You gotta give States United to Prevent Gun Violence (SUVG) props. Their video has garnered some 800k view in the last four days. It’s very clever. And so wrong on so many levels. Commentator fastindy got in fast with “Look back through history. It would seem that the body count of a mass killing is not determined by the weapon of the aggressor, and instead depends on the means of defense and resistance available to the intended victims.” And it wasn’t deleted! Obviously. SUVG has a lot to learn from MAIG (Mayors Against Illegal Guns).

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

57 COMMENTS

  1. Does this mean you guys in the US have the same gun laws as you did back when muskets where a thing?
    Edit: more gun laws does not make society safer 😉

  2. I saw this video. I thought it was pretty funny actually. Wouldn’t it be funnier if the manager in the video had his own gun and shot back?

  3. We do have a long history of attacks on the people and of self defense , sample were the many attacks by our American Indians , The French from Canada, and even during our Civil War were the Copper Heads who left bombs etc. So I take note also from history the answer is to go after the attacker , not to disarm the people as is going on now … so again 200 + history supports 2A….

  4. If he had planned this out, he would likely have been carrying more than one musket and possibly a percussion pistol or two. Perhaps a sword so he could increase the carnage when he was out of ammo.

  5. I think the video should have ended with the guy shot once by every person in the office, who, upon observing the threat, drew their black powder pistol and fired. Because that was legal too.

    • +1000

      maybe the reason that this did not happen is that the guy had a nightmare about this the night before, so he went looking for a gun free zone beforehand.

      • As suggested, that would have been great. Ah, but then it would have been a pro-gun commercial and what media outlet would show it?

  6. I’m amazed that comments aren’t turned off. Although it’s just the same old tired unsupported statements, from both sides, so it doesn’t really mean anything. No wars will ever be won in the youtube comments section.

    • Perhaps not, but it is heartening to see anti – gun videos being given the thumbs down and blasted in comments. I find the disabling of comments in most anti gun videos to be even more disturbing. It is clear that discussion, discourse, and dissention are not welcome.

    • ” unsupported statements, from both sides,”

      Can you give me an example of an unsupported statement from the pro-freedom side?

      • I’m not going to go back through the comments and find them, but if you spend time on gun sites (and I know you do), you’ll recognize them. It’s the same statements that are repeated over and over, and they’re probably supported somewhere, but never in the youtube comments themselves. That’s what I was referring to.

  9. Are they serious? Gun laws have changed! They’re already much more restrictive than when folks used muskets.

    • Seriously. Didn’t any of those dumbasses see The Patriot? Tackle the bastard while he’s reloading!

  13. Guns have changed….. but the need for self-defense hasn’t.

    Don’t be a victim. Return fire.

  14. Repeat with Giordani rifle- see the results. Technology was not as primitive as people would like to believe at the time.

  15. I seem to recall a guy by the name of Blackbeard got around this problem by just loading himself down with pistols.

  16. This is stupid; the way media is distributed has changed, should we change the first amendment to the constitution?

  17. The anti- gun left always wants citizen gun owners to return to the Stone Age while leaving govt, the single greatest agent of mass murder, with a monopoly on force.

    This rifle commonly employed a bayonet — why didn’t he use it? It’s also a lethal impact weapon. Most RevWar era soldiers carried “side arms”. A sword. And Benjamin Martin was quite effective with his tomahawk in the 2002 movie Patriot.

    Common weapons–rifles, pistols, swords, knives, war clubs, every terrible implement of the soldier–is the birth right of the American.

      • They work better when you load ’em with a ball, which this guy didn’t; that paper cartridge fell with far too great a thunk to’ve been empty.

  18. Times and guns have changed. If this guy was really a man of the past, he would have had a second or third firearm in his belt. He would have also had a hatchet or a bayonet or both with him. The guy he was trying to kill would have then drawn his own musket and shot him dead for missing.

    Found this…

    Equipment of a Militiaman

    The Continental army often used the local militia to help out. The militia, made up of male citizens over sixteen years of age, was the defense force of each state. Regiments of militia were called up for service by the governor or the commanding general to serve for a campaign or for a period of time as needed. These soldiers were told what equipment they had to bring with them.

    The militia soldier carried equipment that looked different from that of the Continental soldier but that usually performed the same or similar function. His knapsack was generally made from linen or canvas and sometimes painted. His haversack and canteen were usually similar to those used by the Continentals. He also had an ax and a blanket.

    A militia rifleman carried his rifle, knife, tomahawk—a light ax, water bottle, a powderhorn for his black powder, and a hunting pouch that held other shooting supplies. Sometimes a patch knife, used to cut a patch of cloth, and a loading block, which held patched bullets enabling the rifleman to load quicker, were attached to the strap of the hunting pouch. In addition, a charger measured the amount of powder to put into the rifle when loading.

  21. I do not know what got into me but, yesterday, I decided to post some comments on a “Occupy the NRA” thread on Facebook. After my initial post, which was not inflammatory, I proceeded to respectfully answer some follow-up questions by other posters. Most pertained to explaining why most internet sales presently go through a background check process, since they clearly thought none do. I even garnered 3 “likes” to my original post. Within about 5 hours all of my postings were deleted. (I know. Shocking.) This caused me to wonder: does TTAG permit respectful pro-gun control posts? I would not be overly upset to learn they were weeded out since the point of the blog is for pro-Second Amendment individuals to have an open forum to discuss firearms issues, both political and non-political. I was just curious.

    • Oh yeah. If you hang around, you’ll see them. He hasn’t been around too much recently, but the top contender for a while was a guy called MikeB302000. He was even given posts by Robert, not just allowed to comment.

    • The only comments that get edited or deleted here are those that are abusive, pretty much. Pro-disarmament comments are not edited or deleted, but they aren’t terribly common, for a couple reasons. First, for my part, if the pro-disarmament comments are of the Facebook-style variety, long on emotion but short on reason, I am unapologetically scornful of them, and have and will respond appropriately, usually along the lines of “You seem lost. Facebook is back that way.” You usually don’t hear much from them after that; it’s debatable whether that’s due more to my stellar rhetorical skills or simply because posters like that are usually hit-and-run anyway, and never really intended on getting involved in a running conversation.

      Second, the facts are on our side. Even reasonable, respectful, non-Facebook pro-disarmament posters don’t generally stick around long when presented with evidence that negates their position. I assume they move on to greener pastures, with less well-informed opposition.

      • I’m a pretty fair litigator with a solid understanding of both the law and academic studies relative to firearms. After my experience with the Occupiers, I don’t think stellar rhetorical skills or facts really get you anywhere with this people. And I say that as someone who enjoys your commentary on TTAG. Much better commentary than just plain ol’ “Matt.”

    • Check the achives back around Dec 14-15. There were lots of antis and some decently long discussions. I’d bet they’re all still up.

    • From where he hit the doorway, I’d say it was a botched head shot. Perhaps the gun was sighted with the bayonet affixed, and without it was off a tidge?

      He WAS close, judging from where the divot appears. Casual aim bad.

  23. Pretty sure Ed would have cooked up some bombs instead if all he had was available was a musket…

  24. I would like to see an alternate video that shows everyone carrying and this guy walking in with his musket. Instead of everyone cowering in fear they draw down on the guy and he turns around and walks right back out.

  25. WE need a video that shows an old 1770’s vintage wooden printing press . then imply that freedom of speech doesn’t extend to TV, computers, or radio.

  26. As for creating a compelling response to these anti 2A videos – How about a montage of defensive gun use reenactments? The mother who protected her children – the man who stopped a knife attack but didn’t have to fire a shot – the convenience store clerk who saved his own life…

  27. There are more dislikes than likes on that video… By a margin of over 1000. Winning hearts and minds across the Internet?

Comments are closed.