All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 3, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show
34:31
Unearthing the Dark, Uni-Party Push to Disarm America
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Assault Weapons and Gun Confiscation 00:08:00
Hey everybody, today at Charlie Kirk Show, a pretty comprehensive episode on weapons and guns.
John Davidson from the Federalists joins us and unpacks what are Republicans doing to try to take people's guns away.
It will really, it'll take you back, especially some Republicans from some red states.
Email me your thoughts as always freedom at charliekirk.com.
And if you want to support the Charlie Kirk show, go to charliekirk.com slash support and get involved with TurningPointUSA at tpusa.com.
At tpusa.com, you can start a high school chapter, start a college chapter.
So I encourage you to do that today at tpusa.com.
That is tpusa.com.
Again, I love hearing from you.
Email me freedom at charliekirk.com.
Buckle up everybody here.
We go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit is love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.
Turning point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandTodd.com.
Okay, there's a lot of different stories I want to unpack here.
I want to kind of go into the gun issue.
We've talked about this a fair amount, and it seems as if Nancy Pelosi is just going to go after the entire enchilada.
She's going to go after assault weapons.
Now, just so we're clear, assault weapons is a made-up term.
It is not a technical term.
Anybody that is in the firearm industry, anyone that knows anything about weapons, that knows anything about guns or the Second Amendment industry, they will tell you that assault weapon is a completely and totally made-up term.
Assault weapon could be a baseball bat, it could be a golf club, it could be a knife.
Now, when you ask somebody to define an assault weapon, which I have done, and that video continues to go viral, they just say, What?
Of course, you know what it is.
It's self-evident, really.
So they say, Well, it's a weapon of war.
Well, pistols are used in war as well.
That's a weapon of war.
What exactly do you mean a weapon of war?
So when you press people on these topics and these issues, they're not really able to clearly define it.
And in reality, it comes down to mass gun confiscation.
That's really what it comes down to.
And I just want to alert the grassroots.
I want to try and warn you that we are going to have to have a fight against attempted gun control coming in the next days and weeks and months.
Ellie Mistahl argues that an individual's right to self-defense with a gun isn't actually provided by the Second Amendment.
Its original purpose was to preserve white supremacy and slavery.
Play Cut 66.
In your book, Ellie, you argue that an individual right to self-defense with a gun was not provided by the Second Amendment, but by the Conservative Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment in its Heller decision.
You also say, quote, there was an original purpose to the Second Amendment, but it wasn't to keep people safe.
It was to preserve white supremacy and slavery.
Look, Ellie Mistahl is not a serious person.
He's a provocateur who just says things to try to get headlines.
Interestingly enough, the National Rifle Association that comes under massive scrutiny and continuous scrutiny by the left actually started originally as an attempt to try to arm former slaves against KKK members.
That one of the first initiatives the National Rifle Association engaged in was to try to increase gun ownership amongst southern slaves.
The Second Amendment is applicable to all people of all colors and all backgrounds, regardless of your income level or your socioeconomic situation.
Kamala Harris in Cut 12 calls for an assault weapons ban.
Someone should ask her, what is an assault weapon?
No, no, technically, what guns would you ban and what guns would you allow still?
Where would you draw the line?
What exactly is the functional technical difference between a 9mm and an AR-15, besides the fact that they have increased ammunition capacity?
They're semi-automatic, one pull of the trigger, one bullet.
What exactly is the technical difference there?
Because it looks scary.
Well, if something looks scary, that doesn't necessarily mean you should ban it.
In fact, there's a really bad reason to ban something.
No, actually, when you get into the technical nature of gun control, of talking about this, you realize the firearm illiteracy that has plagued the entire national discourse.
Oh, it looks scary.
Okay, well, that means absolutely nothing.
Play Cut 12.
We know what works on this.
It includes, let's have an assault weapons ban.
You know what an assault weapon is?
You know how an assault weapon was designed?
It was designed for a specific purpose.
To kill a lot of human beings quickly.
An assault weapon is a weapon of war with no place, no place in a civil society.
A weapon of war, like a pistol, is a weapon of war, because every single member in a combat theater will get a pistol as part of their standard operating equipment.
It's interesting.
When you think about it, the left fails to be able to answer very simple what-is questions.
What is a woman?
They can't answer that question.
What is an assault weapon?
They can't answer that question.
When does life begin?
These very simple civilizational defining issues.
And she says, well, it's very simple.
Everyone knows what an assault weapon is.
They're weapons of war.
Really?
You know where the actual war zone is in our country, Kamala Harris, where you don't ever mention?
It's the place with the strictest gun control.
Just in May so far, 59 people have been shot and killed in Chicago, 293 shot and wounded, 352 total shot, and 62 total homicides.
So far in Chicago, so far this year, 231 people have been shot and killed, 1,007 shot and wounded, 1,238 total shot for 255 total homicides.
Now, the vast majority of those gun deaths that are happening in Chicago, the vast majority are with semi-automatic pistols.
They're not with AR-15s.
They're not with sniper rifles.
No, they're with semi-automatic pistols that are widespread and available in most states, but not in Chicago, actually.
Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country, and yet some of the highest gun violence and some of the highest deaths in general.
So if we were actually serious about stemming the curve of gun violence and widespread violence, we'd talk about urban violence and gang violence and fatherlessness and all these other leading indicating issues.
Chicago weekend shootings, more than 50 shot nine fatally in Memorial Day weekend violence.
Memorial Day weekend in Chicago historically means a violent start to summer months.
This year, police say more than 50 people were shot nine fatally over the holiday weekend.
That doesn't get the attention of Kamala Harris.
No, instead, right now, as we are doing this program, the House of Representatives is considering legislation to raise the limit for firearms.
So I will just have a very simple question.
Do you believe 18-year-olds should be able to vote?
And do you believe 18-year-olds should be able to serve in the military?
And it's kind of this great irony because the Democrats are telling us that we need to lower the voting age to 16.
Like, we need to trust children like Greta Thunberg, but they shouldn't be able to own guns.
Chicago Violence and Teacher Arming 00:06:30
So, which is it exactly?
Should we trust teenagers to determine the future of our civilization or should we allow them to own firearms?
It's very simple.
18-year-olds being able to own weapons.
The argument for it is if you can serve in the United States military, then you should also be able to own a weapon.
It's that simple.
If you should be able to vote, you should then be able to own a weapon.
The White House is considering, the House is considering legislation to raise the age limit for firearms.
It's happening right now as it's unfolding, which is amazing because you think about it.
What about 18 or 19 or 20-year-olds on college campuses that own guns to protect themselves against the evil men?
You see all these contradictions in kind of the left-wing activist groups.
One of them is that they believe that men are all around the corner to destroy women and that college campuses have rape culture.
If all of that was true, which is widely overexaggerated, but if all of that was true, then wouldn't you want to be able to have young 18, 19, and 20-year-olds be able to own weapons and be able to defend themselves against that?
How many years have I been telling you about Relief Factor?
Producer Andrews right here doing an Iron Man thanks to Relief Factor.
And truth is, I know there are millions of people.
In fact, some say over 100 million people struggling with some kind of pain, maybe from exercise or just getting older.
That can do it getting older, which is why I'm so impressed with the people at relieffactor.com.
They are on a mission.
You rarely see this kind of focus and commitment.
They recently shared with me that they are doubling down and want to literally double their total number of happy customers in the next year.
And I believe they'll do it.
So here's the deal: if you're struggling with back pain, neck pain, shoulder, hip, or knee pain, even general muscle aches and pain, then I'm suggesting you order their three-week quick start, still discounted, only $19.95.
Go to relieffactor.com.
That's relieffactor.com.
Check it out right now.
ReliefFactor.com.
You should order the three-week quick start to discount only $19.95 to see if it will work for you.
I think it possibly could.
Give your body what it needs to heal itself.
Go to relieffactor.com.
That's relief factor.com.
Check it out right now.
Kind of an amazing moment unfolded in this hearing where there is Representative Greg Stubay from Florida.
He's great.
I've met him.
I think he's a really underrated member of the U.S. House of Representatives.
He's right near Sarasota.
He is good at baseball.
That's right.
That's one of the reasons why we won the congressional baseball game, which actually I think the congressional baseball game is coming up again.
Am I right about that?
It feels like it was actually pretty recent, though.
It's usually in the summer.
I'm actually not so sure.
So Greg Stubay was actually explaining to fellow Democrats what is going to happen if they pass this bill.
And he shows guns that the Democrat-led bill would ban, including a very simple handgun.
And just listen to how this unfolds.
The, let's just say, the infamous Representative Sheila Jackson Lee.
She doesn't get as much coverage as she used to.
Sheila Jackson Lee used to get a ton of coverage.
And now you just got so many clowns over there.
You got AOC, you got Bush.
It's just Corey Bush.
You got Ayana Presley, Rashida Talib.
She just kind of blends in now.
She doesn't stand out as much as she used to.
Play Cut 74.
This is a XL 6-hour P365.
Comes with a 15-round magazine.
Here's a seven-round magazine, which would be less than what would be lawful under this bill if this bill were to become law.
It doesn't fit.
So this gun would be banned.
I hope the gun is not loaded.
I'm at my house.
I can do whatever I want with my guns.
Democrats want to control your guns at all times.
So he shows the gun to the, he shows up the gun with good firearm control, by the way.
And he has it right up to the camera.
Good form and proper form, I should say.
And Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, they really are so concerned about gun control.
She says, I hope that gun isn't loaded.
And he's like, I'm at my house.
I can do whatever I want with my guns.
His proper response would be like, of course it's loaded.
Are you kidding me?
This is not just here to just show you.
They really do believe in gun control.
Now, the great response from Rep Stubay came on Twitter, where Democrats are losing their mind that Representative Stube would even motion that he's showing a gun.
So Eric Swalwell said, with a screen grab of Representative Stubay, said, this is who Republicans are.
Kids are being buried and they're bragging about how many guns they own during our gun safety hearing.
They are not serious.
They are a danger to our kids.
Where Representative Greg Stubay responded and said, if you hate the Second Amendment, move to China.
I hear you know some people there.
Of course, a slight towards Eric Swalwell's lover, Fang Fang, the Chinese spy, where Eric Swalwell was very close to Fang Fang and never got held accountable for that.
A recent poll conducted by the Trafalgar Group shows that a majority of Americans favor arming teachers.
57.5% of voters believe schools are somewhat or much more danger without teachers who carry a legal firearm.
The support for arming teachers is increasing.
Among all political breakdowns, arming properly trained teachers was the most popular position.
Republicans voiced the largest support for arming educators.
A plurality of Democrats agreed, with 48% telling pollsters that armed and trained teachers made schools less dangerous versus 41.3%.
We know the agenda.
These people had a goal to confiscate weapons prior to these mass tragedies, and they're going to continue that.
Now, they're going to come up against a lot and a fair amount of opposition.
It's really interesting to see Senator Mark Kelly from Arizona, who's awful, he's even been a little bit careful on the gun issue lately.
He's married to Gabby Giffords, who was shot in the head and survived, thankfully.
But gun control is kind of his big thing.
Even he has been a little bit careful on his messaging because he knows Arizonans love their guns, that there's 5 million new gun owners across America the last couple years.
And this is where Democrats are going to run into a very difficult political situation.
Now, upper-middle-class rich people, they're actually the most supportive of gun control.
You know who's the least supportive of gun control?
Avoid Banks That Hate You 00:03:11
Poor people.
Because they want to actually be able to protect themselves and they don't live in upper-middle-class neighborhoods that are policed by armed security or by police patrols every 20 minutes.
It's a luxury of wealth to be able to be against firearm ownership.
Upper middle class suburban communities, they say, oh, well, there's no crime in our communities, so who needs guns?
I'll tell you who needs guns.
Plumbers, electricians, teachers, firefighters, and police officers earning $55,000 a year in communities that aren't, quote-unquote, as safe, and they need to defend themselves and their family against potential threats.
It's really out of control.
Inflation is at a 40-year high.
Your cash is getting sucked right out of your wallet with higher prices on gas, groceries, practically everything.
Look, you've got to take charge of your money right now.
So here's a principle that we say: don't use the big banks that hate you.
Bank of America is canceling conservatives.
A team member that we have at Turning Point USA literally just had his bank account shut down by Bank of America.
Literally, no longer allowed to use Bank of America because of his politics.
True story.
So when you want to consolidate your debt and use equity in your home to do so to lower your monthly expenses, you have to use my friends, Andrew and Todd, at andrewandtodd.com.
You have to know what you're going through.
So, look, I just had dinner with Andrew and Todd in Orange County.
We had a great time.
They love the Lord.
They know the Bible super well.
They're ethical.
They're beautiful people.
They really are.
They're wonderful.
And Andrew and Todd aren't brokers.
They're bankers who handle your refi loan personally from start to finish.
And they're always in your corner.
In fact, they're helping me with the problem right now.
Just all this nonsense with interest rates and all this are helping me clarify it.
They're phenomenal to work with.
They're responsive.
They're Christians.
They're conservative.
It's AndrewandTodd.com to beat inflation by lowering your monthly expenses and protect your greatest asset, your home.
So don't use these woke banks.
Bank of America, again, my team member, I'm not going to say his name.
You guys know him.
He's been on our show.
Literally, Bank of America sent him a note saying, we are no longer allowing you to bank with us.
Boom, like that, all because of politics.
Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage share your values.
I trust them.
That's why I work with them.
I hang out with them casually and I've got to know them really well.
They'll treat you right and that when you use them, you're not using Citibank or Chase or these people that hate your values, that believe in this trans nonsense.
Don't use those banks, diversity, equity, inclusion banks.
Nope.
Andrew and Todd at andrewandtodd.com.
So just write that down right now.
Write it in your phone.
You might say, oh, Charlie, I don't need to refinance or whatever.
Well, maybe you will two months from now.
Maybe you young millennials out there, maybe the millennials listening to our show, my fellow millennials, you're going to buy a home soon.
Maybe you're getting married and you want to buy something.
It's AndrewandTodd.com for a quick mortgage checkup.
Use the equity in your home before it's too late.
Go to andrewandtodd.com.
That's andrewandodd.com.
Stop giving money to people who hate you.
AndrewandTodd.com love the Lord.
They love America.
And they're great friends.
So I encourage you to use them as your go-to partner for anything mortgage-related.
Stop using the banks who hate you.
AndrewandTodd.com.
Red Flag Laws and Compromise 00:15:50
So gun control is on everyone's mind, but it's very confusing kind of what is being debated and kind of the legislative details around that.
A phenomenal piece that I read in the Federalist is: quote, there is no bipartisan gun compromise in the works, just GOP capitulation.
We read from that piece the other day, and with us is the author of that piece, John Davidson.
John, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show.
Hey, thanks for having me.
So, John, walk our audience through exactly what is being debated and discussed right now when it comes to gun control.
Who is leading the charge there?
And what Republicans are defying their voters when it comes to this issue?
Sure, yeah.
It's a good way of putting it.
It's a handful of Republicans in the Senate, according to recent news reports led by Senator John Cornyn of Texas, which is my home state.
Certainly, Texans are not in support of red flag laws and quote universal background checks.
But John Cornyn is nevertheless leading the charge to negotiate with his Democratic colleagues.
Other usual suspects like Senator Lindsey Graham are on board, as well as sort of the rhino of them all, Mitch McConnell.
And it's a small group of senators at this point.
I think it's very unlikely that they're going to get much traction in negotiating with Democrats, but it tells you how unserious they are about defending the Second Amendment.
They either don't care about it or they don't understand at all what the Second Amendment means to the voters in the states that they represent.
Yeah, so let's get detailed here, right?
So let's kind of get into what is actually in some of the minutiae.
So you mentioned red flag laws.
And so I'm against red flag laws and for good reason.
But some members in our audience, we get some emails and they say, come on, Charlie, that sounds like a good idea.
I mean, come on, what would be so wrong about allowing the government to put flags on people not to be able to own weapons?
Obvious response that we give is look at the domestic terrorist list where moms and dads are now considered to be domestic terrorists, the ever-increasing wide-ranging definition.
What would your response be?
What would your response be to a well-meaning Republican who says, Come on, why can't we just give a little bit here or there?
What would your reply to that be?
Well, my reply specifically to the notion of red flag laws is to say that the best way to think about them is to think of them as being convicted of a pre-crime, right?
That Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report from years ago.
You essentially have a judge hold a hearing where the person who is accused of not being fit to own guns is not present.
So you're not there for the hearing.
You don't even know it's taking place.
What happens is that local police or ATF agents would just show up at your front door and say, hey, you've been judged incompetent to own firearms.
Surprise, hand over all your guns right now.
And you don't even know that it's happening.
So it's what they call an ex parte hearing.
And it's usually very rare.
You have to meet certain criteria to have such hearings.
And that's what these red flags laws would do.
You don't have any due process.
You don't have the ability to defend yourself, to mount, bring any evidence in your favor.
You can be accused by an ex-spouse, a jilted lover, a neighbor who disagrees with the American flag that you put out on your front porch for Memorial Day.
Anything could potentially be deemed reason for you to have your guns taken away from you without the ability to defend yourself.
So for one thing, it's anti-constitutional.
It completely tramples on due process.
But the other thing I'll say about this is that the idea of introducing a federal red flag law isn't a compromise.
It's not a deal.
A compromise is when one party gives something up and the other party gives something up and then they sign meet in the middle and both sides get a little bit of what they want.
This is just Republicans saying, okay, Democrats, you've wanted red flag laws for many years and finally we are going to cave into the pressure from the corporate press and sort of, you know, the talking heads in Washington and New York and just give in to your demand.
That's not a compromise.
That's not a deal.
How about we trade?
You know, I mean, I wouldn't be in favor of this, but at least it would be a compromise if Republicans said, okay, Democrats, you want red flag laws.
How about we ban gun-free zones in schools and colleges that receive federal funding?
How about that?
That's a compromise.
That's exactly right.
What they call a compromise is a surrender, and you put it best in your piece.
It's a capitulation.
That's exactly right.
So to put differently, Amber Heard could disarm Johnny Depp just because of an accusation.
And that's exactly where Amber Heard comes out.
He hit me.
He broke my nose.
And Johnny Depp is not able to own a firearm.
So you kind of, and again, we talked about the Johnny Depp, Amber Heard thing at length.
I'm not exactly into whole celebrity palace intrigue, but I think that's a good example for the audience to understand.
You have a psychopathic woman like Amber Heard that just says something, and potentially a red flag law could disarm an innocent person who's just been accused of something without their knowledge.
So what states currently have these laws on the books right now?
It's sort of the usual suspects.
19 states, I believe, have some version of a red flag law.
You know, obviously the West Coast, very liberal states, California, Oregon, Washington, New York has a red flag law.
I believe California's one of the most onerous in terms of trampling on due process.
I believe in California that if you've been a patient at a mental health facility twice in the same year, you're banned from owning firearms for the rest of your life.
Something like that.
I may have some of the details wrong, but it's something very extreme that is permanent and that permanently takes away Second Amendment rights.
So this is the idea behind the congressional negotiations would be have some version of a national red flag law that would apply to all 50 states that would be some kind of criteria.
All of the 19 states that have red flag laws right now have different criteria, slightly different, and they're relatively new laws.
So it's hard to judge sort of to kind of measure what the effects of them have been since they haven't been in place for more than one or two years, I believe.
But that's the situation right now, that we have, you know, this handful of states that have them and Democrats and apparently a handful of Republicans who don't care about the Second Amendment would like to have a national red flag law and get nothing in return.
Yeah, I mean, and I just want to, of course, it's just a capitulation.
I mean, you could bring in an unrelated issue and topic that I think I wouldn't agree with this, by the way.
But if Republicans were smart, they'd say, we're not sitting down at the table until you're willing to put $40 billion of border security, build the wall immediately.
Then we can talk about red flag laws.
I mean, that would, I mean, again, it's an unrelated topic.
I'm not in favor of that because I don't think we should give up our Second Amendment rights just to secure our border.
I think that's insane.
But you bring up a really smart point, which is what they call a compromise.
The Democrats just call the, you know, the march through the institutions.
They get what they want.
And we are like, oh, yeah, you know, in a stellar meeting of compromise, we gave them half of what they wanted.
It's like, no, actually, that's not how this works at all.
And we got nothing.
No, of course not.
I mean, if, and what's so hilarious is some of these people used to be in the business world.
It's like, how would you ever broker a merger and acquisition that way?
Okay, so we understand that you want to fire all of our employees and take our profits and kind of destroy our shareholders.
How about half?
No one would put up with this.
I mean, it's just, it's, and they always like, we need more businessmen in DC.
Like, how about you start acting like one?
Can you kind of build out the likelihood of this legislative package passing?
Because some people are getting pretty nervous.
What do you think the actual chances of this becoming law are?
I think the chances of an actual federal red flag law are pretty low simply because of its appalling, you know, undermining of due process that it represents.
And I think once you explain to people what a red flag law is, support for it kind of, you know, dries up very quickly.
And I know, you know, the corporate press would like to quote all of these polls that say, oh, 85% of Americans support red flag laws.
Well, yeah, but look at the polls, look at the crosstabs, look at what they actually ask.
Do they explain that you could have your guns taken away in a judicial hearing that you don't even know about?
No, they don't.
So once the debate actually ensues about the details of what a red flag law is, I think the support for it will dry up.
I think it may be a little bit more likely that you have some federal version of universal background checks, which is really would be something for the Republicans who believe in this stuff to say like, oh, we, you know, we struck a deal with Democrats and got gun legislation through.
But in reality, as you know and I know, and probably most of your viewers know, anyone who goes to a store and buys a gun has a background check.
Like the vast majority, 95 plus percent of gun sales in the U.S. involve a background check.
So in terms of actually changing anything, this would be pure legislative theater.
So, maybe, you know, because it's pure legislative theater, that one has a slightly better chance of getting through than the red flag law.
Yeah, and there's this gun show loophole farce.
But, yeah, based on the 1986 Brady bill, if I'm not mistaken, we do have some form of background checks.
What they won't tell you, though, is that the FBI hasn't done their job in forever.
They get a heads up on a lot of these shooters before, and they're not doing their job.
So, before you pass all new laws, just ask why is our national police force more interested in targeting moms and dads that show up at school board meetings and not intervening with these potential pressure cooker people that legitimately could be shooting up a school or something unthinkable.
But they always want to pass another law.
That is just a pattern of the left.
A war is being waged on reality, everybody, and the left is leading the charge.
Their radical gender ideology has seeped into children's classrooms, into medical terminology, and into our everyday life.
It's producing a generation of psychological infants and confused young people.
Not only that, but this radical ideology is trying to erase the people who brought us all into the world, women.
Now, Matt Walsh of the Great Daily Wire is taking matters into his own hands.
He recently embarked on a journey around the world to ask one simple question: What is a woman?
And you'd be surprised not only how few are capable of answering, but also how many have a completely twisted idea of what a woman is.
Thankfully, he got his whole experience on film, the documentary they don't want you to see what is a woman.
You can check it out today at dailywire.com/slash Charlie.
Radical gender ideology have a not-so-secret agenda, and this film exposes it all.
Check out what is a woman at dailywire.com/slash Charlie.
That is dailywire.com/slash Charlie.
Play cut 75.
So, there's this great question from Gallup, which essentially is: are you satisfied with U.S. gun laws?
And if you aren't satisfied, are you dissatisfied?
Do you want stricter gun laws?
Do you want them to be less strict?
Only 36%, only 36% of Americans say they are dissatisfied and want stricter gun laws.
Get this: 54% say they're either satisfied or they're dissatisfied and actually want less strict gun laws.
This to me tells the story because it could be that you want stricter gun laws, but you're generally actually satisfied.
And this 54% gives it away.
Most Americans are either satisfied or they actually want less strict gun laws.
That is really that's CNN.
John, what is your reaction?
That's not surprising.
I think that these Republicans who are sitting down with Democrats in Washington are so disconnected from normal Americans and the communities that they ostensibly represent, they have no idea how unpopular what they're contemplating really is.
Most Americans understand that there is, you know, a constitutional right to own firearms and that gun laws are only followed by law-abiding Americans.
And, you know, just deeply disturbed people who go and shoot up schools and massacre elementary school children are not going to abide by laws, are not going to abide by gun laws any more than criminals are.
The idea that you stop these school shootings by outlawing guns is like saying you stop murder by outlawing murder.
You know, so it's common sense on the one hand, but common sense is something that our elected leaders in Washington have very little of.
And we see that in these efforts to negotiate with and strike a deal with Democrats who, by the way, I was going to mention this in the last segment.
Democrats are done negotiating or striking compromises.
When was the last time Democrats decided to compromise with Republicans on anything?
Their party is controlled by the hard, left-wing activist-based that is unwilling to compromise on any issue.
And so the idea that there would be some kind of a deal about guns is absolutely farcical, completely divorced from reality.
The Democrats have not conceded anything since the roaring 20s, and that's not an exaggeration.
Since FDR, the Democrats have not given an inch.
Since the Roaring 20s, they have never come to a legislative consensus that is in the favor of something conservatives want.
The only exception might be in the 1990s with Bill Clinton, who might have come to the middle on crime and some other issues.
That might be, but they were getting tons of things in return, like mass immigration, all this other garbage.
What then is the driving force?
I think it's deeper than just disconnection.
I mean, you have someone like John Cornyn, is it just kind of this kind of empty kind of vacuum in their soul where they want to be liked?
You know what I mean?
Like, what is it?
Is it kind of just this, I so deeply want to be accepted by the Washington Post, and this is my time to shine?
What exactly do you think is the motivating factor here?
Well, without speculating on the condition of their soul, I do think that a lot of these politicians in Washington are very sensitive to the kinds of things that are said about them in places like the Washington Post and the New York Times.
When you spend the majority of your professional career and your adult life in Washington, D.C., you know, nobody likes to be a pariah, right?
In your social milieu.
And that's what you become in D.C. if you're like, you know, Ted Cruz or Chip Roy and you sort of say the impolite thing and call people out and stick to your principles.
It's much easier to get along in Washington, D.C. if you're more like John Cornyn or Mitch McConnell or Lindsey Graham.
That way, you don't get nasty things said about you in the paper of record.
And I think that normal, everyday average Americans underestimate that aspect of life in Washington, D.C. and in Congress, that how much of an influence that has on the kinds of things that happen, the kinds of things that don't happen in D.C.
It's not a small thing.
Washington Politics and Influence 00:00:57
It's a big thing.
It happens to a lesser extent in state capitals and state houses, but it happens in a really intense and sustained way in Washington.
And I think that's what's driving some of this.
I think that's exactly right.
The pressure on people like Cornyn and others to conform and to become a reasonable person, the Washington Post, it is not understood, I think, by most voters.
Like, well, why would you care what the Washington Post says?
It is a massive point of influence.
I believe firmly the New York Times and the Washington Post are better lobbyists than most people on K-Street, unintentionally at times.
Okay, phenomenal coverage of a very important issue.
Thank you, John Davidson from the Federalist.
Thanks so much.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thank you so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection