Maybe I’m Wrong About Guns: A Live Debate



Journalist Krishna Andavolu hosted a debate on guns between Maj Toure and Chelsea Parsons at VICE HQ on September 18, 2018. This is live footage from …

30 Comments

  1. Chelsea seems to be ignorant to the fact that if guns don’t move from state to state they’re gonna get moved from country to country. Same thing happened with we weed, now we all smokin Cali bud instead of mexican brick weed.

  2. Maj awesome debate, thanks for getting Black Guns Matter started in PHL and moving that message around the country. If you ever need someone to teach safety in philly let me know.i have my LTCF and I would love to help. It's multiple guns not being aloud to sell in many states, company's like Daniel's, glock, magpul, etc. I know Colion isn't allowed to sell his new gun in California. This question was so loaded, firearm sales, building of guns and even accessories are more strictly regulated in the any car and also firearms don't get subsidies like Tesla. Guns are not the problem, mental health community and firearms safety is what we need more attention paid to. Guns don't need to be regulated for testing, the industry, hell one company (Sig)did a way better job on recalls than all car company's combined make sure the guns are safe.
    "Smart" guns are garbage, I would never ever own a smart gun, I wouldn't carry one to protect my family or self.
    One point I wish was brought up more to the Parkland shooter not only having police interactions over 30x but that the Parkland shooter used 10 round magazines not 30 round standard capacity mags. Or the Texas church shooting being stopped by an NRA instructor with an AR15, the media hardly covered it and didn't cover the 10 round magazines at Parkland all but locally. The NRA represents 5+ million members who they represent in who and what laws they want or don't want. Maj well said, no one brings up the NRA was founded to allow freed slaves to have the right to bear arms.
    I had this conversation last night that lower income neighborhoods and the people in those areas need budget guns and reasonable prices for carry permits. Unlike NY NJ and Illinois charging 100s of dollars just to apply for the permit. That's not financially feasible for many older people in lower income areas.

    It's not just 3D printed guns, milled guns, or made by hand from hardware store parts to build guns are and should be legal. Law abiding citizens are and should continue to be able to make guns like current federal law as stated by the ATF. Maj I couldn't agree more about idiots doing dumb things with home made gun's should not effect the good guys with guns.

    The anti-gun community seems to just wants to add more government involvement.. we need to keep this fundamental human right to self defense.

    Oh and 3D printed guns are illegal period if you're making them undetectable, the need metal springs, firing pin and pins. An assassin's gun is a ridiculous statement.

    Oh and Damn Right Larry Sharpe is a great candidate who might actually change NY

  3. Anyone else think Krishna’s constant requests for viewer input infuriating. Shit, I get it Vice. You want to bump those viewership participation numbers to justify the massive amount of Ad money you are getting. Please don’t interrupt the conversation every minute to try and get more

  4. 53:00 they talk about gun laws being racist or at the very least predominantly hurting poor minorities. gun training requirements are the law in some places to own a gun, and in most places its required to Carry Concealed. the anti gun side wants every single gun owner trained. it sounds good in theory but in reality it is a hefty monetary burden on gun owners. training costs are as much as $140 in some states and its for basic common sense stuff. a poor black man trying to buy a $100 pistol cant afford to pay $35 just to be approved to own the pistol then $140 for the CCW training course to carry the pistol, then $70 every 5 years for renewal and also $30 every 5 years for the ownership license renewal. so what would be a $100 handgun ends up costing $275 initially then $100 every 5 years for life just to own and carry the gun. that doesnt sound like a human right to me, it sounds like paying the crown (government) for permission to exercise your right… in i believe 13 states they can straight up say NO you cannot get a permit to carry a handgun. the hypocrisy is pretty funny on the anti gun side which is generally the Left side. they support gun ownership ID/training but they dont support Voter ID requirements. Voter ID requirements make it harder for poor minorities to vote. both ID requirements hurt minorities, they are happy to get the poor minority vote but i guess the left's principles on ID requirements dont matter when it comes to minorities wanting guns. yes guns and voting are different, they are both constitutional rights though and i agree with the left that any form of ID requirement is an infringement on the ability to vote, its also an infringement on the ability to bear arms. can we at least be consistent with our principles?

  5. question #2 DISAGREE… they just want to make it so they can sue gun manufacturers into bankruptcy like Colt for example when some psycho uses a Colt in a mass shooting.
    here is the law that prevents such lawsuits
    "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. An Act to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others."
    Ofc the anti gunners want to be able to sue gun manufacturers, it was a huge loss for the anti gun side when that law was passed by the NRA in 2005. the anti gunners can no longer sue companies into bankruptcy so now they just twitter mob banks and other corporations demand that they no longer do business with gun companies.

  6. gun manufacturers are not regulated? the last time i checked you need to pay a bunch of money and get yearly visits by the ATF to be a gun manufacturer and one paperwork error can land you in prison… that woman is full of crap

  7. her first argument is weak. comparing the USA to Norway or somewhere makes no sense. does Norway have 33,000 violent street gangs? does Norway border a Cartel run country like Mexico? geography, demographics gang levels all are at play. you cant just look at Norway and be like "hey less murder, gun control 100% works". her suicide argument also falls flat, in Japan they have no guns but they are the suicide capital.

  8. the difference between Maj and Chelsea are that Maj is grass roots funded. the Chelsea's group is funded by George Soros and many other billionaires. Maj has the voice of the people on his side. the Chelsea speaks for foreign billionaires that want to make it harder for peasants to get guns

  9. what are your thoughts on Machine Guns (Full auto)? under current law only fairly wealthy people can afford them because at a minimum an M16 for example cost $20,000. is that acceptable? why are rich people given more rights than the poor? shouldn't we be consistent and either outright ban/confiscate or make them legal so any law abiding gun owner can own them. what about firearms manufacturers? they can own or create any modern firearm they want, including a minigun. why are they allowed to own full autos? its not like they take a mental health exam or training course to become a gun manufacturer, they get an enhanced background check and the ATF comes to meet them in person.
    what about police? why are they allowed to own full autos? they do a background check and psychological exam and require training but should they own full autos?
    so what im actually asking is what hoops are enough hoops to jump through to own full autos? is it background check, national registry, psychological exam and training requirements? or should no civilian ever be able to own a full auto machine gun?
    NOTE: since 1934 there has been like 1-2 murders with Legal Machine guns.
    NOTE: Switzerland is a very safe country in Europe and they let you own Machine guns after you go through all of the red tape.

  10. Lend this woman any firearm she chooses. Tell her to keep it under her dresser for 30 days. After 30 days, ask her if she wants give the gun back or keep it. So……….what would her response be.

  11. The biggest problem is we don't enforce the laws we have in place now. It is against the law for a person who can not legally own a gun to try and buy one yet they don't ever arrest that person. It's a crime punishable as a felony under Federal law to give false information on the Form 4473.

  12. Using statistical information, while it is actual information collected, is the most excellent way to bend any and all truths and and shape a lie perfectly to trick an audience into agreeing that those stats are the whole truth. Comparing country X with all other countries is hardly factual.
    I love how Maj mentioned "sweat shop" phones. Those sell like they're going out of style every new update…
    When he mentioned there were machine guns before the constitution was written and Mr. Weedhead didn't know kind of amused me. It is, in fact, on wikipedia mentioning dates as early as 1500's…
    It seemed like this lady really didn't have solid facts to bring to the debate except, many facts blanketed with skewed facts to appear more in need for dramatic change.
    At the 31:00 did she repeat her statement from 10 minutes earlier or is it just me? I heard "programmatic approach" for two different questions while Maj kept bringing facts to the debate.
    Mostly facts coming from Maj and a lot of vague stats coming from Chelsea… and not much backing up any of the rebuttal whatsoever.

  13. I love hearing from all the anti gunners that dems and libs don’t want to ban guns they just want “common sense “ gun laws. I guess they missed the comment from their fearless leader Hillary and many other dems that the US should adopt Australia’s gun laws, as in MANDATORY buyback, then confiscation.

  14. "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." is a quote by Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II. Thats why we can never give up 2A

  15. What we need in this country is more civilian control not less we need to get rid of the government spying on Americans that should be 100% illegal but the government have been chipping away at our right to privacy ever sense Clinton was in office. Less government will protect americans far more then more government

  16. The government wants to ban "assault rifles" to protect the government. If they cared about protecting civilians they could put a breathalizer in every car on the streets they could govern the cars to only drive a maximum of 75 a civilian really doesnt need to go faster after all and that would not violate a sign right we have as Americans either neither of those things do actually. But the government doesnt do that no do they what do they do? They try and ban the best defense we have against them and claims its for our own saftey dont be fooled its not for our saftey its for the governments safety so we can tell them what to do thats why they want to ban rifles

  17. She seemed way more informed on this issue and more articulate. I had a hard time following his logic in his arguments. Although he has some really good points, his argument seemed a little scattered and unrelated. I saw a lot of areas I agree with and understand both sides. I appreciate a good calm rational debate on this issue. We need more of this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*