Interview with Oklahoma State Sen. Nathan Dahm | The Problem with Jon Stewart

Summary

The video script features a heated debate on the Second Amendment, with one participant advocating for unrestricted gun rights, arguing that more guns enhance safety. The counter-argument highlights the correlation between increased gun ownership and gun-related deaths, questioning the logic behind the 'more guns, safer society' stance. The discussion touches on background checks, registration, and the role of law enforcement, with the debater defending individual rights against perceived infringements, despite the potential risks to public safety.

Takeaways

• 🔒 The conversation revolves around the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms, with one participant strongly advocating for it and the other questioning its implications for safety.
• 🗣️ There is a debate about whether more guns lead to more safety or chaos, with one side arguing that the presence of firearms can deter crime, while the other suggests it may contribute to increased violence.
• 📉 The script mentions statistics about gun-related deaths, suggesting that despite a large number of firearms in circulation, the number of deaths has not decreased but rather increased.
• 👤 The issue of individual responsibility is highlighted, with one participant arguing that the problem lies with the people, not the guns themselves.
• 🚨 Discussion about the role of background checks and gun registration in preventing firearms from falling into the wrong hands, with one side arguing they are necessary for safety and the other viewing them as an infringement on rights.
• 🏠 The conversation touches on the impact of fatherlessness and broken homes on gun violence, suggesting that social factors may play a significant role in such incidents.
• 👮‍♂️ There is a concern raised about the safety of police officers during domestic calls, with the presence of firearms potentially increasing the risk.
• 🏥 The transcript contrasts the gun death crisis with the fentanyl crisis, indicating that while both are serious, the latter has a higher death toll.
• 🚫 One participant argues against measures like gun registration, viewing them as infringing upon constitutional rights and potentially making society less safe.
• 📊 The debate includes a comparison of the proportion of gun-related deaths to the total number of firearms, suggesting that the issue may not be as straightforward as it seems.
• 📈 The conversation ends with a discussion about the importance of balancing rights with responsibilities, and the need for order to prevent chaos.

Q & A

What is the main topic of the discussion in the transcript?

The main topic of the discussion is the Second Amendment and the debate over gun control, safety, and the interpretation of 'shall not be infringed.'

What does the phrase 'shall not be infringed' refer to in the context of the Second Amendment?

The phrase 'shall not be infringed' refers to the right to keep and bear arms, which is stated as an absolute right in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

What is the counter-argument to the idea that more guns make society safer?

The counter-argument is that despite the high number of guns in the country, gun-related deaths have increased, suggesting that more guns do not necessarily lead to increased safety.

What is the 'well-regulated' phrase in relation to the Second Amendment?

The 'well-regulated' phrase is used in the Second Amendment in reference to militias, implying that there should be some form of control or regulation regarding the use of arms.

What is the speaker's stance on background checks and gun registration?

The speaker argues for the importance of background checks and gun registration as a means to identify individuals who may pose a risk and to enforce gun laws more effectively.

What is the argument made about the relationship between fatherlessness and gun violence?

The argument made is that there is a correlation between fatherlessness and gun violence, with statistics showing that a significant percentage of school shooters come from broken or fatherless homes.

What is the speaker's view on the role of law enforcement in the context of gun control?

The speaker believes that law enforcement would be better equipped to manage the streets and respond to domestic calls if there were more effective gun control measures in place, such as registration and background checks.

What is the comparison made between the regulation of guns and other areas of life?

The comparison made is that in other areas of life, such as immigration, there is a desire for order and regulation, but when it comes to guns, the speaker argues for less regulation, which the questioner sees as contradictory.

What is the speaker's perspective on the role of the government in protecting children from harmful influences?

The speaker believes that the government has a responsibility to protect children from certain harmful influences, such as drag show readings to minors, but also implies a responsibility to protect them from gun violence.

What is the debate about the effectiveness of the 'red flag' laws mentioned in the transcript?

The debate is about whether 'red flag' laws, which allow for the temporary removal of firearms from individuals deemed to be a risk to themselves or others, are effective in preventing gun-related deaths.

What is the speaker's view on the role of individual responsibility in gun ownership?

The speaker emphasizes the importance of individual responsibility and believes that the focus should be on addressing the problems that individuals may face rather than restricting their right to bear arms.

Outlines

00:00

🔒 Second Amendment Debate: Rights vs. Safety

The first paragraph presents a heated discussion on the Second Amendment, focusing on the right to bear arms and the associated responsibilities. The conversation begins with one participant affirming their support for the amendment, emphasizing that it should not be infringed upon. The debate quickly shifts to the practical implications of gun ownership, with concerns raised about the increase in gun-related deaths despite the high number of firearms in circulation. The discussion highlights the importance of addressing individual problems rather than simply increasing the number of guns. It also touches on the need for background checks and registration to ensure that firearms do not end up in the wrong hands, and the potential benefits of such measures for law enforcement and public safety.

05:02

📊 Gun Control and Public Safety: A Complex Issue

The second paragraph continues the debate on gun control, with the conversation now centering on the role of law enforcement and the potential impact of firearm regulations on public safety. One participant argues that measures such as gun registration and background checks could assist law enforcement in identifying and preventing dangerous individuals from obtaining firearms. The counter-argument emphasizes the importance of upholding the Second Amendment rights, suggesting that additional regulations infringe upon these constitutional freedoms. The discussion also explores the concept of individual responsibility, with the assertion that the presence of firearms can be beneficial for personal protection, even in the context of domestic disputes. The paragraph concludes with a challenge to the notion that more firearms inherently lead to greater safety, questioning the logic behind opposing measures that could potentially enhance law enforcement's ability to solve gun crimes.

Keywords

💡Second Amendment

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In the script, it is a central topic of debate, with one participant strongly advocating for it and arguing against any infringement of this right. The discussion revolves around the interpretation of 'shall not be infringed' and how it relates to gun control measures.

💡Gun control

Gun control refers to regulations imposed on the sale, possession, and use of firearms. The script includes a debate on gun control, with arguments presented for and against stricter measures. The discussion touches on background checks, registration, and the impact of gun prevalence on safety, as illustrated by the mention of 400 million guns in the country.

💡Well-regulated

The term 'well-regulated' is used in the context of the Second Amendment, referring to the idea that a militia should be well-organized and disciplined. In the script, it is mentioned to highlight the debate on how the right to bear arms should be balanced with the need for regulation to ensure public safety.

💡Background checks

Background checks are procedures conducted before the sale of firearms to ensure the buyer is not prohibited from owning one. In the script, the necessity and effectiveness of background checks are debated, with one participant arguing that they are essential for public safety while another sees them as an infringement on the right to bear arms.

💡Fatherlessness

Fatherlessness refers to the absence of a father figure in a child's life, which is mentioned in the script as a potential contributing factor to gun violence. The discussion suggests that addressing issues like fatherlessness might help reduce violence, indicating a broader social issue linked to gun-related crimes.

💡Anecdotes

Anecdotes are personal stories or examples used to illustrate a point. In the script, one participant accuses the other of relying on anecdotes rather than statistical evidence when discussing gun violence, highlighting the tension between personal stories and broader data in policy debates.

💡Red flag laws

Red flag laws allow for the temporary removal of firearms from individuals deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. The script mentions these laws as a potential tool for preventing gun violence, with one participant arguing that they could have helped in specific cases where individuals were killed by their domestic partners.

💡ATF

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is a federal agency that enforces firearms laws. In the script, the defunding of the ATF is mentioned as a hindrance to effective gun law enforcement, suggesting that adequate funding and resources are necessary for addressing gun-related issues.

💡Restraining order

A restraining order is a legal order issued to protect a person from harassment or harm by another individual. The script references a case where a woman with a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend was killed, illustrating the complexities and limitations of legal protections in domestic violence situations.

💡Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy is the act of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. In the script, the term is used to criticize the perceived inconsistency in valuing some rights over others, specifically in the context of protecting children from different perceived threats.

💡Drag show readings

Drag show readings refer to performances where drag queens read to children, which have become a point of controversy in some areas. The script includes a discussion on the regulation of such events, with one participant advocating for their prohibition for minors, suggesting a broader debate on the protection of children and the role of the government in regulating speech.

Highlights

Debate on the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms without infringement.

Discussion on the use of the term 'well-regulated' in the context of militias and states.

Clarification that the speaker is not against the Second Amendment but seeks a balanced approach to gun safety.

Argument that more guns do not necessarily equate to increased safety, despite the current number of guns in the country.

Statistical analysis of the correlation between the number of guns and gun-related deaths.

Proposal for a solution focusing on addressing the problems of individuals rather than just the number of guns.

Critique of the lack of background checks and registration as a means to identify problematic individuals.

Debate on the effectiveness of background checks and the role of law enforcement in managing gun-related issues.

Comparison of gun-related deaths to the fentanyl crisis, suggesting a broader perspective on life protection.

Discussion on the fatherlessness crisis and its impact on gun violence, particularly in school shootings.

Argument against the necessity of gun registration as an infringement on constitutional rights.

Comparison of the responsibilities associated with voting rights to the responsibilities within gun ownership.

Debating the role of government in protecting children from various threats, including gun violence.

Highlighting the hypocrisy in prioritizing certain freedoms over the protection of children from gun violence.

Discussion on the importance of responsible gun ownership and the potential dangers of unregulated access to firearms.

Argument for the need for more effective law enforcement tools to manage and solve gun crimes.

Debate on the role of personal responsibility in gun ownership versus societal and legal regulations.

Transcripts

I'm a strong proponent of the Second Amendment.

Uh-huh.

I believe the right to keep and bear arms

shall not be infringed.

That's the one right that's listed

in the Constitution that uses that very

specific affirmative language.

- You know, shall not be infringed. - Oh, it's also the one right that

uses the phrase "well-regulated."

Correct.

When it's talking about the militia and the state.

By the way, just for clarity's sake--

Yeah.

--I'm not against the Second Amendment.

I'm not against-- I don't want to ban guns.

But you're saying more guns makes us more safe.

Yes.

So, when?

We got 400 million guns in the country.

We had an increase, and gun deaths went up.

So when exactly does this curve hit that takes it down?

Would a billion guns do it?

Let's just run those numbers.

You know, 400 million, 50,000.

Uh-huh.

You're talking about a-- less than a fraction

of not even a percent of 100th of a percent.

But it goes up, not down.

So your argument is backwards.

But if you want-- okay, so-- so let's-- let's come up with a solution, okay.

So one of the issues, a contributing factor,

again, I-- I believe it's the individual that is the problem.

So your solution to that is give them more guns.

So I'm saying that because people are the problem,

we need to look at the problems that those few people are facing

- and how do we address it versus-- - But you've removed the ability

for the state to do that.

No.

Because you-- Because you're--

If you don't have background checks--

Mm-hmm.

--and you don't have registration and permitting,

how do you know who has a problem in terms of the people

who you're giving a gun to?

Do you want to talk about the background checks first

or do you want to talk about solutions first?

I want to talk about, what you're doing is

you're bringing chaos to order.

That's your subjective opinion that it's bringing chaos to order.

It's not my subjective opinion.

- We have 50,000 gun related deaths. - It is.

That's not a subjective opinion.

Okay, so--

That's dead people.

Let me-- Let me back up for a second.

In every other place in your life, you want to bring order.

But guns are the outlier for you.

So let's start with immigration.

You want registration, maybe a wall, maybe not a wall.

Why do you want that?

Well, one of the reasons is because of the fentanyl crisis.

- Right. You-- - I mean, okay, but--

And you don't know when it's coming across.

So what do you do--

But the fentanyl crisis is twice what the gun death crisis is.

Okay, so until the gun crisis gets to the fentanyl level--

Not until it.

you don't want to bring order.

No, not until it. But--

But do you see my point.

--if we're going to talk about protecting lives, that's a

- larger issue in America than guns is. - Uh-huh. Yes.

If we're talking about individual lives--

Yes.

--of ways that they can be protected, loss of life in America,

there's loss of life through fentanyl, there's loss of life through obesity.

- The obesity crisis in America, - Mm-hmm.

costs six times the number of lives

- as guns and so-- - Right, and you're

the guy saying, you know what would help this, "ice cream."

No.

So you know what would help the problem that we're

facing with firearms.

What?

The fatherlessness crisis that we have in America.

If you look at the statistics--

Right. Yeah, they're dying from gun deaths.

- 80 percent of school shoters - Yeah. Uh-huh.

either came from a broken or fatherless home.

Uh-huh.

So you would say no guns for fatherless homes.

- No, that's not what I would say. - Oh.

I would say that fathers need to be more engaged.

- Great. So let's-- let's put more-- - Crime with a firearm, if

- let's put more resources into areas - they don't have a father in the home.

that are poverty stricken. All for it.

And into fatherlessness. And that's something that we're doing--

But why with guns are you against bringing order?

I'm not against bringing order.

You are.

You're also making it less safe for cops and for people.

When the police go to a domestic call,

it's the most dangerous call they can go on.

Mm-hmm.

In your world, if they knew that there were

firearms in the house, that's a safer call.

Is that what you're saying?

- No because police-- - Because why?

because police treat every situation as a potential--

But more guns makes us safer.

So why don't-- when the police go to a house filled with guns,

why don't they breathe a sigh of relief knowing that this Second

Amendment that shall not be infringed is being exercised

so fruitfully in this home?

Are you familiar with the 39-year-old woman in New Jersey?

- I'm familiar with a ton of anecdotes. - That-- That-- Yeah.

- I'm asking you a simple question. - This is not an anecdote, Jon.

- When the police go to a house-- - This actually happened.

She had a restraining order on her ex-boyfriend.

I can run through--

I know.

--hundreds and hundreds of examples of women killed

by their domestic partners by guns

that were not taken away through the lessening of red flag laws.

- You're pivoting to anecdotes. - But the knives--

No, this is not anecdotes.

What the police say, if we had gun registration,

if we were able to track purchases, if we are--

they have a technology that every bullet would be stamped

with an individual, like a fingerprint,

if we had an ATF that wasn't defunded,

we would be able to enforce gun laws more effectively,

and we would be able to solve gun crimes more effectively.

You're against all of that.

Because the person is the threat, not the firearm, not the knife.

- I get it. Great. - The-- The person, the individual

- Great. - is the one who is the concern here.

But you don't want anything that could help law enforcement

or society determine whether or not

a person is a good guy with a gun or a bad guy with a gun.

- Most even law enforcement-- - The registry would allow

you to have much more effective background checks.

Mm-hmm.

So I don't understand why you won't just admit that you are making it

harder for police to manage the streets by allowing all of these guns

to go out without permits, without checks, and without background stuff.

Why is that hard-- why can't you just stand by that?

Because that's not what I'm doing.

I'm defending the individual's right to keep and bear arms.

That's a different argument.

Okay, but--

You may do-- here-- here's-- here's what I'm saying.

Mm-hmm.

You want to say I'm a Second Amendment purist, and I'm

maing it safer. You're not. You're making it more chaotic.

And that's not a matter of opinion. That's the truth.

That is a matter of opinion, Jon.

But why take away their tools?

Because certain of their tools that they're using

would be infringements upon the people's right

to keep and bear arms upon their constitutional rights, upon

- due process and upon other things. - So you're saying

that registering is an infringement.

Yes.

Okay.

Is voting a right?

It's a right for citizens, yes.

Do you have to do anything to do it?

Yes.

What do you have to do?

It depends on the state.

What do you have to do?

Sometimes you have to-- you have to be at least 18 years old.

What do you have to do?

And in some places, you have to have a government issued ID.

What do you have to-- you have to--

You have to be on the voter rolls.

Register. You have to register.

Mm-hmm.

So you have to register to a right. Is that an infringement?

Does the right to voting say shall not be infringed?

Oh, so this is just a semantic argument now.

No, it's not.

You believe voting rights can be infringed because it doesn't say

specifically shall not be infringed.

Is it an infringement upon a 17-year-old's

right to vote since they don't have that right to vote?

No.

Oh, it's not infringement on them?

- No. Absolutely not. - Why not?

You're the-- because you're the one making the argument, not me.

I'm saying even rights have responsibilities

and that within those responsibilities--

Responsibilities, yes.

--are responsibilities and order. Otherwise, it's chaotic.

I'll go you one further.

You want to ban drag show readings to children.

- To minors yes. - Why? Why?

- Why? Why? - What are you protecting?

Why can we prohibit children from voting, those under 18

- from voting? But also that. - Why are you banning--

Is-- Is that free speech?

Are you infringing on that performer's free speech?

They can continue to exercise their free speech,

just not in front of a child.

Why?

Because the government does have a responsibility to protect--

I'm sorry?

The government does have a responsibility in certain

- instances to protect children. - What's the leading cause of death

amongst children in this country? And I'm going to give you a hint,

it's not drag show readings to children.

Correct, yes.

So what is it?

I'm presuming you're going to say it's firearms.

No, I'm not going to say it like it's an opinion.

That's what it is. It's firearms.

More than cancer, more than car accidents.

And what you're telling me is, you don't mind infringing free speech

to protect children from this amorphous thing that you think of.

But when it comes to children that have died,

you don't give a flying **** to stop that because that

shall not be infringed.

That is hypocrisy at its highest order.