Here is the 1st segment of the Thom Hartman Radio show where he debates a pro 2nd Amendment right winger. Tackling the issue of guns per capita in Egypt vs America.

http://www.cellspin.net/user/160de1f2a1/post/127779/

I would have posted this on the Facebook page, but I didn't want the line blurred between what Hartmann says and what our members think.

The rightie's claims of Switzerland or Isreal is questionable I might add. Last I heard Switzerland not a handgun friendly nation. And well Isreal locks up their poor behind a wall to artificially keep their numbers low.

We need to get Mark on to Hartmann.

Switzerland doesn't have to be handgun friendly since it's not only legal but 100% socially acceptable to walk down the street with an assault rifle. And yes I mean assault rifle as in select fire.

In most defense situations, it would be better to have a carbine than a handgun. Handguns offer concealablity and a little more portability. In the military handguns are really only for backup if your primary (usually a carbine) fails. The only time a handgun is better to have than a carbine is in extremely tight quarters.

Let me first say I'm reacting to what I heard in the clip, and only that.

Hartmann is wrong on so many points, it's not even funny:

1. He says: "They [the Egyptians] were doing what Canada did to England."

Independence was granted to Canada more due to disinterest on the part of the UK than anything else. It is not like Canadians had to argue at length with the UK that independence should be given. The Canadian example is bunk.

There were rebellions against British rule about thirty years before the independence. So they were not the proximate cause of independence. Still, if Hartmann would want to argue (against logic) that they were the proximate cause, I've got bad news for him: they were far from being peaceful demonstrations. People took arms.

2. Hartmann suggested that people in favor of gun ownership hold that only the rich should have guns but not the rabble. WHAAAAAAAAAAAAT? That's the exact opposite of reality. People in favor of gun ownership are the first to point out that gun control means that regular folks cannot get guns but that folks in power are given permits because *they* contrarily to *us* have good reasons to own guns (well, they are rich!).

3. He argues that Egyptian gun control works. Probably some governments are able to subjugate their populations in such a way that yes gun control does work. Heck, I bet that tyranny can successfully control a whole bunch of stuff. They get to that point by violating what we consider to be unalienable rights. It sounds to me that Egypt is exactly the kind of country where subjugation managed to keep guns out of people's hands. Is this the model the gun control side would want to emulate? Really?

4. Hartmann suggests that the Egyptian revolution is being done relatively peacefully, therefore this "proves" (his word!) that the reason the founding fathers wanted us to have guns... blah blah... At this point the words of his argument no longer matter because he has veered squarely into woowooland. What is going on in Egypt provides no evidence as to what the founding fathers were thinking. NONE! We do have evidence however that they did think about armed revolution and that some of them at least saw the possibility of armed revolution as a good thing.

(Holy crap! Maybe the US revolution should have been done with flowers!)

5. I doubt the validity of crime statistics comparison between the US and Egypt. First, as mentioned already, if the populace is subjugated then it is possible that crime is really low. Do we also want to be subjugated for the sake of low crime stats? Could it be however that the police has a monopoly on crime in Egypt? Of course in their official statistics, their actions are not going to be reported as "crime" because it is de facto not "crime" but in our eyes it would be crime.

6. He says "I don't want to argue American gun control with you." Huh???? That's precious coming from the guy who earlier was claiming that the situation in Egypt proves something about the intent of the founding fathers.

You know, sometimes I cringe at what the comments of conservatives in other forums but here we have a guy who has tossed logic aside to suggest that maybe Egypt should serve as a model for the US. Huh? Hello?

Hartman pays attention to Beck and Limbaugh, and mimics their methodology almost exactly. He makes assertions posing them as questions to which he provides the rhetorical answers based upon assumptions that are unverifiable.

He is preaching to the choir.

How do you intelligently discuss anything that way?

spikerogan wrote:We need to get Mark on to Hartmann.

+1!!!!!!!!

I don't have the time to listen to hartmann at all anytime recently, but I do remember him telling about one of his family vacations. He and his family were visiting rural friends and took his/their guns along. After settling in, they went to the local ammo shop to stock up on some fun time fuel. When he began ticking off the boxes he wanted to the guy behind the counter, the guy denied him and limited him to something like six boxes total. So Thom said okay, I'll take these six boxes, my wife will take those six boxes... Nope, counter guy knew they were all together and quashed separating the group, due to the 'ammo shortage' from the coming obama gun confiscation, and the ammo needed to be rationed with purchase limits so all could have a chance at it.

Thom was pretty pissed.

Wurble wrote:Switzerland doesn't have to be handgun friendly since it's not only legal but 100% socially acceptable to walk down the street with an assault rifle. And yes I mean assault rifle as in select fire.

And let me clarify that further- The Swiss rely on a citizen's militia for national defense. Like the United States some 200 years ago, there is a small regular military establishment reinforced by a militia if the need arises. Therefore it is encouraged for a militiaman to keep his personal weapon at home.
The weapons are issued by the state I believe.

the comedian wrote:

Wurble wrote:Switzerland doesn't have to be handgun friendly since it's not only legal but 100% socially acceptable to walk down the street with an assault rifle. And yes I mean assault rifle as in select fire.

And let me clarify that further- The Swiss rely on a citizen's militia for national defense. Like the United States some 200 years ago, there is a small regular military establishment reinforced by a militia if the need arises. Therefore it is encouraged for a militiaman to keep his personal weapon at home.
The weapons are issued by the state I believe.

Correct. And rifle shooting is the national sport. Many Swiss own multiple rifles and shoot them on a regular basis.

When I visited Switzerland, I couldn't tell you how many people I saw each day with a rifle over their shoulder at any given time. They were not on active duty; they were simply going either to or from the target range, or perhaps were planning on going at some point later and had a rifle with them for when/if they wanted to go.

JayFromPA wrote:I don't have the time to listen to hartmann at all anytime recently, but I do remember him telling about one of his family vacations. He and his family were visiting rural friends and took his/their guns along. After settling in, they went to the local ammo shop to stock up on some fun time fuel. When he began ticking off the boxes he wanted to the guy behind the counter, the guy denied him and limited him to something like six boxes total. So Thom said okay, I'll take these six boxes, my wife will take those six boxes... Nope, counter guy knew they were all together and quashed separating the group, due to the 'ammo shortage' from the coming obama gun confiscation, and the ammo needed to be rationed with purchase limits so all could have a chance at it.

Thom was pretty pissed.

That's insane.

Although I have to admit I've heard much the same thing from various people and groups.