Jim Jefferies, an Australian comedian, breaks down every argument made by pro-gun nuts and demonstrates their utter nonsense in this bit. The comedy routine is destined to be controversial for at least half of America because he addresses the most common presented arguments after a massacre such as Columbine, Sandy Hook or the recent Oregon Community College shooting.
After the 1996 Port Arthur Massacre in Australia, the Australian federal government tightened up regulations on gun ownership. The new regulation was the target of praise during Jefferies routine.
“Port Arthur happened and the government said, NO MORE GUNS! And we said, alright then fair enough.”
Jefferies contrasts America’s attitude with Australia’s in response to potential gun regulations in the midst of massacres.
“Sandy Hook happens, where little children are shot. Your government says, ‘well, maybe, we should take away the big guns’. And you say, ‘f*** you, I have RIGHTS!”
He continues by presenting the arguments made by gun rights advocates:
Argument one – gun ownership reduces the chances of mass violence. If more people were to carry guns, then when a crazed lunatic enters a public space with the intent of killing as many people as he possibly can he would be stopped short of his goal by the law-abiding gun toters.
If this were true, then the comparable statistics between Australia and the United States would be reversed. Australia would be overwhelmed with massacres, while the United States was nearly devoid of them. Jefferies points out that simply is not true. Australia hasn’t had a SINGLE massacre of since their gun reform action.
Argument two – gun ownership is needed to protect your home and your family. If someone breaks-in to burgle a house while a family or resident is still home, then a gun is absolutely required to kill the individual who has the audacity to be so bold.
Jefferies brings up the one of our safety laws: guns in the home must be kept in a safe location away from children. For most people, this requires a safe. That makes the break-in scenario irrelevant. What thief is going to wait around for the owner of the home to unlock a safe to retrieve his gun? No one, quite simply.
With these two arguments already dissected the comedian, makes a empathetic point, “I am okay with the Second Amendment. And I respect it. What I don’t like, are bulls**t arguments and lies. There is only one argument and one argument alone, that is: f**k off, I like guns.”