From the transcript here, I’m just going to hit the last page or so right now, because some things jumped out at me.
That’s what these reforms are designed to do. They’re commonsense measures. They have the support of the majority of the American people.
No, they aren’t. No, they aren’t. No, they don’t.
More of our fellow Americans might still be alive, celebrating birthdays and anniversaries and graduations.
Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata would still be alive if Obama’s Justice Department under Eric Holder and his ATF hadn’t been sending guns and ammunition to the Mexican narcoterrorist cartels with the intention of murdering Mexican citizens so they could discover them at crime scenes and say “see, look how bad the Second Amendment is!” His active, murderous conspiracy killed 10 to 100 times the number of people in Mexico as were killed in Connecticut. For once, I can see how someone would say America is a racist nation – based on the media coverage (there was none) by most networks about Fast and Furious, you’d think American doesn’t give a rat’s ass about dead Mexican kids. Of course, it doesn’t really matter what color the kids they murder are, what matters is that Americans are disarmed. The FBI and ATF conspired to let felons pass the NICS background checks so they could send guns south to cartel hitmen. They used taxpayer money to fund cartels that couldn’t buy their own. Individual ATF agent supervisors lied on 4473 gun background check forms – committing felonies – only to have their guns turn up at murder scenes in Mexico.
This administration has less than zero credibility.
This will be difficult. There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.
This is the interesting part, and where myself and two other coworkers heard a Freudian slip. The pause there where he said “that’s true” struck us, as though he had suddenly told the truth – acknowledging that yes, this is a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty.
This is a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty.
Now, let me be absolutely clear: Like most Americans, I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. I respect our strong tradition of gun ownership and the rights of hunters and sportsmen. There are millions of responsible, law-abiding gun owners in America who cherish their right to bear arms for hunting or sport or protection or collection.
We already know that when Obama says “let me be clear”, the next words he says will be flat out lies. Here he says “absolutely clear”, so these are astonishing whoppers. (I can imagine him telling Michelle “let me be clear, I love the food out of your garden” and her giving him the death-stare.)
The Second Amendment says nothing about hunting, or sport, or collection, or even about self-defense against thugs. It’s about the security of a free state – it’s about security against government. Individual self defense is a great benefit (and recognized by the Founders), but ultimately the Founders prefaced the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms by noting that a well-regulated militia (as in free, armed citizens) are necessary to the security of a free state – as opposed to a tyrannical state – and whether against oppression from within or without.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to argue against the “necessity” pleas of tyrants, and against liars who say “common sense” is having a natural right respected by the Constitution abolished in regulation.
Mexico, Obama’s favorite nation to murder innocent people in, has a 10th Amendment that says the people have the right to bear arms, subject to “reasonable” restrictions. Which means, according to any government, that there will be no guns for the serfs.
If the same argument were being used against violent video games, what would that sound like? If there were 23 executive actions taken against the rights of people to play and own violent video games, how would that sound?
This will be difficult. There will be blogs and gamers and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.
Now, let me be absolutely clear: Like most Americans, I believe the First Amendment guarantees an individual right to free speech. I respect our strong tradition of gaming and TV entertainment. There are millions of responsible, law-abiding gamers in America who cherish their right to play Frogger or Pac-Man, or even Wii Tennis.
I also believe most gamers agree that we can respect the First Amendment while keeping an irresponsible, law-breaking few from inflicting harm on a massive scale. I believe most of them agree that if America worked harder to keep violent video games out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be fewer atrocities like the one that occurred in Newtown.
First, it’s time for Congress to require a universal background check for anyone trying to buy a video game.
The law already requires licensed video game dealers to run background checks, and over the last 14 years that’s kept 1.5 million of the wrong people from getting their hands on a violent video game.
But it’s hard to enforce that law, when as many as 40 percent of all video game purchases are conducted without a background check. That’s not safe. That’s not smart. That’s not fair to responsible video game buyers or sellers.
If you want to buy a video game, whether it’s from a licensed dealer, or a private seller, you should at least have to show you aren’t mentally defective, and that you pose no threat to society under our definitions. This is common sense. And an overwhelming majority of Americans agree with us on the need for universal background checks for video games, including more than 70 percent of readers of Game Informer and Wired according to one survey. When we asked them “should people like Ted Bundy be allowed to play violent video games?”, they said no. So there’s no reason we can’t do this.
Second, Congress should restore a ban on all violent video games, and a 10 minute play-time for all games.
The type of video games that drove the killer to murder in Aurora, for example, when paired with long-duration games has one purpose: to drive a person to as much violence as possible, to do as much damage to their psyche and designed to inflict maximum madness. And that’s what allowed the maniac in Aurora to hurt 70 people, 70 people, killing 12. The bombs he set at his home because of trap games he played had taught him how to kill many more, and it was only by luck that his bombs didn’t kill hundreds more. And this is all due to violent video games.
Violent video games designed to glorify violence and war have no place in American homes. A majority of Americans agree with us on this. And, by the way, so did JFK, one of the staunchest defenders of the First Amendment, who wrote to Congress in 1963, urging them — this is JFK speaking — urging them to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further creation of violent films and entertainment that drive people to violence.
We have to ban video games for the good of the children. We have to do this, because we must do this. We cannot let anyone else be harmed by the madness inflicted on our society by these death-pornography merchants. We have already seen the carnage that these madmen cause, whether with guns, bombs, knives, or fire, and we can only use common sense to come up with common sense solutions that will embrace what the public has already demanded. All violent video games must be banned. We must urge congress to ban all violent video games for the children.