Amy Schumer did a skit on Comedy Central about buying guns on a Home Shopping Network knockoff. Before you watch it, try and imagine just how bad that skit might be. Then double it.
What did I tell you? First of all, it wasn’t funny. More importantly, it was factually inaccurate.
“You can absolutely get a gun if you have several felonies, as long as you buy it on the Internet or at a gun show.”
Ummm… no. That’s not what the law says. Federal law is very clear that felons cannot own guns unless their rights have been restored by a judge. It is also illegal for a private citizen to sell a gun to someone they know or suspect cannot own a gun. The “I don’t know and I don’t want to know, just give me your money and here is a gun” approach is, at best, ethically dubious, and at worst, a crime.
A study from The University of Chicago Crime Lab confirmed what the FBI has said that criminals do not get guns at gun shows. They overwhelmingly get them on the street from other criminals. What was interesting to learn is that gangs maintain gun libraries and criminals treat guns as disposable, buying and selling them frequently so that they reduce the risk of being caught with a gun that can be traced to a crime.
*Holding up a Glock pistol* “Just a reminder to all the parents at home, these make perfect stocking suffers for as young as… it doesn’t matter.”
While in most states, she is technically correct that is no minimum age necessary to be allowed to shoot a handgun, those laws – and common sense – have provisions that allow minors to shoot handguns only under proper adult supervision. But of course that’s not what she was getting at. The implication being that any kid of any age can just have whatever guy they want whenever they want it because… that is the same, worn out, straw man argument that the NRA wants to arm kids with Uzis.
“Even a blind person can see what a great deal this is, and can take advantage of this deal by buying a gun. Totally legal.”
Yes it is. Physical handicaps are not a justification for denying someone their Constitutionality protected rights. Amy Schumer is a SJW type, so perhaps I’ll throw an SJW word back at her, she’s an ableist, thinking that only able-bodied people have civil liberties. Just to further rebuke her, here is a video of a guy with no arms shooting a pistol.
Caller: “I wanted to buy a lot of these but I’m a suspected terrorist on the no-fly list.”
Amy: “You’re fine, sweet potato fries.”
First of all, the No-Fly List is not a terrorist watch list. It is a disaster than just about anybody can be put on for any reason. In this country, your civil liberties cannot be taken away by a bureaucrat. Just because some anonymous government stooge puts your name into a list, a list that they don’t have to tell you that your name is being put on and is impossibly difficult to get your name off of, does not mean that your Constitutionality protected civil liberties are forfeit. There is a reason the Democrat campaign against “no-fly loophole” died fast. Even liberals got uneasy about just how Orwellian the no-fly list has become.
Then the video ends with the male co-host shooting himself in the foot because of terrible trigger discipline, then with an ad for Everytown.
The biggest tragedy of this video is that it is not funny. If this turd was YouTube video for Everytown, that would be one thing. But this was shown on Comedy Central, which is supposed to be funny. South Park is funny. Key & Peele was funny. Amy Shumer has just become a nanny-state loving, Social Justice advocating, hypocritical scold who has turned her show into a weekly 30 min SJW PSA.
When I finished this post, I clicked back to the Comedy Central tab and the next Amy Schumer clip started playing. It just went to prove my point that Amy Schumer is an SJW with a PSA fora TV show, so I decided to update my post to hammer that home with you.
The skit is called New Twitter Button, and is a mock tech news bit on a new Twitter shortcut that sends rape and death threats to women. Do not for a second think that I am defending rape and death threats, or any other sort of threat of physical or sexual violence online. But the reality of online harassment if very different than this SJW scolding on the issue.
As it turns out, men are more often the victims of harassment online. Men receive more threats of death and physical harm. Men get called names more than women online. It is true however, that women do receive the brunt of sexually themed threats. This last point makes sense, in a weird way, since most trolls are straight males that sexual threats would be directed at women.
We’ve known for a while that the internet turns some people into psychopaths. They act out online because they are protected by anonymity and distance, causing hurt that they couldn’t do in person face-to-face.
The problem with the discussion about online trolling is that it is almost entirely couched as how to stop trolling against women because women take trolling harder and women are not welcome on the internet. If you want to deal with trolls, let’s deal with trolls. There are difficulties in doing that. In the US there are protections on freedom of speech and privacy that make it hard to define some forms of harassment criminal and to identify the real identity of trolls. Trolls may live in a different state or even a different country which makes enforcing the law against them even harder. Technology also makes it difficult, every time someone comes up with a piece of anti-troll software, there comes along a better troll to get around it.
But if you are going to take the attitude of “send death threats to 10 men and nobody gives a shit, but threaten to rape one woman and now we have to end trolling.” That seems a bit unfair.