It is not any différent that in the shorter clip. You can think hé is right or wrong hé is promoting more guns despite the fat that the US has more guns that any country in the world and more deaths by guns per capita as well. You can think gun contrôle would not change anything and putting armes guards everywhere is the solution. His comparison with driving is preposterous, as I dont think there are significsnt variances in the world on car accidents ( never researched it)…. everyine meeds a driver licence. Again it is a matter of opinion but that is what he said. He packages it well, he is a good speaker, but he is wrong in my view. But still no reason to shoot him nor to be happy about his death which is still a tragedy.This is exactly the problem. That 20-second clip is a classic case of cherry-picking to push a narrative. Without the full discussion, it’s impossible to see what he was actually addressing, the nuance, or the examples he gave.
Here ya go:
Last edited: