16 votes

PENN Jillette in an AWSOME interview!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The Same Braindead People

that watch Wendy Williams are the ones that watch American Idol. Pointless to care about it.


No, It Isn't...

..fact is, many of them vote for those who would disarm us and further advance government tyranny and they also shape societal norms and what is 'commonly accepted'.

They and their ilk are to be countered and resisted as if they were evil incarnate...fact is, they are.

Nothing Awesome About It

He did nothing but weakly attempt to defend firearms, peripherally, whilst properly promoting individual responsibility.

I am aware that many people disagree with my assessment of how this fundamental liberty issue must be approached and framed, but it is what it is.

I assess that we MUST frame the issue in stark bedrock concepts and we must NOT get caught up in such defenses against such insipid emotive-blurting and reactionary arguments coming from the drones in society who have been so manipulated by government and its propaganda arm.

A calm, matter of fact case needs to be made each and every time in some form or fashion, as I see it:

First, America is governed via a Constitution which has a Bill of Rights enumerating a few of countless fundamental natural-rights. One of most important of those fundamental-rights is the right to keep and bear arms, uninfringed.

Secondly, You can be emotional all you want, you can allow yourself to be manipulated into a frenzy of fear, loathing or anger directed towards disarmament, by the government in its relentless aims to disarm the people.

That said, you must realize that there are millions of individuals, living quietly in peace, wanting to be left alone to live their lives and who hold dear to the Constitution. Even more importantly, these people hold to the fundamental liberties that all free-men enjoy.

We happen to be discussing the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

next, these millions of people will absolutely NOT allow themselves to be disarmed, despite your desires, fears, advocacy, or the actions of government which are contrary to the principles of individual liberty and to the text of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Amendment II was enumerated to absolutely provide 'the people' with the means to defend against tyranny. That means individual people, not government or state military or police, ma'am. Yes, ma'am, that means that we the people must have the means to defend, with force of arms, against tyranny in government and/or to throw off such government and institute new government.

It is that simple.

Next point:

It seems as if what you and those like you in government are advocating, is the exact scenario that Amendment II was enumerated to provide the means to prevent and to defend from. You are forcing it to become a reality.

It is that simple.

So, ma'am, if what you are asking for comes to pass, how many dead American men, women and children do you desire to see slaughtered in pursuit of your desires? Tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions?

On top of that, it is very important for you to conceptualize and realize that these same good, decent, peaceful people who will refuse to be disarmed, will not quietly sit and await the agents of government to come and kill them or strip them of the only means to defend against tyranny.

These good Americans who understand and value liberty and who grasp the dirt-simple concept and intent of 'Liberties Teeth', well, they will shoot back and actually go on the offensive in defense of those liberties and our way of life.

So, ma'am, how many police, military, government apparatchiks and others are you willing to see killed, on top of the numbers of slaughtered 'evil' radical people who simply refuse to be disarmed?

Well, how many dead Americans are acceptable to you in pursuit of your goals?

Pure emotional arguments on one side

...reason on the defensive. Listen to the audience cheering any senseless retort made by their chosen side. He was really wise to appeal to kind and protective emotions to try and defend people with aspergers from the indiscriminate blame tornado rather than getting angry in response.

And a mental health "czar" in every county? It's a safe bet that if she had her way there's a major "what have I done" moment of intense and impotent regret waiting in her future as the reality unfolds in an American culture no longer keen to limit powers nor protect innocents.

The sad thing is

I am sure more people agreed with the idiotic women then the sensible Penn Jillette. The 2nd amendment isn't a choice for the majority to remove. It is an inalienable right. As far as I am concerned, congress and the president can sign as many laws as they want, the constitution overrides their crap. We just need to draw a line and not let it go any farther. The bill of rights is supposed to be protected by the federal government, not violated. Treason has been going on in Washington for to long..

He could have done better...

He didn't even pose the very pertinent question regarding psychotropic medications.


but he still owned the other idiots on stage.

I agree..



Penn did a great job

Exercise Your Rights. If You Don't Use Them, You Will Lose Them.
My News Twitter http://twitter.com/sharpsteve
My YouTube http://www.youtube.com/user/sharpsteve2003

Yes he did

and he is VERY smart throwing the straw man out there....."people with aspergers do not become violent".

"Endless money forms the sinews of war." - Cicero, www.freedomshift.blogspot.com