what? 3 hours?

I really don't know where to start, carry on campus allows legal concealed carriers who already have a permit to carry on campus, just like they can across the street from campus. How is that so hard to grasp?

[burning rain]

15. Speaking of TYT, when does Cenk's Current tv show start?

.

[FairWinds]

21. As a Vietnam Vet, and an international relations prof . . .

. . who has seen a lot of gun violence, let me just say that . .

Guns are for cowards.

[Tejas]

30. "Guns are for cowards."

Do you endorse Fully Automatic firearms for use by city and/or county law enforcement agencies?

MRAPS?

Tanks?

[DemOhio]

34. Just wondering

What university you teach at?

I have an MA in IR.

Want to talk theory?

[Atypical Liberal]

37. So the people who stopped Cho with guns were cowards? n/t

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[20score]

25. K&R

[ScottLand]

26. The Virginia Citizens Defense League sounds pretty RW.

How did they feel about the mosque at Ground Zero issue?

[spicegal]

29. This breaks my heart. Va Tech is my alma mater. I have

two children currently attending there. In fact, just last night I met a man who's son was shot (and thankfully survived) in that massacre. He's very involved with the gun and mental health issues. I specifically asked him how all those parents whose children were killed or injured felt about the pro gun radicals pushing for carrying concealed weapons on campus. He said not ONE supported that kind of lunacy, not even one. It's a recipe for disaster.

[RSillsbee]

32. It's a recipe for disaster.

Then why hasn't there been a "disaster" (or a mass shooting) on any of the 70 college campuses in America that allow concealed carry?

[DemOhio]

35. Ehhh not sure

That is the best argument. We both agree that these cases are rare. It isnt often people go on murder sprees. However, I am not sure that a university allowing people to carry guns is a deterrent for this sort of behavior. To engage in such an action, you are probably crazy at some level. As such, you are not stable enough to say "wait, I am gonna go to a school that has heavy gun restrictions so I cant be stopped." You must likely will be going on the shooting spree because you feel wronged by whatever group and need to seek revenge. The end result of these things is usually the suicide/death of the shooter anyway.


A better argument would be to say that allowing the students/faculty/staff to carry guns will minimize the carnage because the shooter can be stopped before law enforcement has a chance to respond.

[RSillsbee]

38. I think we have a crossed wire

If I read it right the poster I responded to stated that allowing students w/ a permit to carry a concealed weapon on campus was a recipe for disaster.

I countered that is this was the case why have there been no "disasters" on any of the 70 campuses that currently allow students w/ a permit to carry on campus.

Your response seems to be arguing but it appears you are agreeing w/ me please clarify

And BTW welcome to DU

[anonymousworldwide]

33. WTF

What is the world coming to? Are they serious. At college?

[Atypical Liberal]

36. This video is COMPLETELY OFF BASE.

I love The Young Turks.

But Cenk and Anna are completely wrong in this video.

Firstly, Anna goes off on a rant on how college students are too irresponsible to carry concealed firearms. She specifically mentions "18-year-olds".

In most, if not all states, YOU MUST BE 21 TO OBTAIN A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT.

So the idea of rampaging college freshmen is impossible. At most, you'll have juniors and seniors that would be old enough to carry concealed firearms.

But more than this, if I am responsible enough to carry a concealed firearm down main street, surrounded by hundreds of my fellow citizens, why would this change when I walk on a college campus? It doesn't.

There is nothing special about a college campus. There is no reason why CCW-permit holders (who statistically we know are less likely to be involved in any kind of crime, let alone firearm-related crime) would be unsafe on college campuses.

Moreover, what about the millions of older adults that go to college? People like myself, who am over 40 and attend the University of Alabama in Huntsville, where professor Amy Bishop went into the same classroom building I go to, the Shelby Center, and shot 6 people, killing 3 of them? Clearly the anti-firearm policy did not slow down Amy Bishop. Why should adults continuing their education, often at night school, be unable to carry a concealed weapon that they could easily carry off campus?

There is no reason.

Then Anna went off on a tirade about "guns in bars". It has always been, and still is, illegal to carry a firearm while drinking. The purpose of this law was not to let people carry guns into bars. The only way this would apply to any CCW holder is if they happened to be the designated driver, probably a rare scenario. The purpose of this law was so that people with CCW permits can go to restaurants that happen to serve alcohol. Applebees. Ruby Tuesdays. Longhorns. Red Lobster. Outback. Etc. Etc. Etc. For a CCW permit holder, if they want to go out to such a restaurant for dinner (not to drink alcohol), then previously they would have had to leave their weapon in their car. Many people dislike this, aside from the fact that they are then disarmed, because it puts your weapon out of your control and at risk for theft.

Now as for protesting at Virginia Tech.

I'm sorry that some people are offended by the protests. I have no doubt many people are offended by the Occupy Wall Street message also. I've lost count of the number of people who say, "You should go protest the White House instead of Wall Street!".

Protest is SUPPOSED to make people uncomfortable.

The simple fact is that Seung-Hui Cho commited his crimes unopposed until people with guns - the police - came to stop him. Everyone else was at his mercy while he murdered at will.

Now the fact is, such events are exceedingly rare. The odds of someone needing to use a concealed weapon to defend themselves from such an event are very low. And that is not to say that someone who had the tools to stop Cho would have succeeded in stopping him.

But that is not the point. The point is, people should have the choice and chance to defend themselves.

And if someone has the permit to do so while walking down main street in town, there is no reason why they cannot also do so while walking down main street on a college campus.