In this second SOTT Talk Radio show, co-hosts Joe Quinn and Niall Bradley discuss the recent furor over proposed US government gun control legislation in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, and the implications for Americans' right to bear arms. Many 2nd Amendment advocates insist that a 'well-armed citizenry' is the last defense against tyrannical government, but are 80 million armed Americans really the solution to the problems of a corrupt government? An armed populace has not hindered the destruction of other civil liberties in the US to date, so is it a question of the curtailment of gun rights opening the way to tyrannical government, or is tyrannical government already here?

Along with their special guest, Jason Martin, a life-long student of martial arts and the history of warfare and combat theory, Joe and Niall discuss the root causes of the culture of violence in the USA, the history that gave rise to the US constitution and the Bill of Rights, citizens' justified fears that they cannot rely on the corrupt authorities to protect them and what kind of a revolution it would take for people to achieve real justice.

Running Time: 02:23:00

Download: MP3

Previous articles on Gun Control:

Liars, Gun Control and Money in a Culture of Violence

Here's the transcript:


Niall: Hello and welcome to SOTT Talk Radio. Today is January 27th, 2013 and the title of tonight's show is Gun Control USA: Do guns protect civil liberties? I'm your host, Niall Bradley, and my co-host is Joe Quinn.

Joe: Hi.

Niall: And with us tonight we have a special guest, Jason Martin. Jason, say hi.

Jason: Hi, Jason.


Niall: Jason is a ... Jason is with us tonight. You may have noticed he had an article on about this very topic we'll be talking about tonight.

Jason: No I didn't, they forced me to write it. [laughter] They held a gun to my head. [laughter] They're a whole bunch of gun nuts.

Joe: No, but seriously you should check out the article ...

Jason: Yeah, yeah you should.

Joe: ... if you get a chance. On, it's right at the top of the page. I mean, ya know you could check it out after the show, for a little more information, in case we ... we missed out something that Jason covered in his article. But first of all let's do some introductions. This Jason needs to ... [laughter] Tell us, just who he is and why we have dragged him [laughter] onto the show here this evening.

Jason: [laughter] I dunno I mean I ... I like to consider myself a god-loving and veterate republican gun nut. Not really, you know, I mean I'm a programmer, I'm a sort of a life-long student of martial arts and strategy and combat and violence and, you know, when I was very young one of my mother's friends was a sixth degree black belt in ninjitsu. Of course I was like ... I was, ya know, six years old at the time, you know, and ...

Joe: And everybody loves ninjas.

Jason: [laughter] And everybody loves ninjas, you know, so I was like 'Will you teach me in ... will you teach me ninjitsu?' and he was like 'Yeah, okay'. So he kind of Mr. Miagi-ed me a little bit. He never actually taught me how to throw a punch or anything. It was all a bunch of ... out of the mystical stuff. But I was kind of hooked on martial arts and so throughout my life I've studied various ones, you know, Isshin Ryu Karate, Wing Tsun, [inaudible] Wah Lum Kung Fu, and Aikido. I spent a lot of time studying Aikido and Tai Chi and I do ... right now I do a lot of Kali Arnis and things like that and I'm, ya know, kinda into the Dog Brothers and they're very much into, sort of like, theories of law enforcement and correctional enforcement, things like that. And they talk a lot about violent crime in the streets and dealing with that, self defense. So that's where my particular expertise is, in that department, would come from, is, you know, I spent a lot of time studying it, studying the various different self defense mechanisms, studying guns, empty hand, knife fighting, knife defense, things like that. So, I mean, that's where I come from, from a certain perspective.

Joe: Well that's pretty much what the ... what we're gonna be talking about tonight. It's self defense, the right to self defense, the right to bear arms. And the reason we're talking about this is, anyone who's listened to the show from last week knows that we discussed, pretty much in-depth, the Sandy Hook massacre, and apart from all the gibber-juicing and massacre and a lot of dead children and people, the one major thing that the Sandy Hook massacre produced, on a national level, within the US, was a major debate that's still ongoing, about guns and the idea of gun control and whether or not, you know, some new laws are required to control guns, particularly assault rifles, for example, as a result of Sandy Hook, done in an effort to ... to prevent or stop such things happening again.

Niall: Well, that's exactly it, I mean, gun control's high on the agenda and what you notice is the ... no distinction is made between mass shootings, such as what we discussed last week ... the Sandy Hook, and of course there were several other horrific shootings before that. There's no distinction made between these kinds of outrages. And the background ... let's say regular homicide rates, in the US, you would never hear of gun control being put to the top of the agenda in the mainstream media, unless something horrific had happened.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Niall: So these mass shootings by ... there's like a pretext there or whatever you wanna call it ...

Jason: Well ...

Niall: ... where ...

Jason: ... well, I mean, okay so ...

Niall: ... gun control is ...

Jason: ... obviously ...

Niall: ... top of the agenda.

Jason: Obviously, we have this problem when we talk about gun control where we're actually talking about a very complex topic that isn't a ...

Niall: Extremely complex.

Jason: ... cause and effect type situation

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: it's not like ...

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: ... it's not still cause and effect. So what you have in modern Western society, in fact most societies, is you have this kind of like ... you have push-button legislation, you know, that like ... people like rats in a cage, pushing a button, hoping to get the treat out. And the way that they do this is they think that they can legislate safety, you know, they think that law prevents crime. And they've been doing this for like 10,000 years, you know, easily a 1,000 years on the books. They keep making laws to be safer and they're never safer. Never. And it never works. Plus ...

Joe: Never?!? [sarcasm]

Jason: No, it never works, because laws don't prevent crime, they punish crime. Law is about ... law attempts to be a deterrent for a crime but, you know, murder has been a capital offense for years and yet people still do it. So obviously it doesn't work as a deterrent, right? Now that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have laws, on the contrary, we should have laws, but we should understand that when we make a law for safety that we are deluding ourselves, because it doesn't work. Laws don't prevent them, they punish them. They give us a way to pursue a criminal after the crime has been committed.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And what a lot of people, especially like the gun lobby, are trying to argue is that they want to find ... they have ... they think that they have found a way to help them to prevent crimes, in the act, by ... [throat clear] excuse me ... by being armed, you know.

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: So, a large part of the debate is based on this fallacious reasoning of gun control will lead to less crime, right, which is false.

Niall: And make you safer.

Jason: And make you safer by that. Now, of course there is this problem of, you know, you get a lot of talk from both sides, right? But they're usually kind of actually arguing a little bit different points, you see. Because, the people who want the gun control, they want less gun crime, right? But what they're actually arguing for is less shooting incidents, right? And the other guys, the gun lobby, are actually arguing for the opposite. They want more shooting instances and less of other types of crime. They want less robbery, less rape, they want less physical assaults, right? And the other people are saying, well, getting ... because they don't understand guns, they don't carry guns, they're kind of very pacifist, fabianist, type of individuals, wait for the police to come - this type of idea, right? They ... they don't understand guns, and to them, they only ... their only experience with guns is in the media, they see Rambo's got an M60 [vocalized machine gun sound]. So that's how they look at any kind of gun-toting person ... any person that has a gun. They imagine he's Rambo and he's got this big, giant chain gun - blowing away hundreds of people. That's their only real experience with guns, they don't shoot 'em, they don't own 'em, right? And they think that shooting is the worst thing, it's the worst thing. And then when you get one of these Sandy Hook kind of incidents ...

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: ... they see that it can be very bad, it is horrible for children to get shot, but it's just as horrible for children when they get stabbed and it's just as horrible for children to die from infectious diseases or to drown in pools. There's all these other situations that children are dying from that we also need to be looking at. The worst offender of child death is infectious disease from lack of healthcare. The second one is actually drowning. It's kind of interesting that in the United States more children drown in residential pools than are killed by guns. That doesn't mean that we should ban pools, but it also doesn't mean that we shouldn't be looking at gun violence in schools because, obviously, gun violence in schools is completely unacceptable in every sense of the word. I mean, violence in schools is unacceptable. And the thing is is that they think that banning a gun is gonna end violence in schools. So they're not really aware of the fact that, okay, first of all, in countries that have very strict gun laws, there are still crimes in schools. They're still shootings in schools. They're much reduced in the shooting aspect because when you ban guns or when you legislate guns, heavily, it reduces shooting crime. That's obvious, this is a logical conclusion - less guns means less people getting shot.

Niall: By whom?

Jason: By guns, because they're aren't any. But, unfortunately, what it ends up doing, and it is very true, and it's very much proven, is that it ends ... the crime that was shooting now gets spread out into all the other crimes because a large amount of shooting crimes can or should be attributed to ... to kind of self defense shootings and things like this, you know. But you don't really have statistics of those things. It's very difficult to find accurate statistics - it's not difficult to find someone claiming they have 'em. Hold on a second ...

Joe: What ... what about ... what about the argument though that, I mean, there's a ... there's obviously a lethality, with guns, that you don't find with other weapons. Or ease of ... maybe not ease of use ...

Jason: In truth, that's ...

Joe: ... but lethality.

Jason: ... that's not entirely true. That's not entirely true. Guns are not substantially more lethal than any other type of weapon. I mean, you're ... you're ... I think it's a ... you have a 3in 4 chance of dying from a knife wound and you have a 1 in 4 chance of dying from a single gunshot. But, of course, in these cases you have multiple gunshots and they're in a tight-closed room with a bunch of kids.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: I mean, you're talking about a lethal situation.

Joe: What ... what about the idea that guns, in some way, are easier to use or ...

Jason: Of course!

Joe: ... than say knives. I mean, you take the average person ...

Jason: Aww no no no no no nonononono. A knife is immanently concealable. A knife requires no bullets, no gunpowder, no registration, you can make it in the back of your house, you can ... you can make it out of a screwdriver. In fact, I think it's right here in France, a lot of the gypsies, one of the things they're doing is carrying screwdrivers that have had the tips sharpened even more and using those as shivs against people.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Okay, you know, I mean, the knife is the ... is the ... was one of the deadliest and one of the most facile weapons. And, you know, seeing the results of knife crime ... if people who were talking about this whole gun violence stuff were to see like, you know, what it looks like when somebody has been sliced and stabbed twenty, thirty times from a knife fight, they would really be like 'Woah, that's ... it ... this is messed up.' You know, I mean, arguing the little details, the little gradations between - well, it's a little bit more dangerous here or there - is not really, you know, pertinent because violence should should be the unacceptable thing.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Not the particular type of violence. Not how it finds its expression. Because whether or not that expression is raping women, robbing homeowners, stabbing people, or shooting kids in schools, that expression of violence has to be seen as unacceptable and people should be trying to find out how can we deal with the violence.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And one of the suggestions is let's ban the guns or let's legislate the guns or control the guns, lets do background checks. This doesn't work, you know, because ...

Joe: It's not a bad idea and it doesn't necessarily mean that there's some ulterior motive or some conspiracy behind this for the government, for example ...

Jason: Noo ... no.

Joe: ... to take away your guns ...

Jason: The government does not wanna take away your guns.

Joe: ... it's just a bad idea.

Jason: The government does not wanna take away your guns. I mean, only ... only very stupid, insecure governments wanna take away guns.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: The guns ... small countries that are very very insecure in themselves wanna take away guns because they're not very progressive in their political thinking. See, Americans that ... the American political elite are not stupid people and they realize and recognize that the size and technical skill of their paramilitary police and the institutions of the government are so armed in such an inordinate ... I mean, it's just such a disparity between the arms of ... that are even accessible to the population and the arms that are accessible to the government, that the government has absolutely nothing to fear with you even owning an AR-15 Bushmaster. They don't have anything to fear if you owned M-60s. I mean, really, they don't. From ... the government doesn't. Perhaps other people would, but the government, in and of itself, doesn't. I mean, when the Waco ... the guys in Waco, Texas - they were stockpiling guns, the ATF said you can't do this, what'd they do? Send ...

Joe: They sent in tanks, yeah.

Jason: ... they send in the tanks and the FBI. I mean the ...

Joe: Flame throwers and helicopters.

Jason: ... Branch Davidians didn't even have a chance, forgetting whatever their ... their religious or political opinions were. I don't care about that. I'm just talking about like ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... these people who come up and say we're gonna resist the government and nooo, you're not. I mean, in 1776 you could resist the government because you didn't have such a ... such a wide range of military hardware and considering that you have today. I mean, you know, but today, in order for you to resist the government, you would have to have M-16s and cruise missiles in your backyard and surface-to-air missile batteries, maybe ... maybe a couple of, you know...

Joe: Predator drones ...

Jason: Predator drones, you know ...

Joe: You'd have to have your own army, basically.

Jason: You'd have to have your own army, and even then you wouldn't be guaranteed success because of the nature of modern warfare.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Which people don't study at all. They don't think about ... they think that they're gonna do a revolution and all they're gonna do is get themselves and other people killed. I mean, most of the people who would suffer from an attempted revolution would be ...

Joe: Civilians ...

Jason: ... regular civilians, everyday Joes.

Joe: That's what has happened historically and that's ... in war even. In war, revolution ... the people who suffer the most, the people who die ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: ... the most, in the greatest numbers, are civilians who essentially don't really want anything to do with it.

Jason: Right, so you have this sort of discussion of the second amendment and your second amendment rights. And I should state up-front that I'm 100 percent for second amendment rights because I don't think that you should ever remove a right that you've ... that you've won.

Joe: Yeah, well ...

Jason: I think it's dishonorable to the people who died for that right and thought it was very very important, unless you can show, with some serious proof, that that's the cause of a real problem. Which I don't think is true. I don't think that the second amendment is responsible for the deaths at Sandy Hook.

Joe: No.

Jason: I don't think it's a simple cause and effect situation there.

Joe: No. And yeah, I would agree with you and I ... I mean, all this guy ... one of the main things that this guy, Piers Morgan ...

Jason: Oohh Jesus Christ ...

Joe: ... has been on this [chuckling] mission ... been on the US ... and we're gonna rag on Piers a little bit here ...

Jason: Oh jesus [inaudible]...

Joe: ... 'cause one of his main points has been on ... on every time he's dealt with this, on his show, in recent weeks, he's been extremely critical of anybody ... and the people he's had on have been people who expressed this idea of the second amendment is there to protect the population ...

Jason: Right.

Niall: From tyrannical government.

Joe: ... from ... from ... yeah, from tyranny.

Jason: Which is why it was there!

Joe: Okay yeah ...

Jason: It's true!

Joe: Yeah, that's true. And Piers turns around ...

Jason: Well it worked.

Joe: ... and says ... and ridicules these people and says 'Do you really think that ... are you crazy enough to think that, right now, your government ... this ... this US government would be planning some kind of tyrannical takeover of the country, putting people into FEMA camps' ... all this kind of stuff. But, he's, he's missing the point and he's ... and I think he's either stupid or he's deliberately missing the point. Because the point is that it is immanently logical for, given history, given the events that've transpired throughout history, where dictatorships have risen up in countries and persecuted the people and kills lots of people, it's completely natural and logical for people to, in a country, to have the right to bear arms to resist against that kind of thing happening. If you look at the broad sweep of history, it makes sense, have it there. And it's ... it's ... he tries to frame it as in 'do you think the US government, like dear, sweet, cute, you know ...

Jason: Cuddly.

Joe: ... Kenyan Obama [laughter] is going to, well allegedly, is going to turn around and enslave everybody?' But that's not the point. The point is that you have a law on the books for all of history, for the entire history, for the future, for 50, 100 years. Who ... how can Piers turn around and say that 'it would never happen ever' given ... given what we know of history ...

Niall: Yeah.

Joe: ... how can you say it would never ever happen in 50, 100, 200 years, that some kind of dictatorship would rise up in the US? I mean, just on that point alone he's completely wrong. He's, I mean ...

Jason: All right. This is the problem with like the ... there are certain people in the world that have like just, kind of like addled brains, that have the inability whatsoever to conceive of anything outside of a linear progression of history. We go from the caveman to the astronaut.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: You know, there's no cyclic nature to history at all, right? From then, everything gets better, okay? And it cannot go backward, nothing can be retrograde ... there's no retrograde evolution or devolution and things like this, so they kind of think like that. So, that they ... they have this kind of these typical weak arguments because from they're unable ... they're unable to conceive of the idea that anything could fall apart ... that anything could go back to that way.

Joe: But they don't understand the truth of history, and that's why ...

Jason: They're partially right, and I'll explain to you why they're partially right. The second amendment and the first amendment are not there to protect ... to protect the minority of the majority, they're there to protect a minority of people. And there was at this time with all the founding fathers the understanding that ... that democracy represented a kind of tyranny of the majority that ... they wanted to have this democracy, but they wanted to make sure that the majority of the people could not, through emotional manipulation, be used as an instrument by a clever man to suppress and oppress a minority part of the population. They didn't wanna have an ochlocracy. They didn't wanna have mob rule, okay? So this is why Jefferson and stuff, in the declaration of independence, was talking about inalienable rights.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: These sort of basic human rights that can't be violated.

Joe: That are self evident.

Jason: That we find these truths to be self evident.

Joe: That is, people are free, they have the right to freedom of movement, freedom of speech.

Jason: Yeah, and also the freedom to defend themselves against the government. Most specifically ...

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: Now, it's obvious from the way the constitution was written at that time and the fact that many of the states rejected it outright without the bill of rights, which is the second document of the amendments of the constitution. They refused to ratify the constitution. Some of them said that they would ratify it just because they promised the bill of rights, and they did so. But several states also said we're not gonna do anything until we see the bill of rights. And some of the things they demanded were, you know, the first amendment, the second amendment. The third amendment was very important at that time, you know, sort of like no soldiers sleeping in your home type of stuff, and the fourth and fifth amendment, those are really sort of very important amendments in the constitution. The first one is the freedom of religion and speech and expression and the ability to gather together to express your dissatisfaction and to petition the government for redress. The second amendment, of course, is to keep and bear arms. You know, the fourth amendment against illegal search and seizures ...

Joe: So, kind of what you're saying, in just a kind of sum up of what you're saying here is that the second amendment is it's ... good, it makes sense, it's ... there's nothing wrong with it, there's nothing wrong with the right to bear arms, but that, at the moment, the idea that the second amendment would be used to protect the people against tyranny is kind of obsolete.

Jason: It's completely obsolete in today's world. It's completely obsolete. They couldn't have foreseen the type of weapons that exist, I mean, in that sense a lot of the people's arguments against guns is, say the, you know, the founding fathers couldn't have foreseen the assault rifle and things like this. And that is somewhat true. That doesn't mean that you should ban them but, I mean ...

Joe: Okay.

Jason: But the validity of the second amendment is not useful, right now, in the context of the current world that we're in.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: But a right is easier kept than recovered.

Joe: Yeah. There's no reason to get rid of it.

Jason: And a lot of people died and thought it was very very important and you have an obligation to honor their wishes throughout history.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Okay? If you're ... if you're a patriot of this country you have an obligation, unless there is a real pressing reason why you shouldn't, alright? And this whole gun crime stuff is not a product ... because you did ... you have ... you didn't have these crimes, you've had guns throughout the entire history of America. Everyone's always owned guns, in fact, gun ownership is kind of dipping a little bit but that kind of stuff comes in cycles too, so you can't look at statistics for like a five year period and say that this is indicative of the ... of the nature of the country, you know? Gun ownership's kind of dipping and stuff like that, but we have this crime rise going on of this ... with this rise of the spree killing, we've got like 65 of these school murders and stuff like that. It turns out that most of them aren't really in the same class as like Sandy Hook.

Joe: All right. Yeah, we ... well we addressed that point last week [inaudible]

Jason: Yeah, addressed that point last week. So, you have that kind of thing but it's like people ... there've always been these guns, guns, guns and now suddenly there's crime and how exactly do people make that connection, that it must be because of the existence of guns? It's sort of like, do they imagine that, you know, the guns we're building got magical powers over the years, passing from one evil gun owner to the next until the point is it's like some sort of horror movie where, you know, you ... you touch some magical artifact [Joe laughs] and it releases demons into the world, you know?

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Did guns ... how did guns suddenly start causing this? Because it's ... in my recent memory ...

Joe: Okay. Let me just interrupt ya there for a second. We have a ... we have a call, I think here, so we're gonna ...

Jason: Oohh dear.

Joe: ... we're gonna take this.

Caller 1: Hello.

Joe: Hello? Hi.

Caller 1: My name's Danny. I'm calling all the way from [inaudible]. I'm ... I'm listening to what you're saying, right? But I have to agree like where Piers ... Piers [inaudible] is saying. We ... if ... I don't see [inaudible] possibility[?], as Americans, that the government is gonna do tyranny to us, I don't see it at all. I don't see it in 20 years, I don't see it in a 100 years. And the problem I have with gun owners is that you're basically bringing fear to America.

Jason: Hold on a second. You're seriously ... you're seriously choppy ...

Joe: Yeah, you ... we've got a really bad ...

Caller Danny: [inaudible] Sorry, can you hear me?

Joe: ... connection. We've got a really bad connection with ... connection with ya there. Can you ... can you try and re- [chuckling] can you repeat your question again?

Jason: Wait wait, hold on. Hold on.

Caller Danny: Okay.

Jason: Just just answer ... just hold on, hold on dude, hold on dude ... just chill out. Because I think I understood what he asked so I'm gonna repeat it back to you in case we can't get such a great connection.

Niall: That's a good idea.

Jason: Okay? I think that what you're saying is that he agrees with Piers Morgan because he doesn't see the government becoming tyrannical in one year, 10 years, 20 years, right? Is that what you're saying?

Caller Danny: Yes. Yes ...

Jason: Okay.

Caller Danny: ... that's what I was saying.

Jason: That's a total [inaudible]...

Caller Danny: [inaudible] Hello.

Joe: Go ahead.

Caller Danny: Okay, and the problem I feel is ... the problem with gun owners, I feel that you're greeling ... bringing an institute of fear in our country, of assuming things that never ... that's not happening. We're Americans! And it's either we live with fear or we live with hope. I'd rather live with hope [inaudible] ...

Jason: [inaudible] ... I gotta say ...

Caller Danny: [inaudible] I don't wanna live with [inaudible] been too much a society of fear. Fear of [inaudible], fear of this(?), fear of that(?). You don't [inaudible] live with fear.

Jason: Okay, okay dude. You're really choppy, but I kinda hear what you're saying. He's saying that ... that he ... he believes in hope, he believes in the good stuff. He doesn't wanna live in a culture of fear and he feels that the gun lobby is creating a culture of fear, right?

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And I can see where you're coming from, dude. I totally can. And I can see that also, for a certain part of the population of the United States, there will never be a tyranny. You have to kinda understand that, you know. It's ... people look at tyranny and they don't really kinda understand it. What the ... what tyrannies do is they suppress the borders of society, the small, the outside outskirts of it, but the center, the creamy center of society is almost never really fundamentally oppressed because they don't do anything that needs to be oppressed. They're just consumers, they just do this stuff.

What ends up happening is you have a lot of people in society who, for whatever reason, kinda wanna do their own thing, not necessarily a negative part for society, but they just wanna do their own thing, and the government kinda doesn't want that to happen. So they get oppressed. The oppression of minorities. And that does happen. I mean, it's unfair to say, looking at the history of America, that it's very very recent that we live in this small tiny band, where we've just come out of the civil rights movement, we've just come out of the allowing, you know, black people and women to vote period. You know, we're in this tiny band, and what a lot of people are saying is not so much that the government will become a tyranny, it's that the ... it's been too little of amount of time of goodness, in America, this good feelings of this women can vote, black people can vote, 'hey we're getting rid of racism', we're working to this stuff. It's been too short for them to feel secure, so they're afraid of that stuff. So they're not trying to create a culture of fear, they're saying that already ... they're a little bit saying 'hold on a second', you know, things have not been good enough, long enough.
And that is some of the reasons why the second amendment was put into place, it's why they had this cause of inalien rights because they didn't want somebody to give away that right during a peacetime, which happens in every culture ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... throughout history, there are times of peace. But they had ... they were afraid at the time because it was cyclical and that every time that there was a long stretch of peace, there would then be followed by a long stretch of wars which, I don't know, isn't happening at all right now. It's like ... not like we haven't been in ten years' worth of war, okay? And then, after that, because of the loss of life and because of the stress on the economy, then immediately followed by that is a dangerous period where tyrannies can pop up. And so that's what people are seeing and they're afraid of that and so they're saying that hold on, we're ... we want to ensure that it doesn't happen. And that's kind of what ...

Joe: Well ...

Jason: ... I see the gun lobby's perspective as ...

Joe: ...Yeah. Are you still there, caller?

Caller Danny: Yes, I'm here.

Joe: Well ...

Caller Danny: And that's ... that's the problem I have with the whole [inaudible]... don't live in fear. That same right that we do, the right to speak, the right of [inaudible] ... to go to Canada. You don't have everybody has the right to have a gun, but they have the same right of the right to speak, the right of things. Many country ... we're not the only country who has those rights, like we've said, and ...

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Danny: ... and to act like we're the only one is being hypocrite. We're not! We're not! And if we're ...

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Danny: ... gonna be honest, you have to study every other country who do have the same rights as us, but don't have guns. How do you explain that? They have the same right as us, they have many different histories, but when you look at it now, they have the same right, they don't have a gun problem, and you don't need a gun, and you still have the right to speak, to do what we do.

Joe: Absolutely, yeah. That's a good point.

Jason: Okay.

Joe: Thanks for your call.

Jason: Thanks for your call, man.

Niall: Thank you very much.

Caller Danny: Thank you.

Joe: So, I mean, that guy, we didn't get his name but he was ...

Jason: I think his name was Donny. Didn't he say his name was Don?

Joe: I didn't ... I didn't quite catch it. But, he was ...

Jason: He was a nice kid.

Joe: Yeah. He was basically, you know, decrying the fact that, you know, the whole gun debate now and guns in American society, in general, create a ...

Niall: An atmosphere of fear.

Joe: An atmosphere of fear in the country, but maybe the point there is that the US government kinda thrives on fear.

Jason: Well, sometimes yeah.

Joe: Well, I mean, I mean they ... they achieve a lot ...

Jason: Government wants the fear of their power. The police ...

Joe: Well not just the fear of their power but look what, I mean, he mentioned fear of Muslims ...

Jason: Right.

Joe: ... at one point there. Obviously the fear of Muslims ...

Jason: Right.

Joe: ... has been deliberately manipulated ...

Jason: Sure, sure.

Joe: ... into the American mind and into the, you know, the Western civilization.

Jason: Mmhmm.

Joe: The mind of Western civilization. Now that's a completely false fear, but they do it for specific reasons.

Jason: Mmm, yeah.

Joe: So, I mean, it seems to me that if ... like getting back to what you were saying earlier on, Jason, that the government doesn't wanna take your guns away, it wants people to have guns. It doesn't really matter to them. If they have to choose, they'll choose let people have guns because, if this caller was right, if Donny, if that's his name, was right then if that serves to increase the atmosphere of fear in the USA ...

Jason: Right.

Joe: Well then that's simply going to lead people to be more dependent on authority ... on the authorities to protect them, and that's what the government wants. Ultimately, the government wants people to remember, as we said last week, to remember ...

Joe, Jason, Niall: Why they need us.

Joe: Right. So, I mean, sure, he's talking about an ideal ... ideal world, type of thing, where there is no fear ...

Jason: You have to understand ...

Joe: ... and everybody lives in peace and hope and stuff, but ...

Jason: For the average American ... that's not even specifically white Americans, it's kind of more like middle class Americans, you know, and a lot of people who, you know, had come from countries that were very bad in consideration to what it's like when they come into the US, that actually life is ... life can be pretty good in America, so you have a really hard time arguing these things to people who haven't lived in abject poverty.

I mean, I lived, you know, for ... for the first, you know, eight years of my life in very abject poverty. So I have been ... I've been on the other side of the tracks. And I know kinda like what's it's like to be there and for most people, America is actually kinda good because America has the illusion of wealth. I mean, it's not real wealth, it's fake wealth, in a certain sense. It's wealth that keeps you occupied so that you never do anything meaningful in life, right?

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: So, nobody in America really builds like giant cathedrals or big statues, you know, no one's dragging around giant stones like they apparently claim that you do or whatever, no one's building pyra ... no one's doing anything great. There's no heroes in America in a certain sense. There's no Hercules, there's ... there's nothing like this. And to maintain this, you have to give people enough sustenance to just kinda live, so they have this whole debt where they have a nice car and TV and they buy their iPhone and they do all this different stuff. They don't actually own those things.

Niall: Yeah, they do it all on credit.

Jason: They do it all on credit. They don't actually own those things, so it's not really wealth but it's the illusion of wealth.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Because, for them, functionally it's the same thing. Before, they lived their lives as peasants and poverty and there was a higher aristo ... an aristocratic high class. It was very decadent and closed off and everyone was very ... wide based beneath them, there was no kinda like middle class and they said 'well this really sucks' and then they came up and now there's, everything's more equally distributed in the sense of this idea of wealth which is really just debt. You don't really have wealth, you don't have anything. And it just keeps you from doing anything worthwhile and important ...

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: ... you know, in a certain sense. It main ... it's basically, society has started to exist simply to continue its existence.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And that's a fair way to operate, in a certain sense, from a government's perspective. They want to maintain their power and the way that they do things and they want to maintain the status quo and most of the people in the country want to do the same. So, for them, the way the world is right now, today, is good. And if the government wants to go off to some other country and take oil or kill people and it's gonna filter back to you, you know, it's outta sight, outta mind.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: I don't care that there's, you know, 7.6 million children dying every year all over the world and 5.5 million of those are from treatable diseases and, you know, all the people starving in the world and all this violence and stuff like that. I don't care that my government may be involved in setting up banana republics and regimes just so they can go and knock 'em down and take their resources, maybe that's happening, maybe not. But, they don't care! Because it doesn't really affect you and ...

Joe: But at the same time there's an underclass in the US, you know ...

Jason: There is absolutely an underclass.

Joe: ... that aren't happy with their lives.

Jason: Absolutely, and that is where the tyranny of America comes in. It's in the low classes, it's in the poor classes. The ... the sort of the ... the strong legs and back of the society that are just there to sort of like, ya know, work and work and work.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: And the ... the working class ...

Joe: But at the same time, even those people buy into the kind of American dream.

Jason: That's the thing! That's the thing! I don't really think so.

Joe: It's forced on them.

Jason: I don't really think so. I mean ...

Joe: Well, I mean, I actually have a [chuckling] clip here of that kind of maybe illustrates the point, at least it illustrated the point for me.

Jason: All right.

Joe: And it's a clip from America's favorite president of all time, George W. Bush ...

Niall: Who said he's America's favorite president?

Joe: I did. From two thou ...

Jason: Oh, I love George Bush. [inaudible] George.

Joe: From 2005, when he was talking at a town hall meeting in Omaha ...

Jason: [giggling]

Joe: ... Nebraska. And a woman in the audience asked a question. We don't actually have the specific question but here's what ... here's her comments and here's what Bush responded.

[begin clip]
Bush: There's a certain comfort to know that the promise is made, will be kept by the government. You don't have to worry.
Woman: That's good, because I work three jobs and I feel like I contribute.
Bush: You work three jobs?
Woman: Three jobs, yes.
Bush: Uniquely American, id'nt it? I mean that is fantastic that you're doin' that.
Bush: Get any sleep?

[end clip]

Joe: There's the clincher, you know.

Niall: 'Get any sleep?'

Joe: 'Get any sleep?'

Jason: The thing is ...

Joe: ... Ha ha. But, for me, what I was getting from her point there was that she was kinda conflicted in the fact that the fact of her life where that she's a single mother and she was having to work three jobs, probably at menial ... basic wage, to ... and she could barely cover her expenses. And as Bush very perceptively noted was that she does, 'cause I think afterward she said 'no, I don't get any sleep actually' you know. But when he said that's uniquely American, you know, and she said ... people applauded.

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: The whole audience applauded. This was uniquely American, that a single mother has to work three jobs at a menial wage just to make ends meet. She doesn't really make ends meet. And that this is her contribution ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: ... to America. And she's hap ... she's meant to be happy with that ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: ... that's uniquely American, that's the American dream.

Jason: Well ...

Joe: And, so, on the one hand, there's the facts of her life which are pretty ... probably pretty ... pretty dire, pretty dismal, she's not havin' a good life. But at the same time, she's being encouraged and the whole audience believes that this is somehow good, you know, and I think that's just one example of this American dream where people, even when they are marginalized socially and impoverished and basically ignored by the powers that be, they're under this intense pressure to believe that they have the best of the best basically, you know. And that, for me, that kind of ultimately is gonna ... it's a kinda pressure cooker, you know. People are eventually gonna maybe, if that continues, people are eventually going to ...

Jason: I mean, the problem is, is like, in order to understand any of these things, you have to go so wide into so many different topics, like psychology here. You have to understand, ya know, kinda like, not just the psychopath but even kinda like the ... sorta the spirit of meanness that exists in the middle classes. The almost kind of desire to torture, kinda like the torturing an animal type of thing. That the most enjoyment for them comes from, not just the idea of the oppressed, but the oppressed being happy with it in a certain sense.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: They want you to be ... they want you to ask for more punishment type of thing. It's just this is the way that they think. And Bush, being extremely psychopathic, ya know, would naturally make that kind of comment and ... we got ... we got a what? Oh yeah, so I'll summa ... sorry I'm [inaudible] ...

Joe: We got, we got a call. I'm not ... I'm not bein' a good ... I'm not keepin' up with these calls here. We got a call from awhile ago. Hi, caller? Can you hear us?

Caller 2: Hello?

Joe: Hi, what's your name?

Caller 2: Hi, this is Genevieve.

Joe: Hi Genevieve. Where're ya callin' from?

Caller Genevieve: I'm actually calling from the United States.
Joe: Okay.

Jason: Well what part of the United States? I'm actually from there.

Niall: [laughter]

Caller Genevieve: Indianaoplis [inaudible]. Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jason: Oooo! Oohh [inaudible]

Joe: Welcome [inaudible].

Caller Genevieve: Big ol' red state.

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: So you've got a ... you got a question or a comment?

Caller Genevieve: Well, the comment that I wanted to make, really, about the gun control issue is that I have a hard time with it because in reading the newspapers, which I do on occasion, and watching any sort of mainstream media, the whole idea of gun control, to me, just further divides humanity.

Jason: 100 percent.

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Genevieve: I think it's a ... I think it's purposefully done ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Genevieve: ... to divide the masses. You know, they're ... oh, it's ... I guess that's the point that I wanted to stress. Because there are so many people out there that still, under one way or the other, are very worried about our guns being taken away when all of our other rights are being stripped away and those aren't being talked about.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Amen. 100 percent.

Joe: Absolutely.

Jason: She's cutting right to the issue that we ... we've kinda been dancing around up until this point which is that, you know, people are arguing about the second amendment, right? But at the end, you know, I mean they ... they've ... they have extraordinary rendition, they have now legislated the right to be able to arrest and detain without trial.

Joe: The NDAA.

Jason: Yeah. Any person to execute them in some cases, to torture them. You're no longer allowed to make protests. They've declared that low-level terrorism.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And which is a violation of your first amendment right to gather together and petition your government for redress.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: Just like that.

Niall: Even your right to private property. I mean, eminent domain [inaudible].

Jason: Yeah, well, eminent domain has always been a problem in the US. I mean, it's always been kinda creeping in the back of a lot of libertarian ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... type of people..

Joe: Yeah, well ...

Jason: ... pointing out that you've never really had a right to property in the US. And when everything's mortgaged, you don't have the right to property anyways.

Joe: Anyways [inaudible]

Jason: It's a moot point, you know.

Joe: Yeah. So ...

Jason: Contractually given it away.

Joe: Yeah, absolutely. So, I mean, that ... that is something we were ... Genevieve, that's something we were goin ... hoping to get into, which was the idea that, basically, this whole gun control debate is, like you said, an attempt at divide and conquer and it's a redirection ...

Caller Genevieve: [inaudible]

Joe: It's a redirection of the real issue which is ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: ... it's directing the issue towards, kind of like saying, this is a social problem that all you Americans need to deal with, it's your problem when, in fact, the frustration and anger, justified frustration and anger, of the American people should be directed at their corrupt leaders.

Caller Genevieve: Correct. Yes and I apologize for jumpin' the gun there.

Joe: No! That's fine, that's fine.

Jason: No! No! No! We're so happy you called.

Caller Genevieve: No pun intended. But [inaudible]


Joe: [inaudible]


Caller Genevieve: It's a ... yeah ...

Jason: [inaudible]

Caller Genevieve: ... as far as a diversionary tactic, yes it is. And it's quite frustrating to be able to see it for what it is and ...

Joe: Yeah. Well, it's extremely important ...

Caller Genevieve: [inaudible]

Joe: ... it's extremely important that people do see it, you know?

Caller Genevieve: Well, if other peo ... if people could become as passionate about all the other rights that have been stripped away instead of the right to bear arms then maybe we might actually be heading somewhere more positive or more hopeful.

Joe: Absolutely.

Caller Genevieve: So ...

Jason: More useful rights.

Caller Genevieve: ... thank you for taking my call.

Joe: No problem.

Jason: Thank you for calling.

Niall: Thanks for calling in.

Caller Genevieve: Right.

Jason: You have a ...

Caller Genevieve: Thank you.

Jason: ... you have a good night. You k ... you keep, you keep Indiana safe.

Caller Genevieve: You too, thanks for the show, guys.

Joe: All right. Take care.

Caller Genevieve: All right.

Joe: Bye.

Caller Genevieve: Thanks for the show. Bye bye.

Joe: We're gonna go to another caller here actually because he's been waitin' for awhile.

Jason: All right. Yeah, okay. Pull 'em up.

Joe: He or she. Hello, caller? Can you hear us?

Jason: [radio voice] Hello, caller. You're on the air!

Caller Betsy: Hello?

Jason: Jason, Niall, and Joe.

Joe: Hi, what's your name?

Caller 3: Betsy.

Joe: Hi Betsy and ... Betsy, where are you callin' from?

Caller Betsy: North Carolina.

Joe: Ah huh.

Jason: North Carolina, nice (?).

Joe: You're very welcome, Betsy.

Caller Betsy: I just called to bring up a point of ... firearms are practically the only way a woman has of protecting herself against rape.

Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: It's a horrible thing to say, but rape is a ... is a very prevalent crime in the United States.

Jason: Right.

Caller Betsy: And the police are not there until it's over with.

Jason: Yeah. If I could ... if I ... 'cause we were actually ... this is another caller who's jumpin' the gun because one of the big things that we were gonna cart out is this talking about ... and in many of the societies that ban guns, the drop in shooting deaths gets spread out. And one of the ways that it gets spread out actually into things like rape, burglary, and vicious assaults. So that they don't have so many shooting deaths but now they have more women being raped or at least a proportionate number of women being raped to the US, even though they have a population five times less, which is insulting. Like in Britain where the rape rate of women in Britain, even though it's got five times less the population, is like right on par with us and their violent crime and burglary is higher than ours.

Joe: Sure.

Jason: So, and in ... I think Penn Jillette from the Penn and Teller group, his big thing was that no matter how you slice it, at the end of the day, he was saying kinda what Betsy is, is that women usually are the people that have the most need of a gun for self defense because no matter how strong they are,
they still can't necessarily be strong than ... than a decently strong man. And sometimes guns are their only recourse to self defense and that's an extremely valid reason for someone to have a gun.

Niall: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: Yeah it ... and it's what lets me live alone in a very remote location.

Jason: Exactly.

Caller Betsy: I'm ... the closest help is probably 15-20 minutes away, as far as police help goes. If I was to call the sheriff or somebody was wantin' to kick in my door, my only defense, in this country, is a firearm.

Jason: Right.

Caller Betsy: That's the only thing that allows me freedom of movement. That's the only thing that protects me from assault. That is, you know, I have nowhere near the strength of a ... of a man who might wanna kick in my front door or crimes like that. I agree with you that firearms won't do anything to help us keep our rights. Our rights are already flying out the window. And like the prior caller said, no one notices.

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: No one's commenting on it. Those are gone. I'm not gonna be able to protect myself from my government with firearms. I can, however, protect myself from a criminal.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Exactly.

Caller Betsy: Someone who wants to take my freedom, take my life, whatever that is. That, to me, is the primary reason that we need firearms in this country.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: We cannot have a policeman on every corner .

Joe: So ...

Jason: Even if you did ...

Caller Betsy: We don't want a policeman on every corner.

Joe: So, do you th ...

Jason: Even if you did, it wouldn't stop, you know, people comin' into y ... there's a lot of ... most rapes, a large majority of the rapes, you know, that happen, you know, don't happen on the street corner necessarily. They happen in people's homes, they happen during home invasions, or they happen during parties, they happen, you know, in the backs of clubs and things like this, you know. You can't have policemen there all the time. And, you know, police and laws are for the pursuing of criminals who've already committed the crime.

Caller Betsy: Correct.

Jason: Ya know, but once a woman's been raped, she's already been raped and the damage has been done and I would say that a great deal of damage and from a woman's perspective, but I would think ... not being a woman, I can't say, maybe Betsy can say ... that rape is a very strong violation.

Joe: Absolutely.

Jason: It's a very strong violation and it's one of those one's that's tolerated a little too much in our society. I think the statistic that I heard was that a woman is raped like every three minutes. I mean, it's an insulting level of rape in America.

Joe: Yeah. It's horrific.

Jason: Horrific.

Caller Betsy: And we're expected to, for some reason, accept that and more often than not it's actually flipped on the victim. What did you do to get raped?

Jason: More often ...

Joe: Absolutely.

Jason: ...[inaudible] you were wearing high heels, suddenly ...

Caller Betsy: You were in the wrong place at the wr- what ...

Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: ...'what were you doing there alone' is the one that you hear all the time, like a woman is supposed to go everywhere escorted by a man. I am, Mr. Timber.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: That's pure psychopathic ... that's pure psychopathic thinking and, you know, I mean...

Niall: Yeah. It's [effect of even](?) blame the victim.

Jason: Yeah. Blaming the victim. And that's what you see with the ... a psychopathic, ponerized society. I would even say, for a certain sense, that it's actually what you see in a kind of ... the mean spirited authoritarian aspect. The ... the violations are your fault, you know. Your ... because you were doin ... Because almost ... Because a lot of the times, what people do is it gets presented that the women that get raped are usually ... they're independent, you see? And that sort of violates the status quo of what the authoritarian thinks.

Joe: Of the patriarchal society.

Jason: A woman shouldn't be outside of the ... She should be barefoot, pregnant, in the kitchen cookin' dinner. And if she's out, you know, doin' business and gets raped then, well, she got what she deserved type of thing and it's mean spirited in a society today.

Joe: It's not just mean spirited, it's psychopathic.

Caller Betsy: And they're also ... it's also a crime against poverty. I mean, most of the people who are victims of these crimes are poor or marginal or lower class. Whereas everyone who's trying to promote gun control has bodyguards. And have you noticed that every single person who wants to take, in the US government, who wants to take your guns away, who wants to pass laws that say average citizens cannot have guns - they have bodyguards. They have the wealth to protect themselves with paid security people, with guns. And then they want to take that same right away from you.

Joe and Jason: Yeah.

Jason: It's bullshit. So totally bullshit.

Joe: Le- Let me just ask you, Betsy, do you ... what's your opinion on, I mean in your section of US society, do you feel that it's ... do you feel kinda secure or insecure when you're goin' about your daily business? Do you ... I mean ...

Caller Betsy: Oh, I'm very secure. I have a Timber .45.


Jason: She's so happy [inaudible]

Caller Betsy: I am completely secure. I go where I want, when I want, whatever time I want.

Joe: So you don't feel threatened, generally speaking.

Caller Betsy: Not at all. I live completely without the fear that a lot of women have because they're not trained or prepared to protect themselves.

Joe: So you put that down just to ... to the own ... having a gun being ... being an owner of a gun. Do you put that [inaudible] ...

Caller Betsy: Absolutely. I mean there are places that I simply could not go. I would not feel as comfortable living here. I would be in constant fear without the method ... without a method of protecting myself. And that's the other thing, too, is that it's not just that you're going to protect yourself, but the weapon itself prevents the crime without it ever being drawn.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: Predators look for easy prey. They can look at a woman who is fearful and see her and go after her, whereas say they see a woman like me walkin' down the street, I'll look 'em in the eye - they know I'm armed.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: And it never goes beyond that point because they go pick easier prey.

Jason: They have proved this in scien- in psychological studies where they have taken sexual predators, rapists, and things like that. They have shown them videos of women walking down halls and they have been able to pick out the weakest kind of member, the members who've been sexually assaulted before and therefore would be primed for another sexual assault.

Niall: And they can ...

Joe: Or ... or the ... or the ones that just feel insecure.

Jason: Or the ones that feel insecure.

Niall: Well, I remember this study. Th- They were able to pick out the more insecure ones just by the way she walked.

Jason: Exactly.

Niall: And it was a tiny little thing ... just a little slip ...

Jason: And when they pointed it out.

Niall: ...or a little shrug on the shoulder or something.

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: Oohh.

Jason: The confidence ...

Caller Betsy: They can also ... You can also tell if a person is carrying a firearm by the way they walk.

Joe and Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: I mean, police do this as well. Police can ... a lot of trained police officers can stand on a city street and look and tell who is walking and carrying a weapon and who isn't.

Jason: Absolutely, absolutely.

Joe: Betsy, would you ... do you see it as any kind of an indictment, on American society in general, that you need to carry a gun to feel secure?

Caller Betsy: That's humanity. I mean, we've always had predators, we've always had psychopaths..

Joe: Okay.

Caller Betsy: ... and we always will. Do we have more now? I think we have more in government..

Joe: Uh huh

Caller Betsy: But I don't think there's ...

Joe: On the street?

Caller Betsy: ... any possible way to elimin ... women have been, you know, being raped since a man first picked up a club.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: And started walking upright.

Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: I don't see that we're any different now, in that respect, than say the old west or even prior to that. In Roman times, women who carried daggers, you know, in certain cultures before guns were invented they made it against the law for people to carry swords.

Jason: Yeah, they jus-

Caller Betsy: In Europe and places like that. Again, they're creating victims. Anytime someone is deprived of the most popular weapon of the time then ...

Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: ...that creates a victim ... a potential victim.

Jason: Yeah. Absolutely, absolutely. It's been true. And in my article I quoted some legislation from way back in Queen Elizabeth I's time.

Joe: 1566, yeah.

Jason: 1566. And then ... I had heard of some legislation from like Greek times, I just didn't have time to go through ... because I like to check as much as possible, the sources, and I didn't have time to for the article. But, I mean, I know that there are extant texts talking about the limiting of armaments here and back to the pre-city-states time and stuff ... It's the long history of weapon legislation which, as Betsy was saying, creates victims. And it creates an insecure society. And the problem is that you have a lot of people arguing from a lot of different angles. You have ... part of the gun lobby is arguing irrationally for the ... we need to defeat the government or protect ourselves from the government. And that's true, the prob- it's true, the problem is it's impractical, you can't do it anymore.

Caller Betsy: Well, that ... can I in-

Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: insert something in there?

Jason: Sure.

Caller Betsy: I agree with you if it was the population primed to rise up against the government.

Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: The whole concept of the populace having what they erroneously call assault weapons ... semi-automatics and high capacity magazines and whatnot ... would be if a portion of our military woke up. And ...

Jason: Yeah, absolutely. I agree.

Caller Betsy: You know, at that point, having an armed populace to support that portion of our military who realize, you know, our constitution has been completely subverted, it is time to ...

Jason: Sure.

Caller Betsy: ... just, you know, lock up all these psychopaths and ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: ... start over with fresh elections. Then, yes! Having an armed populace would be very very useful.

Joe: Hell yeah.

Jason: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. But, I mean ...

Caller Betsy: But it would take ... it would take generals, who have access to major troops.

Niall: Yeah, history has shown that.
Caller Betsy: That would finally say ... 'no , we're not going to do this anymore.' But then, yes, as a supportive of that, again we're back to, you know, how the original revolutionary war happened. It was a very small military and supported by a very large armed populace.

Jason: Yeah. It was and, I mean, the American revolution, you know, happened at a time where it was very possible to do those things and to win, in that sense, you know? And so ...

Joe: Absolutely, yeah.

Jason: It's not quite the same because it's one thing to rebel against your foreign masters that have to cross an ocean and have ... it's very costly for them to occupy you. And it's a different situation if you try to rebel against a government that is established within you, without, as she was saying, the support of a conscientious military.

Caller Betsy: I think ... I think you're cutting ... you're not taking into account how huge this country is. I mean, what you're saying I would agree with in the cities, in the major cities, but if you're talking about these remote ... it would be impossible for our government to stop a revolution that started nationwide. We simply don't have a large enough military.

Jason: Okay.

Caller Betsy: I mean, this ... we're talking a hu ... our country is, you know, as big as the UK, and yes, they could be able to oppress and control, they could send the military in to control major city-dwellers. But out in the country? No, I don't-

Jason: I agree with it if you look at it from that perspective, okay? But in a stern sense there've been several researchers in recent times, you know, General Frank Kitson from the UK, Major Trinquier from the French, that ... they talk about that exact problem. The fact is that countries are very large and it's hard to go and get the guerillas, right? And they talk about the ... even in Algeria, they found it very difficult to suppress guerilla movements [inaudible]

Caller Betsy: Well look at Afghanistan.

Jason: And in Afghanistan, too.

Caller Betsy: And the Russians in Afghanistan and now us, United States in Afghanistan..

Jason: Exactly.

Caller Betsy: ...those are all guerillas.

Jason: So you have to see ... the strategy that they came up with in which Trinquier talks about, Kitson talks about, is actually what they do, don't do, is they don't go after the guerillas. They said it's a waste of time to do it. The country's so big, they can hide, they know the area.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: What they actually do ... and they talk about it and they admitted ... first of all, they dress up like the people, the guerillas, and go around and commit crimes in their name. And they launch a massive propaganda campaign ...

Caller Betsy: Right.

Jason: ... against their own peaceful population to make it so that they have no ground to go to. It's the Sun Tzu strategy ... if they have no ground to go ... that type of thing. So what they do is they don't go after you in the jungles, they leave you and you can take your little things here and hit your little things there and they go after their own population with a strong propaganda campaign and false flag operations to get them to hate you so that whenever you go from town to town you're rejected, you're reported, and there's no safety for you. So that has b- that has been the developed, recent strategy since from ... from like the 1980s, 1950s and 60s on, from their experiences in India and Malaysia, Algeria, Indochina, right? Because she ... what you're saying, Betsy, is completely correct. That was the problem that they found with the Russians in Afghanistan and even what their finding now ... going into a foreign country and suppressing rebels is very difficult because they know the lay of the land, they know where to go, and they're supported by the population. So what they're trying to do in America ... Genevieve was ... I think it was Genevieve who pointed this out ... the separation of people, you know, the testing different types of polarization. One of those issues is smoking, another one of those issues is gun control.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: They're trying to polarize the population.

Caller Betsy: And abortion ...

Jason: And abortion.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: ... and a dozen different other issues.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: Homosexuality, alternative religions ... they wanna polarize people against each other ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... so that they can't have any kind of effect.

Joe: Divide and conquer. Yeah, I mean ...

Jason: Yeah, exactly. [inaudible]

Caller Betsy: And it's very successful. Unless a portion of our military actually broke off, you know ...

Jason: Yup.

Caller Betsy: ... and started a cleansing of Washington D.C. Let's say, I mean, I realize I'm creating a total figment of imagination here ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: ... because they are very well programed little soldiers, I don't think this would ever happen ...

Joe: Mmm.

Caller Betsy: But if it did, that would be the point that having an armed populace would actually be useful.

Jason: Well, here's the thing, okay, so when a ... I don't wanna like contradict, I mean, I'm pro military, you know, because where I grew up there were a lot of, you know, Vietnam vets ... I worked with them, I went to school with them. None of them were pro government at all. [chuckling] They were all anti-government, they were all pro gun they were all ... I mean these were Vietnam vets, they came back, they were really messed up you know. I mean I used to go to school with a guy, he was the gunner in a helicopter in Vietnam, you know, and he was just ... he was the most anti-government person I'd ever met in my entire life, you know. I mean, most of my anti-government sentiment, if you can say it was that, was influenced by him, you know. And I have ... I have a very strong respect for the military. I don't think that they're so mind programmed. I think that they're in that situation and they're being bombarded in the briefings with 'Oh, we're liberating people' and stuff like that, but I think that they're going out and they're seeing on the peoples' faces that they're hated. Every time that they're running one of these checkpoints, everybody drives by, hands them their papers with this look of 'if I could kill you I would.'

Caller Betsy: Right.

Jason: And eats them away and that's why you see such a high suicide rate in the military over there. It's not happen ... they're not being killed because of insurgents quote-unquote. They're killing themselves, because they see the atrocities that they're being asked to commit, they're realizing the bombardment in the briefings, the propaganda, the 'you're here, freedom' all this stuff ... is bullshit. They're really tired of it, and they're tired of killing people and they're killing themselves because they feel guilty and culpable.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: I think ...

Joe: Well that's why they had to turn around and recruit 200,000 mercenaries for Iraq the first [inaudible], ya know what I mean?

Jason: That's why ...

Joe: Got 100,000 soldiers and 200,000 mercenaries because the mercenaries will do it for ...

Jason: For money.

Niall: They'll do it for the money because their propaganda is not good enough.

Joe: They'll do it for kicks as well, eh?

Jason: 'Cause it turns out ... because military ... because people who join the military ... people who willingly join the military, in my opinion, usually do it for honorable purposes and they are honorable people and I don't think they're ...

Joe: Well they're being lied to.

Jason: They're being lied to. They're a tool like a gun, you know. They're being misused by a psychopathic elite. And I do think that the reason that there's all these security companies being created is because this psychopathic elite realizes that they can't have such control over the military because those people aren't in it for the money.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: They want people ...

Caller Betsy: And we're starting to see that in America too. We're starting to see police officers who're ... that police lieutenant who got arrested at the occupy thing ... the occupy protest..

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: A lot of sheriffs in the United States are simply saying "No, we won't do that."

Joe and Jason: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: So we're starting to see our own home-bound paramilitary organizations - the police, the sheriffs, the deputies - who are ... who have a line where they say "No!"

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: It may be why we already haven't been all rounded up and put in these camps that everyone's afraid of.

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: It's ... getting the military to work against the American people, well that's where they came from.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: That's going to be very difficult to do. So, like you said, they've got to go the more propaganda route.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Betsy: Which is why it's ... you know, I toyed around with the idea of even calling in because so many people have just made up their minds, they don't think. They're gonna get their opinion off the television, or off the computer, or off of Alex Jones, or whatever crazy person out there ...

Joe: Mmhumm.

Caller Betsy: ... tells them how to think. It almost seems like a ... I don't wanna say the show is a waste of time, it's not, but it's almost like ...

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Betsy: ... okay, you get intelligent people together to talk about a particular topic. That really doesn't help when you have, you know, two hundred million drones who are just gonna do whatever they're told to do.

Joe: Absolutely.

Jason: Well, I mean, you have these people that're kinda like the inert mass, in a certain sense. And I mean, it's a ... they are converted and they're constantly bombarded with all this propaganda and that's definitely a negative facet of society, but, also, I think that, you know, our only real chance, aside from, you know, like ya know, people are saying like "Oh, if the military comes in and does somethin' maybe we could have some revolt". But we really do have an opportunity to have a mental revolution ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... an educational revolution of people.

Joe: That's the only way it's gonna be effective.

Jason: You don't have to be violent about this stuff. You need to start working on educating people ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... about the truth, getting them to think critically and that is ... we're not gonna get ... 'cause look what happens, at every revolution it happens, the minute the revolution is done the next leaders are almost always worse than the first. And then you have to fight to get rid of them and then you kinda get to this compromised state for a while, which we have been in in the U.S. for the last couple hundred years, is a compromised state. After the civil war we kind of got into this compromise where, you know, it's not so bad, it's not so good. And we maintain that, we try to maintain it, we fight to maintain it and then at the end it ultimately loses.

Caller Betsy: Exactly.

Jason: So, okay. We got another caller coming in, so, thank you very much for calling, Betsy. It was very awesome to hear from you.

Caller Betsy: Thank you.

Joe: All right, thanks Betsy.

Niall: Thanks Betsy. We've another caller?

Joe: We do.

Caller 4: Hello.

Joe: Hello, hi.

Jason: Hey there, good buddy. Hows it goin'?

Caller 4: It's goin alright. How you doin' sir?

Jason: I am doin' very good. Where you calling from?

Caller 4: Hold on, let me get my head phones on.

Jason: Oh, okay, get your head phones on. Okay so, where you callin' from man?

Caller 4: I'm callin' from Fort Worth, Texas, man.

Jason: Ah, good man, alright.

Joe: And what's ... what you got to tell us?

Caller 4: I was just chiming in. I'm a two time combat veteran and I think the problem ... I think what's gonna have to happen, as far as ... number one, what America is gonna end up havin' to do is havin' to do like Iceland did, is overthrow the government. I mean that's what's gonna have to happen. I mean, it's not a maybe, it's not a matter of if, it's just a matter of when. And the thing that I think that us conservatives need to continue to do, is to continue to be consistent, you know.

Jason: Mmhmm. Yeah.

Caller 4: But, a lot of times conservatives, you know, we tend to stray away from the main issues, you know. We tend to entertain liberal propaganda when really we shouldn't even entertain that nonsense, you know. And I think that, because the fact of the matter is, a lot of soldiers have gotten out the military.

Jason: Yep.

Caller 4: Lotta soldiers have gotten out the military and ... there's something wrong with your connection or something, it keeps fizzin' up.

Jason: No, we hear you fine.

Joe: Keep going

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: We hear ya. But it keeps ...

Caller 4: Well, anyways ... anyway, what's gonna have to happen is the fact that the soldiers, like myself ... I was the kind of soldier where, you know, I was very opinionated because I spoke the truth and that's not what they liked, you know. But there wasn't just me like that, there were more soldiers like that.

Jason: Mmhmm.

Caller 4: And the soldiers like me that have gotten out and see through the malarkey and the skullduggery of the government ... I think that we can have an effect on other soldiers ...

Jason: Yep.

Caller 4: ... and the marines, you know. But I think that that's what's gonna have to happen, ya know, because ...

Jason: Mmhmm.

Caller 4: The thing about liberals ... I give it to liberals, man. They've been consistent in their issues and they stuck to it, you know, and that ...

Jason: Right.

Caller 4: ... a lot of times the crap they'll push is republicans need to cater more to minorities when that's really ... again, that's malarkey.

Jason: Yeah.

Caller 4: Because prior to the 1960s, most minorities, especially me being a black American, were republicans.

Jason: Right.

Caller 4: So that, again, is liberal propaganda.

Jason: It is.

Caller 4: And I think that a lot of the problem is plain and simple, you know. Is that people, like the young lady was saying, are not researching, are not engaging.

Jason: Yup.

Caller 4: And I think that ... they're gonna ... people're gonna have to see Obama for what he is, you know.

Jason: Yup.

Caller 4: And one friend of mine, we was on a radio show last night, he said, you know, I'm a firm believer that I think, you know, we were just puttin' ideas out there and he was saying that if Alan West ran for president in 2016 that ... he feel that he should cater to minorities because, let's be honest, most blacks are just gonna vote either because of democratic party ticket or skin color. And that's just how it is, you know. And it's a fact that many don't wanna accept. But it's true, you know. And, I mean, that's just my whole opinion on it, you know, like I said ...

Jason: If I could chime in, bro, for just a minute. Because I think a lot of people might misinterpret what he's saying. But what he's saying is fundamentally true - about the republicans, about conservatives and sort of ... their flip-flopping on certain issues, right, and adopting liberal stances. So you have, you know, from the perspective of liberals, as being these kinda like fabianist passivists, kind of like middle class people who are all like "let's get rid of the government, ba ba ba," you know, whatever it is. And then you have the conservative people who have a long time been staunch republicans, which is about let's maintain the republic, maintain the rights, maintain the order of government. You have these people that will start changing their arguments, you know, into like "Oh, no, it's for hunting, it's for game!" They'll change their arguments, in the gun control issue specifically, cause that's what the topic is here, not necessarily that. They'll change their arguments to pacify the opposing party because they don't wanna look bad or they don't wanna look like ... they don't wanna look like they represent the virtues and values they do. And that's ... having a conservative party, which I am a conservative type of person, having these people, you know, back off from their principles whenever someone ... some emotional kind of like liberal type of individual, I'm just using those terms, those terms have a meaning in this specific context.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Niall: Right.

Jason: You might call the fabianists pacifists or whatever, you know.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: They change their principles and what they think is right ... they right for, like Betsy was saying, with women's self defense, you know, the rights of minorities and things like that, of protecting those things ... of the rights of what the government was built on. The government was built of the idea of inalienable rights ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... for the protection of minorities. And that was a republicanism idea. That was not a democratic ideal, that was a republican ideal, from Thomas Jefferson with his democratic republicanism. So, I mean, what he's saying is kind of ... is essentially true as long as you ... as long as you hear the words and understand what they mean.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: So, I just wanted to jump in and say that because, you know..

Caller 4: Yeah.

Jason: ... a lot of people, when they hear the "oh, it's conservative vs. liberals" they try dismiss the argument, but what he's saying is true.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: From my opinion. I just wanted to [inaudible]

Caller 4: Oh no, I understand that. There's nothin' wrong with that. I don't wanna confuse your audience. And I think that, like on gun control, you know, like you said, I think it's, again, foolishness because, you know, we all know why the second amendment was put in place, you know. There's many reasons, you know, to basically ... in case a revolt happened, the people can defend themselves against the government. I mean, this is something a lot of people don't even know, you know. And I mean, it's so ... it's like you said, I think that when the liberals get nasty, talkin' about magazines, and I mean, and that's foolishness ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: 100 percent, bro.

Caller 4: It's foolishness because it ... you know, you as an American have the right to arm yourself. And I think, another thing that I think that's hurtin' us is the fact that I'll see people, you know, and I'm a very spiritual person and I definitely believe in my god and lord Jesus Christ, you know. But I think, a lot of time, that we have been dumbed down by religion, you know. And we'll use this excuse "Well, God is my protector" and I mean, let's be real, you have to arm yourselves, I mean ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: God helps those who help themselves.

Caller 4: Exactly. Peter had a sword.

Jason: Word. He did.

Caller 4: You know, and I mean, you know, I think that's just the issue, man, you know. But on these issues conservatives are gonna have to stick with their guns. And right now we need to clean the Republican Party out because, right now, I think ...

Jason: Yeah.

Caller 4: ... there's a bunch of hidden liberals in there and that's just [inaudible]

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: So what do you think the solution is, then, to the problems, as you see them, in the U.S.? What do you think the solution is?

Jason: Well, let's keep on gun control.

Joe: Yeah, in terms of gun control. I mean, you talk about ...

Jason: I mean, are you for it or against it?

Caller 4: Oh I'm against gun control, man! I mean ... control guns, that's insane! You know, I mean, you have the right to bare arms, man, and I don't think the government should tell you ... you need a ten round magazine and lock it up in a cage. And I mean ... they're basically disarming you while still trying to arm you. If you tell me I gotta put my weapon in a cage, well, if somebody breaks into my house well I gotta go unlock the cage, I gotta go do all this, that's foolishness!

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller 4: Why can't I have my shotgun sittin' next to me behind my dresser where it's easily accessible and I can take care of business when somebody breaks in my house.

Jason: Damn straight! That's the thing. All right, listen man, I appreciate you callin'. It's been real and it's been awesome and we appreciate your comments. We got another caller comin' in.

Caller 4: Ok, man.

Jason: So, thank you for callin' in, bro, and you have a really good day, you know, keep Texas safe and you have some fun, man.

Caller 4: All right, man.

Jason: Later.

Joe: All right we got another caller on the line here, I think. Hi, caller, you're live. What's your name?

Caller 5: My name is Pianke, I'm callin' from the Midwest. How you doing?

Joe: Pretty good.

Caller5: Actually, I'm callin' from St. Louis.

Joe: All right.

Jason: St. Louisman, [inaudible]!

Caller Pianke: Yeah, but, you know, I agree like the oth ... now, I'm a non-believer, I don't believe in, you know, the bible or Jesus or anything like that. But I believe, very strongly, in the United States constitution, and especially the second amendment. And, you know, one thing ... the second amendment is too porous. Not only does it talk about the militia but it also talks about the right to bare arms. And you just had two court cases, one in 2000, a recent in 2010, I think one maybe in 2008, where the judges said that the right to bare arms is separate than ... to the militia. And I hear people, when they quote the second amendment, they say "Well, we're not back in those times where we're worried about England comin' over and taking over." No, that's not what it really says. So, yeah, and this whole notion about the ... I don't think ... I very strongly, for those who show a mental ability not to own guns ...they they have some sort of problem ... they should not have the ability to have guns.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Pianke: If you got a mental problem. If you have some sort of illness, mental illness. But I don't see any restriction that's needed on United States citizens owning guns if they can afford it.

Joe: Mmhmm. And do you think ... okay, so you support gun ownership and you're against gun control, but do you think there is a problem with the government, in general, in the U.S. today?

Caller Pianke: Oh! absolutely!Government is totally out of control. You know the constitution, what twenty six pages, that ... the constitution was designed to protect the citizens, protect the states and the citizens from the federal government.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Pianke: And anytime wherever there's not a law, there's a right, but anytime you create a law you givin' up rights, and sooner or later you'll find yourself pushed up in a corner and surrounded with a lot of people with things in their mouth.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: Exactly, exactly! I mean, to be fair, when a lot of people talk about the constitution they talk about two documents - the constitution and the Bill of Rights. And he's right, the Bill of Rights, for the most part, is just a bunch of rights that are being given to you, and we consider them amendments to the constitution. For those listeners who are not familiar, 'cause we have some international listeners, what exactly is the second amendment and what is he talking about here? I'm gonna read it for you real quick. It's very short. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. That's it, it's a very simple straightforward piece of text. And, you know, I mean, it's your right and when you pass laws, I mean, as I said in my article on the SOTT page,, If you haven't gone there, go ahead and read it. I say that, you know, and commentators from that time, the American founding fathers commentators, British commentators, like Blackstone, basically said that the passing of legislation about game and hunting was a way to usurp the people's ability to keep and bare arms and it's registration and all these gun control things are some ... they basically make it absolutely and totally impracticable, the second amendment. So yeah, I was just ...

Caller Pianke: You're absolutely right. Then when you have people sayin' "well the government is not gonna take your arms, it's not gonna come into your house," but that's not true because they do it in a very, very, sneaky way. Lemme give you an example, when they come up with this notion of no guns around schools ...

Joe: Yep.

Caller Pianke: All right, now, suppose you got a house, a residence that's been there before the school was built, and they have guns, so you mean to tell me that you gon' take the guns from the people in that house that live across the school, or on the other side of the block?

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Pianke: That there is the sneaky way the government comin' in imposing that you gotta remove your guns, they takin' your guns away from you ...

Jason: Yeah. Yeah, they declare these gun free zones, you know, it's ...

Caller Pianke: Absolutely! I mean, so that is just another example. And I'm for open carry also. And in this state it is open carry, but when you do open carry the police harass the hell out of ya.

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: Well, yeah. What's ... your name is Pianke, yeah?

Caller Pianke: Yes

Joe: Do you think that a large number of, you know, a majority or a large number of people, like a million people in the U.S. carrying guns, do you think that is useful against government tyranny basically, you think it would in some way help to prevent the government goin' to far or maybe puttin' people in FEMA camps, that they talk about and stuff like that? Do you think it's useful for that?

Caller Pianke: Well yes, I do think it's useful for that. Matter of fact, there's a town in Georgia right North of Atlanta, called Kennisaw, and it's mandatory that each household have a gun in Kennisaw, Georgia, today.

Joe: Yeah?

Caller Pianke: And you can look around the world, for instance, like Switzerland. Switzerland doesn't have a standing army. Every person in Switzerland has a gun ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Pianke: ... and they're required to have ammunition and know how to use that gun. So yes ...
[audio dropped] ... gonna approach.

Joe: Okay. All right, well, thanks for your comments Pianke.

Caller Pianke: Thank you for havin' this conversation. I think it's well needed.

Joe: Okay, thanks.

Niall: Thanks.

Joe: Well, yeah. I mean, obviously we're gettin' a few ... we're getting some callers there on this topic. And at this point, anyway, [chuckling] everybody is supportive.

Niall: Noo ...

Joe: Apart from the first guy.

Niall: Yeah.

Joe: Most people are supportive of ... the idea of carrying guns and, really, like, our main point, or the point that we ... the conclusion that we came to when we looked at that issue is ... this issue ... is that it really is a non-issue ...

Niall: Yeah

Joe: It's been fabricated out of nothing.

Niall: The gun control debate is based on the faulty premise, as I mentioned in the introduction to the show, it only ever comes up whenever we've got these mass shootings.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Niall: Now, we looked last week at some of these mass shootings and they stand out from the regular background of gun violence ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Niall: ... in a big way.

Joe: Yup

Niall: And they've got a lot of things in common.

Joe: Absolutely, you gotta look at it from the point of view of like ... like we mentioned last week. There's somethin' like ... in the last 16 years there's somethin' like ... there's been something along the lines, 65 shootings in schools. And maybe 6 or 7 of those, if you charted them on a graph, in terms of number of people shot, there will be 6 or 7 of them that stand way out ...

Niall: Yeah.

Joe: ... compared to the normal which is one or two people shot, there's 6 or 7 that jump way up to, you know, 22-30 people shot and stuff. And it's those shootings that ignite this gun control debate.

Niall: Gun control debate, yeah.

Joe: When ... and overall in the U.S., on average, general figures or something, something between 10, 11, 12 thousand homicides, people being killed, a homicide, every year in the U.S. And obviously these mass shootings contribute a tiny number to that number of people. So - But, so ...

Jason: But it's represented as being, like, the whole. When people say ...

Joe: Well, exactly! So ...

Jason: When people say 'school shooting' they leave it up to you to imagine that it was 20 people each time but, actually it wasn't.

Joe: Yeah. No, exactly. Yeah. And it's - so, what about the other 10? You know, if it's 12 thousand every year, what about the other 11,950? Do people not mind that that number of people have been shot, one at a time, every year in the U.S.? They only care about the 50 people last year, for example, 50-some people, who were killed in a mass shooting. Is that ... is that the only time it becomes an issue? I mean, obviously we're talking here about some other problem in terms of maybe a culture of violence or why so many people are killed, not just shot with guns, but are killed in any way. Why is there so much violence in the U.S. compared to other countries? And is that even true? I mean, the U.S. is held up around the world as an example of a gun ... a culture of violence and a gun culture that has become a problem ...

Jason: Mmhmm.

Joe: Of course there are shootings in other countries, but the U.S. always seems to stand out and is held up as a problem. So, that's something, maybe, we should discuss a little bit. Is the idea of there ... is there a culture of violence, in the U.S.? Is the U.S. society a violent society? Is it ...

Jason: And why? The most important thing that, I think, is ... it's apparent that it is a culture of violence.[Talking to someone in studio] (I'll move closer) It's apparent that it is a culture of violence in the U.S. I mean, that was the argument that I made in the article. I think I was ... I think I gave sufficient evidence. I mean, there's plenty of evidence, you know, that violence is ubiquitous in American creative expression. Which is like a sign of saying "hey, why are people so identified with violence? Why do they want to produce violent images? And why do they want to consume them?"

And it can't really be explained that it's just pushed on them by the government or propaganda 'cause it's not entirely. They do do that, of course! Yes they do! But, why do people accept it so readily? Because people really delight in violence. And so there is a culture of violence in America and we're seeing ... we're reaping the benefits, now, of the violent seeds that have been sown over the last, you know, since the early 1900s, since the industrial revolution, where people were turned into ... to economic units for production and marginalized by society. The creation of, basically, people to work on the assembly line ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... and most importantly, the fact that all those people, it was promoted for them to breed as much as possible. They wanted to create more workers to work in the factories. And now, they're replacing them with machines so you have masses of people being laid off, no longer having jobs, no longer being able to feed themselves. And, of course, you're reaping the collective, in like, kind of a collective unconscious. I don't know if I really wanna say that exactly, but I wanna say, it's kinda like, the only way to express is that there is a genetic hatred in people from the oppression of their forefathers, you know, that manifests in them. I mean, that's the only way I can really kind of explain it, I'm not sure that I'm saying that that's exactly scientifically what I'm saying is happening. I'm saying, it appears that people remember, I mean, and you see that kinda stuff happening in like the Jewish population as well. They do seem to have this memory of the violence done to them by the German people ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: ... and, like, there was a ... there was a documentary done where they took a bunch of Jewish school children to do a tour of the ... the camp sites in ... the various concentration camp sites, and you can see in these kids, there was young kids' faces, that there was a level of emotion that you wouldn't necessarily expect. I mean, they were ... they really felt it in a way that was surprising, in my opinion. The emotion, the depth of the emotion that they felt for it. And so you can see in the behavior of Israel sometimes, you can almost kinda understand it, but they do have a ... they do have a very ... and a lot of bad things were done to them ...

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: I mean, you can't escape it. I mean, there's people who go around talking about, you know, Holocaust this and Holocaust that and stuff like that but, I mean, Jewish people suffered a lot ...

Joe: Absolutely, yeah.

Jason: And that comes through in some kind of genetic or collective subconscious of the people and it makes them want to think a 'never again' type of thing.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: The same ... you have to see though that it transfers to the U.S. because, you know, abuse is the ... the way that you abuse people creates, in them, a desire for justice and when they can't get it it just starts to boil over and boil over.

Niall: In other ways, yeah.

Jason: In other ways. And for a lot of people who are, you know, intrinsically good, souled, people, you know, it doesn't manifest in real violent violence, it's just anger - maybe road-rage or something like that comes out every once and a while or maybe they, you know, get in fist fights or they do some other kind of, like, violent activity or they start doing violent video games or they start creating violent images which then are then passed ... it's like them passing on the violence from a previous generation into the next, which then consumes it.

And it's almost like, you know, it's almost like a family feud type of thing where they're trying to get reprisals for things that have happened not only to them in their life, which happens in everyone's life, but the lives of the previous people, you know, their ... how their father ... they see their father being ... you're workin' in the factory every single day, he comes home, he's just completely slaughtered from work, and he just drinks himself into a stupor, and maybe he's a little bit abusive or somethin' like that. And they look at that situation, like, you know, "Why is he like this?" And they start to hate society because they start to blame him for their situation and society is, in a certain sense, to blame for it, obviously. And that creates in them anger, you know, they're angry, people are angry. It is a culture of violence, you know. That's basically what I'm saying. That's all I have to say really on it. I mean ...

Joe: Yeah. But that ... I mean, the expression of that anger ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: ... as a result of social injustice, let's say ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: It seems that the government is ... I don't know if they're directly aware of it and take action ... to consciously take action to deal with it and to keep it under wraps. But, it seems to me that any kind of sense of anger among large sections of the population, as a result of social injustice, gets kind of redirected or diverted into ... you know, one thing that I was thinkin' of was that the popularity of violent movies and stuff, it's a way for people to kind of have a release, in a sense, of seeing the injustice that they sense in their own lives. They see it played out on movie screens where the good guy always ends up beatin' the bad guy, you know. The good guy might, initially, in the movie, suffer some kind of injustice and ultimately seeks his revenge and ...

Jason: But the real proof of a model of some kinda like human behavior is to see that it's scalable across human experience, right? So, I mean, the question is that you see a lot of people, that they create, I guess what you could call, like, an escape valve, for their stuff. And that is the same in the sorta like cultures of violence and cultures of sexual perversion and things like that, that they create situations that they can then work things out. That's just a natural thing. It doesn't work, you know?

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: The problem is, is it's like a crutch; it helps them walk but it never actually cures the disease in them, which is the injustice and the abuse that they have received.

Joe: Mmhmm ...

Jason: You know, and so that in a sort of sense is the validation of this model that that's what's going on in people's minds.

Joe: Yeah, so I mean if we talk about social injustice, in the U.S., I mean, there's a lot of people, in the U.S., on food stamps ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: Which are for people who ...

Niall: Yeah, but that means it's hitting something like 50 million people now ...

Jason: I forgot the point that I wanted to make. Can I make it real quick?

Joe: Oh, I thought you were finished, go ahead.

Jason: Oh yeah, so what you were saying is whether or not they kinda know about this and they kinda control the situation and stuff like that. And I use, sometimes, this analogy of a person who tortures a dog, you know, they tie him up to the tree and then torture him and then maybe they bring someone over and let the dog attack them, you know. I use that as kind of an example of how the psychopathic elite are treating the people of the world. They ... but you have to remember that the beginning of that is the wherewithal in their minds to tie the dog up first.

And that's what they do to the society. They tie us up like dogs and then poke and torture us. It's not just mind ... and it's just an intrinsic strategy in themselves, they wanna protect themselves. So, that's why a lot ... that's why they make these laws. They're trying to protect themselves so that they can then do what they want to do. They wanna cause suffering, they wanna do ... whatever it is that they wanna do, who knows? I mean, who knows, in the end, what goes on in the mind of a psychopath.

Sometimes I really don't know or understand, you know, why they do the things that they do. Only I know that they do them, but I don't think that it's like a massive conspir- ah, sorry ... I don't think that it's a massive conspiracy, you know, against the people. I think that it's just a natural way of doing things. I mean, they ... it's just consistent self interest and consistent sadism and a mean spirit that causes them, or you know, gets them to do these things. You know, they're just consistent in the way they do 'em so it looks like a gigantic conspiracy. It looks like they're planning everything, but actually they're not. They're just ... [chuckling] they're just evil, man.

Niall: Well, if you think about ... it's good we're talking about this now ... the social injustice that is underpinning violence and crime. Not just in the U.S. but across western civilization.

Joe: Can I just interject there? I just wanna give out the number just in case anybody else wants to call in.

Niall: Yeah, let's do that.

Joe: The guest ... we should've done this earlier ... the guest call-in number is, from the U.S., is 718- 508-9499. If you want to ... it's on the web site and stuff ... if you wanna call internationally you just put a 001 before that. So go ahead, Niall.

Niall: I think, people ... people feel powerless, you know? Something like Sandy Hook happens and there's just, "What can we do? What are our options?" And helped by the media, of course, it falls into "Well, I can either arm myself or I can rely on the authorities to protect me."

Joe: Mmhmm.

Niall: Most will take option B, of course some will take option A. But the feeling of powerlessness that they can't really do anything about it is ... I think is expressed in media. We're talking about movies, violent video games, where that enraging sense of injustice can be, at least vicariously, dealt with.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Niall: By feeling like you can identify with the guy in the movie, who does get social justice ...

Joe: Mmhmm ...

Niall: ... at the end, you know. And that is handed to Americans, and people in the West in general, in spades. They can have as much of that as they want but you're never gonna ... the message coming through is to forget about real social justice.

Joe and Jason: Yeah.

Niall: You can feel like you can get it. And that feeling ... I think part of that is the sense of security that comes with owning a firearm.

Joe: Mmhmm. Yeah, certainly. I mean, social injustice leads to our feeling that, you know, that your life isn't what it could be. Really, when you say ... when people are being subjected to some kind of injustice, you know, broadly in society where they don't have ... don't feel they have, you know, opportunities to improve themselves, do what they wanna do, you know, the education system fails them, there's only crappy low-end jobs available and stuff. Ultimately what that all conveys or how that's felt by people is essentially a sense of powerlessness.

Jason: Mmhmm.

Joe: So, I mean, you can understand how people, particularly in ... by poor areas and stuff, would automatically say "Well, you know, the system is stacked against me. It's screwing me over, basically. I'm gonna get a gun so I can ... that'll [inaudible]. Having a gun'll help me to feel more powerful and it'll also help me to get some stuff that otherwise is not available to me, that is being denied to me, you know?"

Niall: Conspiracy or no, I think we can safely say that when gun control is being pushed, at least, maybe not literally, but is being pushed in the sense that it's getting people revved up. Because they know full well it's an emotional hot button topic. When it's being talked about like that, you know they're really targeting the working class people because they're the ones who are ... they're the ones who will be arming themselves to protect themselves because they know that they can't rely on the police.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Niall: And the justice system to protect them.

Joe: Yeah. Well, that also creates ... you know, for the middle class that the police do kinda protect, you know, more wealthy kinda suburbs and stuff. The police are always there and they're ... you know, as soon as you call 911, five minutes later they're there.

Jason: Yeah, because those people are white, rich, and middle class. You know, Americans.

Joe: Yeah. Those people get the security. But their sense of insecurity and their sense of needing the authorities to provide security for them is enhanced by this kind of underclass who are driven to be the criminals and, to some extent, prey on the middle class. And the middle class then ... throws the middle class in the arms of the government. And I mean, it keeps it all within, amongst the people. It's divide ... we keep saying this kind of divide and conquer, it keeps it within ... the problem defined as being within society itself while we, your overloads, sit in our ivory towers and are only too willing to enact laws or whatever is necessary to protect you, the people.

And they keep the debate at that level and keep people distracted, keep people fighting among themselves, when the ultimate cause of all social ills, today, in the world, pretty much in the world and in every country, is corrupt government and corrupt and unjust laws, that they pass, that basically seek to, one extent or another, screw over the people.

Jason: Well look at the mechanism of corruption 'cause when you say corrupt government it's like "what do you mean?" And like, I saw this Piers Morgan, he's talking to Jesse Ventura - and I love Jesse Ventura, I was a fan when he was a wrestler and I always have much respect for the man and he does kinda ...

Niall: I like Jesse too.

Jason: I mean I just like him. You know he's the type of guy that you just wanna hang out with. He reminds me of a lot of the buddies I used to have back in the day. You know, the older guys that're kinda like mentoring me when I was in college, they were doing their re-education. And, you know, he's talking to Piers Morgan, he's say ... and Piers, I think, asked him some sort of question along the lines of, you know, "what's the problem?" And the problem is all the back [sheesh?], all the backroom dealing, all the bribery that's going on, in government. It's money. It's the corruption of money. It's the people that are ... they're being bought off against their own people by, you know, rapacious corporations, special interest lobbies, and all this different type of stuff. [inaudble] by the military industrial complex or whatever you wanna call it. I mean, it's just people who wanna make money. It's greed, you know? And I'm one of those types of people that ... having been a person that has, in my life and in my youth, committed plenty of sins, I can forgive ...

Niall: I don't believe that.

Jason: ... almost all of them. I can forgive almost every sin. I can forgive pride, I can forgive wrath, even if it's against me. I can forgive gluttony, sloth. I can forgive lust, but the one sin I cannot forgive is greed. 'Cause greed is one of the ... all those sins are sins against yourself, alright? You know, if you go on the path of lust it's a sin against yourself. If you go on the path of gluttony, it's a sin against yourself. You're hurting yourself. Pride - you're hurting yourself or you're cutting off other people, alright?

Greed is ... as far as I know, it's the only sin or maybe just one of the few sins 'cause the only other one is, like, envy, I think. Anyway, I got it most ... but greed is the one that takes from others in order for it to be greed . It takes from others and restricts them from possessing that which you possess.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And so greed is a really terrible sin. And if you look back into history, like with Lycurgus and Sparta, you know. And a lot of people saw like 300 and "This is Sparta!" and, you know, and kickin' some ass - I really like that movie. But the Spartan way - what Lycurgus did, who was, you know, the sorta creator of what we know of as Sparta, now, in these days, was ... he ... the first thing he did was to get rid of wealth. He got rid of all gold and silver and he made all the coins brittle iron or somethin' or, you know, brittle metal that couldn't even be resold to be smelted into weapons cause they quenched it in vinegar so he just ... this is what ... this is the script that you use to do your business.

And the next thing he did, of course, is he instituted lots of educational reforms, mostly in the form of a kind of a milit ... everyone, all the men were part of a militia - kind of a military education system. Maybe I'm not suggesting that for now, but I'm saying that he saw, even at that time, that the number one corrupter was wealth.

And for 500 years - some people ... there's different quotes of how long they lasted - Sparta remained, like, one of the - the military power in the Hellenistic world. It was respected by most people, certainly militarily. If they came into your city-state and said "You guys need to stop fighting or we're gonna come in" everyone said "Woah, shit! Okay, no! No, Sparta don't come and attack us." And what ended up bringing Sparta down, what brought them down was that they forgot about that rule that he had put in - they said "Oh, we don't need that law anymore." And they reintroduced the concept of wealth and started to allow people to have gold and silver and to trade with gold and silver, and [inaudible].

Wealth is a very corrupting influence, especially in government, which is why even in the constitution it says that "senators are not allowed to take bribes," you know, that was [inaudible]. Bribery is a very serious problem and Jesse Ventura was talking about it when he was talking about like the demo-crips and the re-blood-ican type thing. But the real problem in government - the source of the corruption ... even if you wanna talk about, you know, there's all these stories of them participating in pedophile rings, there's all these other kinda stories of the sex scandals and stuff like that. The real problem in politics is money. The thing is, is that campaign contributions - they call them, it's just changing the words - it's just a bribe.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: That's what a campaign contribution is.

Niall: Lobbying.

Jason: Lobbying!

Joe: Well, obviously, it's exactly the same, you know? It's completely stacked against the average ... you know, average citizen. What's pretty amazing is that they've able ... they've been able to enrich themselves, so much, and still maintain some semblance of social cohesion and not have people ...

Jason: Can I make one thing? I remember reading a story about Donald Rumsfeld.

Niall: Oh, not him.

Jason: Now this is a man that is in public office in the United States of America, where lots of people are really dirt ass poor. And this man, through some company that he was part of the board, made a deal that would benefit him to the tune of like 35 million dollars. There are people in American who will never, in their entire life, make that much money. That's an insulting sum of money for someone in office to be receiving! It's just ... this is the kind of money we're talking about. I just wanted to point that out.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: That when you're saying they're making money, it's like, they're not making 500,000 they're not making a million. They're making tens of millions of dollars on these backroom deals.

Joe: Yeah. And it's not just the politicians, obviously ...

Jason: No.

Joe: ... it's the ... it's the corporate heads as well. I mean, there's corporate CEOs who are making, literally, 1,000 times the amount of money for the same, supposedly, the same amount of time that they put in a working week. 1,000 times the salary of the guy workin' on the shop floor, right below them. I mean, that, by any stretch of the imagination, is ...

Jason: It's insulting.

Joe: It's obscene.

Jason: It's obscene. It's obscene [law?].

Joe: And what's amazing is that they've been able to ... to do that and get away with it, and like I said, maintain the integrity of society and keep people from revolting against such revolting practices. And, like, I mean, here's an example ... there's an example, this is a pretty ... a pretty relevant one from just a few days ago when Obama was inaugurated. It was some kind of a post or pre-inaugural commentary by some senator.

Niall: I think, a senator gave this speech prior to the actual swearing in ...

Jason: Yeah.

Niall: ... at the inauguration.

Joe: Yeah. And it was basically about the transition of power, Just have a listen to what he said.

[Start audio clip]
The late Alex Hailey, the author of 'Roots', lived his life by these six words: find the good and praise it. Today, we praise the American tradition of transferring or reaffirming immense power in the inauguration of the president of the United States. We do this in a peaceful, orderly way. There is no mob, no coup, no insurrection. This is a moment when millions stop and watch. A moment most of us, always, will remember. It is a moment that is our most conspicuous and enduring symbol of the American democracy. How remarkable that this has survived, for so long, in such a complex country, when so much power is at stake. This freedom to vote for our leaders and the restraint to respect the results.
[End audio clip]

Joe: There's only one word you need to change in that to make it true.

Jason: What?

Joe: Where he said "how remarkable it is, that this has survived, for so long, in such a complex country".

Jason: How disturbing.

Joe: Change "complex" to "corrupt."

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: And that's what's remarkable. I mean, it is remarkable - when he talks about ... no coups. I mean, it's almost ... it's pretty subtle - I don't know if I'm reading too much into that - but he says "no coup, no insurrection, no mob."

Jason: Well, he's talking about what he's afraid of. I mean, what they're afraid of is an insurrection.

Niall: Is that such a thing might happen. Yeah.

Jason: Yeah. And they may also be kind of like suggesting it, in a certain sense. I mean, you have to look at the government from - well, you gotta take off the movie glasses when you look at the government because people get their experience of how the government works from watching, like, Jason Bourne and all these different movies about, like, the CIA and the kinda all-powerful with ... and they kinda look like ... they make themselves out to be all-powerful, but it's a complete fantasy, alright? They're not that. They're not cohesive. It's not that there's a big giant conspiracy in the government. They don't all get together and meet, except in congress [chuckling] but then they don't agree on anything. They don't get together in some back room, all of them together. They're not all in on it.

Joe: Right.

Jason: You know, they're all out for their own personal self interest. And there's groups of money-men who come in, these lobbyists that come in, that kinda steer them in the right direction by leading them on with, you know, promises of prostitutes and cash. And that is what gets things done, in politics, today. I mean, so these guys ... so when we talk about, like, the government wants this or the government wants that, you gotta take that with the understanding of - one part of the government probably wants that, another part does not, you know? And like I say in the article, that the reason they pass gun legislation laws, the reason why they pass any laws, actually, is 'cause they're psychopaths. They don't want to protect people. The reason they do it is to protect themselves from each other because they know ... they come together in kinda packs, every once in a while. They get together and group together for mutual benefit, mutual rapaciousness. But they're always afraid that one of them's gonna turn on 'em.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And what they're really afraid of, throughout history, is what's been shown in every single revolution, is that government becomes complacent and then they start to abuse even their own kind. Even their own ... psychopaths in power 'cause they're just not the right kind of psychopath for them. Their fixation is, you know, they wanna go off and molest little children, while these guys just wanna, like, rape the environment, you know. So, they [manly voice] 'have a war' - "Oh, we're gonna have a war!" and they do it in the back rooms with like ... if you ever see a politician getting accused of sexual misconduct, financial misconduct, or suicide, then you know that ...

Niall: Neither.

Jason: ... that was was an inner conflict among the psychopaths, right?

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: And, you know, if they couldn't get 'em on sex ...

Niall: [inaudible] ratted out.

Jason: If they couldn't get 'em on sex, or they couldn't get 'em on money, then they just, you know, got 'em to suicide.

Joe: Suicide.

Jason: Suicide-ed 'em out, right? They always try the first one because it's easiest, because people - like, with the whole Bill Clinton thing. You know, all these people were like "He lied in court, he lied." I said "Yeah, he lied about getting a blow job." I mean, I'm sorry, but I'm not really seeing the impeachable offense here. Of all the evil things that Bill Clinton did his entire administration, of all the crap, of all the bombing, all the stupid laws that he passed into ...

Joe: Well, that [inaudible] a lot of puritanical Americans as a crime.

Jason: Yeah, but that's not a crime. Like I say, I can forgive any sin except greed. And when you see that in people, that's an inter-faction outcome, you know, this ... like when they did it to Traficant. I always loved Traficant - [like Senator Traficant] "Beam me up!" I love that guy, you know. He was a senator or a representative or something?

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: Anyway. And they they got him on taking campaign bribes. And then he said, as they were about to kick him out, he said [like Senator Traficant] "But you guys all do it too!"

All: [laughter]

Jason: [while laughing] You know, as they were kickin' him out.

You know, when you see that, that's what it is. And then what happens is, when the government, the faction that is in charge, gets so intrenched that even the peripheral psychopaths - 'cause they're a perfect mirror of any society, they have minorities even within themselves - can't get in and get their ya-yas, right? And the people, of course, are naturally being abused left, right, and center because that's what psychopaths do. They can't help it, you know. They get put in charge of an economy, they're gonna run it into the ground. They get put in charge of a military, they're gonna go out and create atrocities. It's just their way. So the people get really pissed and then the psychopathic elite on the fringe says "Damn it! We wanna be the ones, you know, raping and pillaging here." So what they do is ... they see the people are ready to rebel and they start funneling them weapons and a couple of 'em step down and they turned to [innocent voice] "I'm ... I defend the people and I've always believed in whatever it is that you believed in."

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: You know, I mean, they almost practically say that "Whatever you guys believe in I believe in it too! Yes, yes yes."

Niall: Yes, this charismatic leader comes out of nowhere.

Jason: Yeah. They raise the people up, get them in open rebellion. I mean, this is the Russian revolution, this is the Chinese revolution, this is all the same, you know, all the ... the French revolution for certain. You just look at what happens right after the revolution and then you can tell who was behind it, you know?

Niall: Yeah. So, on that note, then, that's obviously something that would repeat itself in the eventuality of a U.S. revolution 'cause we've had a couple of callers saying ... they're not ...

Jason: People don't learn from history, they don't learn from history, you know?

Niall: Mmhmm.

Jason: I mean, because, I mean, running a revolution is a really tough job, to be quite honest. I mean, if you don't have money and access to guns and you aren't a bit psychopathic about it [laughs] then it's just very difficult for a natural people's rebellion to raise up. I think it's possible, for sure. I just think that it takes too long and one of these opportunistic, pathological people come in, take it, steer it off course 'cause it serves their purpose, you know. And people don't learn about this. I don't know if there's an easy way out of it, you know, I mean ...

Niall: Well, this has been my ... my beef, not a big beef, but it's a beef nonetheless. With a lot of people in their response to this gun control, phoney debate because it's based on the false premise. Their response is "Well, it's for the eventuality of rising up against a tyrannical government." And they specify "We live in such a time right now," That's great. They can see that. Cool.

Jason: Okay, cool.

Niall: So they get most worked up, right now, when it comes to their guns being taken away, but over the last ten years, especially since 9/11, everything has been stripped one by one by one. I mean, George Bush and the illegal wiretapping, they just made it legal instead. It was never "Oh, well, we're gonna deal with this." Torture - Obama is like "Oh yeah, I'll come in and we'll sort this out," still torturing people.

Jason: Mmhmm.

Niall: And it's accepted.

Jason: Yep.

Niall: Where is the revolutionary spirit when it comes to all the other inalienable rights? Inviolable rights which have been violated left, right, and center.

Joe: Well, that's just shows that people are not really prepared ,or ready, for whatever reason. And, you know, there's probably some obvious reasons why they're not ready for a revolution. I mean, the situation has been controlled. I mean, if there's one thing ... if there is a government, and maybe even a secret government or whatever you want to call it in the U.S., that's kind of controlling, trying to ... that they're engaged in population control, if there's one thing that they're concerned about, that they're gonna put a lot of their energy into, is making sure that a rabble, a mob, does not rise up..

Niall: Against them.

Joe: ... and kick them out. I mean, surely that would be something, if they have any planning ability at all, they would be ... I mean, and if they have self reflective abilities to realize "Listen, we're doing some pretty nasty stuff here. We're enriching ourselves, we're passing all sorts of corrupt laws, etcetera, etcetra and these are directly impacting, in a negative way, a lot of people. What about if those peop- what if those people kinda figure that out? I mean, do we want to take any kind of action to, you know, head that off at the pass? How should we deal with this situation, you know?" And, you know, obviously, we can get into, like, all the techniques or the ideas of how populations are controlled and ...

Niall: Yeah. Well, another thing I'm askin' myself is, in terms of revolution in the U.S. ... late 2011 and into 2012 there was a pretty widespread, and I was surprised at how widespread it was, protest movement across major cities all over the country, and the world - it spread. This is the Occupy Wall Street movement I'm talking about. Of course, it went way beyond Wall Street but I'm glad they called it that because they recognized the core, the symbolic core, of social injustice is ...

Jason: Is money.

Niall: ... is the financial system, it's money. Well, you have this protest movement and practically overnight, they did have to go in a few times, but there was one night in particular - I think it was sometime around March, April 2012 - where the Obama administration, like, they must've coordinated because police units all over the country went in simultaneously and booted everyone out of there.

Jason: People have no guile in the world, you know. They really are very naive. You gotta understand that the police spend a lot of time and we spend a lot of money training them to do exactly what they did. Which is, I mean, they have radios, they have communication, they have huge databases, we helped them build them up, we helped teach them how to use it, they record every single thing that they do and share it with the next generation of police officers. They do this everyday. You don't deal with the police everyday. They deal with the types of people that you are, which is those people who are doing what the government doesn't like, whether it's crime or whether it's protesting.

So yes, obviously, the police did this. I mean, you saw the same kind of ... I mean, it wasn't quite as bad as ... you remember Dr. Zhivago? Where the people did that peaceful demonstration and all their signs said was freedom and bread, you know?

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: And they're marchin' down the street, and they march, and they get down into this place where it's like a bottleneck for the group.

Niall: Yeah.

Jason: And there's a whole bunch of police cavalry there, with swords, and they just go and cut 'em all down. And I think this is fairly good representation of what was happening at the time in Russia.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And here we have the same kind of idea happening in the U.S., of a bunch of people thinking that "Oh, we can just protest and no one's going to do anything about it."

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And this was the police and government's way of saying "No, you can't."

Niall: Right.

Jason: And now, you know, people ... because people are guileless. They have no cunning and artifice, you know. They don't think that someone would want to stop them from being reasonable because they don't think that unreasonable people exist. But the government is populated by unreasonable pathocrats, by unreasonable psychopaths. That's just the way that it works. And those people are filled to the brim with guile. They are cunning and they will ...

Joe: One of the cunning ways that they get police officers who might otherwise be, you know, at least conflicted about whether or not they should beat the heads of ordinary people who are just protesting for what could be construed as legitimate ...

Niall: Some of them were.

Joe: Yeah, some of them were, but one of the things that they do, and they do it repeatedly, every time there's a demonstration anywhere, a major demonstration, anywhere in western civilization or in western countries is that they have covert protesters, basically, you know, the black block, basically, policemen, or people hired by the police, or policemen themselves, who, dressed as protesters, go in and wreak havoc around the place and therefore all the rest of police say "Well, look, we're dealing with a kinda, at least an element, among these protesters, that are just, basically ... they're just hooligans."

Jason: There's a term for this. There's a term from way back in the union days and we have, actually, in our library, there is a book from the early 1900s and it says ... the title of it is "The Agent Provocateur."

Joe: Yeah. Agent provocateurs.

Jason: It was in the union movement, you know? This is how they were, you know, getting union protests and strikes, being able to bust them up, was by sending agent provocateurs into their midsts to start doing something illegal.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And that's essentially their first strategy.

Joe: Yeah. You can turn the police against the legitimate protesters, who aren't doing anything wrong. You can turn the police against all the protesters by having some protesters that you hire, go in and attack the police ...

Jason: It's a false flag operation.

Joe: Well, [chuckling] yeah, in essence.

Jason: In essence.

Joe: And it's the first thing they think of ...

Jason: Right.

Joe: ... in terms of dealing with people trying to assert their rights and even trying to expose the truth. The first thing they do is, like you just said, it's a false flag operation, but ...

Jason: I'm sorry I keep sipping my tea in front of the mic. I'm sorry about that. It's probably driving people nuts.

Joe and Niall: [laughter]

Joe: It's not ... it's against internet radio etiquette.

Jason: It's against the law.

Joe: Gonna pass a law on that one.

Jason: [laughter] We need tea control.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: [laughter] We need more tea control.

Joe: Yeah. So, are we going to, in some way, you know, sum up and come to some kind of pithy, incisive conclusion - take home message - that people can just, you know, instantly understand what the obvious answer is to this whole gun control debate? Is that asking too much?

Jason: Well, I mean ...

Joe: I think it is.

Niall: It could be.

Jason: I mean people need to ... obviously, need to start thinking, but I think that what we need is for people to just start honestly saying what they think. I mean, 'cause you can't hope for more than that. The problem is that people are afraid to say what they think. You know, they're afraid to talk against the crowd. They're afraid to say something that might not be accepted. And I think that you would be surprised ... the repercussions ... if people just ... you know, like, people were calling in here, telling us what they think about the gun control issue - I mean, that kind of stuff. Just, you know, call into radio shows and say what you think. Write on the internet, say what you think. You know, 'cause that's all you can do, in a certain sense. You know, tryin' to get violent with things is really not a productive way to do things. You know, trying to start a revolution or starting with this revolutionary rhetoric is really ... it's really naïve.

Joe: Well, it was ... it's something for another time. It worked at another time ...

Jason: At another time ...

Joe: Today, it does not work.

Jason: No, and it's not a good idea. And I always say, you know, I mean, it's easier to take a government that exists and work to fix it - that's the best hope you got - than to try to tear it down and put something ... because that has always also lead to a very bad situation where what you replace is usually worse then what you took down ...

Joe: Yeah. And if there's gonna be a revolution, today, that's appropriate for the times that people live in then it can't be like a revolution of the past, because in the past hundreds of thousands of years ago , the grievances were, and the injustices were, pretty clear. And people could just go ahead, have a revolution, and get rid of the injustice and put it in place. And there was nothing covert about it, but today, a large part, as far as I'm concerned a large part, of the main way in which people are enslaved and social injustice is kind of allowed to pass, or gets passed unnoticed and people accept it, is through the control of information and the dumbing down, and the manipulation - the emotional manipulation of people - and preventing of people from really getting ... having access to the truth of the situation. So today, the kind of revolution that is most appropriate for the problems ...

Jason: Is a revolution of the mind ...

Joe: Is a revolution of the mind, basically.

Jason: I mean, you gotta remember the first law of war is to use a weapon that your enemy fears. And from what the government does - the massive propaganda campaign that it has - What does it fear? It fears people with opinions. It doesn't fear gun control. I mean, the gun control thing is not to ban guns, they don't want to take them away from you, they just want to legislate them. That's just about pretext, that's just about, you know ...

Niall: It's about irritating the hell out of you.

Jason: It's about irritating people and about driving a wedge between them.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: What the government fears is people with opinions with the courage to speak them.

Joe: And to stand up for them.

Jason: That's all they're afraid of. I mean, you don't even have to go out into the streets. If all you can do is say aloud to the T.V. "That's some bullshit. I don't believe you. This is how it happened," - That's better than nothing.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: Just have an opinion and speak it.

Joe: Well, it's not even just opinions, but it's, you know, people ... the government fears people with some semblance of the truth or at least a little idea of what a lie and what the truth is, you know ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: ... that they can see through the bullshit.

Niall: They don't want sense, they don't want an informed opinion.

Joe: Exactly, informed opinion. And they don't want people talking to each other about these things that they've discovered, and spreading this information, 'cause they know that that will ultimately ...

Jason: That's all you have to do.

Joe: That will create a revolution, of some sort. It has to begin ...

Jason: It'll create a revolution of the mind, that's it. Just telling people, "Look, I don't believe what's going on and I think that they can do better." That's all you have to ... just saying that is a good start because there are a lot of people who aren't even saying that.

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: And talking about an armed revolution - it's just, I say hyperbowl, my mom is always correcting me that's it's ...

Niall: Hyperbole.

Jason: Hyperbole. Hyperbowl [chuckles]. It's just hyperbowl talking about that. I mean, it's dangerous hyperbowl. It's gonna ... somebody who's really mentally not there is gonna actually take that kind of stuff seriously and get himself and a lot of people killed - a very dangerous situation, and unnecessary.

Joe: And it's monopolizing the whole idea of revolution and doing something against the government, by people, and in such a way that most people are like "I don't wanna ... I don't wanna have anything to do with that," do ya know what I mean? So they say "Well, they're taking care of the revolution, I'm just gonna go back" but, they don't realize that that's the wrong way to go about the revolution. Those people are basically ... they're distractions. And maybe they're conscious in what they're doing ... they're to distract the real ...

Jason: Yes. Remember that when the Nazis took over, some of the first people that they locked up were the vocal people who spoke out against them because that's what they were afraid of.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: That's who they go after because it's universal - they're always afraid of people who speak their minds and have the courage to do so.

Joe: Well, have we done this topic to death?

Jason: Um, I don't think we've even covered one one hundredth of this topic, at this point.

Niall: Yeah. You can see ... you get an idea of how complex this issue is. And when you hear Piers Morgan or other mainstream commentators ...

Jason: Yeah, we didn't even get to talk about this guy. Every time I hear that name talk ...

Niall: [chuckle]

Jason: ... I feel like a demonic entity has mounted the left side of my head and is tying to insert some sort of sinister seed, ejected from the sphincter of his neo-cortex ...

Joe and Niall: [laughter]

Jason: ... into my mind! I hate that guy so much! Oh my god! I can't stand listening to him! And we didn't even get to talk about him.

Niall: So turn off your T.V. and tune into SOTT Talk Radio next week where we'll be talkin', and talkin', about the real issues.

Joe: Yeah. We will. Probably not this topic again. But, we can ... Niall just started to sum up there, more or less, but didn't finish by saying that when you hear people on T.V. and - the T.V. news pundits - talking about the gun control debate, and who's for and who's against, just understand that it's a distraction, that you can kinda pretty much ignore - there's nothing wrong with having guns in a society. But, there is a problem with a society where there's a high level of crime. And maybe people need to look at the underlying ... the reasons for the injustice within their society and what the source of those injustices are. And direct your energy and your attention and if you feel like protesting, you feel like revolting, or whatever, in your own particular way, eh, go ahead and direct it at the source of the problem. Which is, ultimately, corrupt government. It's kind of a no-brainer.

And don't be ... don't allow the mainstream media, and your politicians, and your whoever, to force you into this kinda like, you know, black and white thinking and it's basically a problem among American ... the American people or American society because that's not the root of the problem. The root of the problem is psychopaths in power and the fact that we, as a population of the planet, have allowed these psychopaths to, basically, control us for - well it's gone on for centuries at this stage.

Jason: Yup.

Joe: And it has reeked havoc, basically, on human society and the potential for human society to be something.

Jason: And just remember one thing, it was Miomoto Musashi who said, "It is false to die with your sword undrawn." So, if you got an opinion, man, speak it. Don't leave that sword sheathed.

Joe: Alright. Well, we're gonna leave it there for this week. Thanks everyone for calling in and for listening. We hope you enjoyed it.

Jason: Thanks for having me.

Niall: Yeah. Thanks for coming in, Jason.

Joe: Thanks to Jason.

Niall: If you haven't checked out his article yet, Jason wrote an article - it's currently on the SOTT page ...

Joe: Okay, we have one more caller and we have time to take it this time.

Jason: How much more time do we have?

Joe: We have enough time to take it.

Jason: Okay. Go ahead.

Joe: And I think I know this one, so this might be interesting.

Joe: Hello, Away With the Fairies?

Caller Patrick: Absolutely, yeah. Can you hear me?

Joe: I can indeed. Patrick, how are you doing?

Niall: Good evening Patrick, welcome.

Caller Patrick: Good evening, I was hoping to [inaudible] you.

Jason: [inaudible]

Caller Patrick: I'm what, sorry sir?

Jason: [laughter] I'm just messin' with you Pat.

Jason: Are you addressing me, young man?

Jason: [laughter]

Joe: No, he thought you were someone else.

Caller Patrick: Yeah, okay. You've got 59 minutes left there, mate.

Joe: I know, yeah. I know that, yeah.

Caller Patrick: Good evening now.

Niall: Good evening, Pat. Thanks for joining us.

Caller Patrick: Yeah. You were touching on a subject then you just said, like, you know, this subject hasn't even been touched upon yet, but you were ... well, you were touching on it and where we really need to go with it is the real revolution is in the mind and evolution of the mind and education. It's an educational revolution. Which is actually needed now and not someone like Alex Jones. I mean, can you imagine someone like Alex Jones without his show, and how he is at home, that man? He's a psychopath, man. But, yet, I mean, it's the evolution of the mind and education is what we need. How do we address that? 'Cause that's where we really need to go.

Jason: I mean, I can just see Alex Jones at home ...

Joe: No, I don't wanna think about Alex at home.

All: [laughter].

Joe: But eh ...

Jason: His wife ...[in female voice]"If you don't give me kisses, 1776 will commence again!"...

All: [laughter]

Caller Patrick: [inaudible] [in Alex Jones voice] this god damn toaster!

Joe: Hang on Patrick. I think we actually have a call here, you just stay on the line. We have a call here from Alex Jones ... he wants to tell you.

[Plays Alex Jones audio]
I'm here to tell you! 1776 will commence again! If you try to take our firearms!
[machine gun fire] [falling bomb] [explosion] [old western bullet ricochet]
[end audio]

Joe: Sorry about that, Patrick. Alex just ...

Jason: [inaudible] [laughing] Did we just lose Alex?

Joe: I think he lost the [inaudible]

All: [laughter]

Joe: Death by misadventure, but eh ...

Jason: [laughter]

Caller Patrick: It would be a great massacre by misadventure if anyone actually follows the lunatics such as him, really. I mean, you know [Alex Jones voice] "Let's grab guns 'n go and shoot the guy!" You know, well, what is that? Our new leaders are Alex Jones, for gods sake, man.

Joe: Not only is he engaging in a phoney debate, as we just been at pains to kind of try and explain to people, but also he's doing it in a really obnoxious and stupid way. So I mean, he ...

Jason: Right. I mean, so is Piers Morgan, in all fairness [audio dropped]

Joe: Well yeah. Well, he's doing it in a snide ...

Jason: Piers Morgan's a snobbish, pusillanimous, supercilious kind of ...

Niall: Well, if anything sums up, or could encapsulate, the phoney debate - it's those two, having it out, in the ring ...

Joe: Yeah, absolutely.

Jason: Those two are ...

Niall: [audio dropped]

Caller Patrick: [laughter]

Jason: Yeah. I mean, Piers Morgan with his [sardonically] "Oh, he's a model. England's a model for how you should be."

Joe: Yeah.

Jason: I mean, what a wanker. He's a soulless wanker. [laughs]

Joe: But, Patrick, I take your point there. Yeah, obliviously that's what we were kinda saying at the end. That it needs to be a revolution of the mind and people need to be educated. And that's kind of one of the reasons or the main reason why we wanted to start these kind of radio shows because what other way do we have to try and help this revolution along, the revolution of the mind, but by talking about it and giving [audio dropped] to discuss it. 'Cause it's only through discussing these kinda things that people come to conclusions and real realizations about it, you know? Otherwise it just gets ... loops in their head, ya know?

Caller Patrick: It's true. Well, what we're saying is, like, you know, we're talking about, you know, Alex Jones or whoever, you know. But the way to take back the country or, like, whatever is by arms and it's not. Because if you're having a revolution and you're not educated then all you're gonna replace it with is [inaudible]. Augusto Boal , who was a man in South America. Augusto Boal, I think he wrote "Theater of the Oppressed," you know. And he said, you know, "The oppressors become the oppressed and the oppressed become the oppressors," you know, once ... it's like a seesaw. It's just a stupid seesaw that goes up and down.

Jason: Joseph Michael Linsner once, you know, said, you know, "the oppressed love their oppressors you can't wait to follow in their example," exactly knowing that.

Caller Patrick: Absolutely.

Jason: And, you know, I would point out, 'cause, you know, Niall had written down John Lennon's quote, which I should read 'cause it's very pertinent to this, "When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system's game. The establishment will irritate you, pull your beard, flick your face to make you fight. 'Cause once they've got you violent, they know how to handle you. The only thing they don't know how to handle is non-violence and humor."

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: And that's an important thing, you know?

Joe: Yeah. Absolutely. Non-violence and humor. And humor that can form ...

Jason: That doesn't mean they wont come after you ...

Joe: No, but ...

Jason: They'll still come after you for it.

Joe: Absolutely. But you can, you know, I mean, you can spread the revolution much more effectively, in that way, by telling the truth and using humor to tell the truth which is very effective ... effective way of doing that - exposing lies.

Jason: Don't be confrontational with people.

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Patrick: Going back over old signs, which is things that don't fall in free fall and things like that, and reeducate, you know, such an old law, really, would be a start, wouldn't it, in that people understand what free fall is ...

Joe: You mean for 9/11?

Caller Patrick: Well, yeah 9/11, well, I mean, you know, if you talk to anybody on the street they will know the word kinda free fall, even if they're not educated into why free fall is what it is and, you know, holding the bag and the feathers together. And reeducated in that kind of way and then you can point and say "And now can you see that that's why that is [inaudible] that's not possible." You know, the earth goes around the sun, you know?

Jason: Everybody who wants to talk about what's wrong with the world wants to start with 9/11 and I think going to 9/11 is a mistake. Ya know, we need to start with talking to people about how to just treat others decently. How to be good to people. How to have goodness in your heart and how to, you know ... 'cause I was in a dentist's office, here's an example - I'm in France, I was in a dentist office the other day and a woman came in and she was a little bit freakin' out and lookin' for the secretary, right? And she's lookin' for the secretary and she can't find her. So this woman who's sitting next to me stands up and says in French, but essentially what she says to the woman is, you know, "You should have to wait like everybody else." At this point I was already out of my chair trying to help, because I thought that if she was so frantic to find the secretary then she might be in more pain then me and I should help her find some help for that, you know?

Joe: Mmhmm.

Jason: This other woman had no goodness in her heart and didn't think for an instant that this other woman, maybe, you know, she had a kid in the car who was, like, dying in pain and she was [sympathetically] "I know" ... and actually what ended up turning out, what it was. You know, she was trying to find some help for her kid who had, like, knocked out her tooth or something and, you know? I mean, look, that's the kind of situations that you get in with people. And, you know, that type of person doesn't need a discussion on free fall or controlled demolition or any of this stuff with 9/11 ...

Caller Patrick: I know what your saying and I totally agree with you, in that sense, you know. At a [inaudible] level it's like standing in a supermarket with one can of beans and someone's got a full trolley and, you know, you say "Get in front of me." You know, I do that all the time, if that's the case. Yeah, it's a different thing, but it's the same thing. And I agree with you totally. But, no, I think you have to go back to the education ... of educating people of what it is they're actually looking at and seeing, and how simple ... the actual smoke is. But that's very difficult because, as you know, the mind is a very, very [chuckles] strange thing to start off with at all because evolution, in the mind ... it's like, you know, Leonardo da Vinci was talking to people in the pub, when he was a young lad, saying "Look at this plane that I've drawn" and the people next to him are going "He is completely nuts." Mind is a kind of a strange thing. The body lives in the same time and space, but the mind is a different thing and it's evolved in a different way. And when you start talking through to people, sometimes they think you're talking down to them. And that's very difficult, you know?

Jason: Well, that's because a lot of times ... I see this because I hang around with a lot of people who are into various truth movements - there's 9/11 and all this other stuff - and they actually do kinda talk down to people. And, you know, believe 9/11 or don't believe 9/11, I still say that that's not really the place to start. That the place to start is about insisting on a certain level of humanity and culture. A certain level of goodness and a certain level of virtue and honor in your dealings with other people.

Caller Patrick: I'd say that goes without saying ...

Jason: That's very important. And people are not educated to consider value. They value money. They value, you know, getting theirs. And they don't value things like community and honor. I mean, in a certain sense, a lot of this anti-second amendment stuff comes down to - it's a position of honor for a lot of people that, you know, you don't wanna throw away everything that other people worked for unless there's a really good reason for it. And there isn't. And people are saying that "Here you are, you're coming up with these circular arguments, these facile arguments, these parade of horribles, just because you think that you're gonna feel safe." And, you know, it's just a completely dishonorable way of behaving. It's not quite good.

So, I think that the source ... where we need to start with education is educating people to demand humanity from government. Demand humanity from the courts and from other people and to insist that they not be taken advantage of. And that's more important than whether or not some towers fell down directly or were hit with a plane. Because, in the end, you know, in the grand scheme of things, 9/11 is pushed as being super, super important to the world, and it is very important, but it is not the most important thing in the entire history of mankind because we are talking about ten thousand, eleven thousand, twelve thousand years of living under pathocrats, of living under psychopaths, and the reason we get lead astray is because of greed and rapacious behaviors and not cherishing, you know, our community and the people around us, and not being educated to goodness, in a certain sense, of responsibility.

And that's what America was founded on, you know, republicanism, democratic republicanism - civic duty, virtue. participating in your government, participating in the decisions, and voicing your opinions, and becoming informed about them. And so that's why I think that education really would help. That would be a revolutionary education. Not telling people that some buildings fell in a certain way ...

Joe: People are gonna have to do that themselves, because that's not [inaudible] on offer from the government, from the powers that be. I mean, [inaudible] exactly the opposite. That's something that you have to do in your own community and decide to do yourself, independent of the authorities.

Jason: Absolutely. But everything, in a certain sense ... it's a government of the people, for the people, by the people - that's what the slogan is, so people need to take that seriously ...

Joe: So get rid of the politicians is what you mean.

Jason: No, I'm not saying get rid of the politicians ...

Joe: I am.

Jason: ... 'cause you need 'em.

Caller Patrick: I am. [chuckles]

Jason: No, don't get rid of poli- See, people ...
Joe: New ones at least.

Jason: No, not necessarily, you know, because ...

Caller Patrick: Jason, the thing is about the 9/11 thing is [inaudible] not so important. I would disagree that it has the whole world talking at this point in time, you know, you're either for or you're against. And everybody has heard of 9/11, it's like Christmas day, you know.

Jason: [inaudible] a great place to start, that's what I'm saying ...

Caller Patrick: It is a great place to start

Jason: It polarizes people. It only polarizes them further by pushing it because all you do is get all the people who agree with you on your side and all the people who don't agree with you on the other side ...

Joe: That's because the debate has been hijacked ...

Jason: Of course. They have been highjacked.

Joe: ... already, by the media. And when you talk about information, here, you're talkin' about the control the media has over the flow of information. So people really do need to develop their own forms of media and look to alternative news sites like, S O T T dot net, for example.

Jason: Absolutely.

Joe: So you can look at websites like that where it's uncontrolled information. It's free-flowing information that is not controlled by any specific interest, or corporate interest, or anyone. And you get as close as you can to the truth.

Jason: True.

Joe: Because without the truth, people are just absorbing more lies and they're just goin' downhill.

Jason: Right.

Caller Patrick: So how many people would you say - and this is just gonna be a real guess - How many people buy guns to protect themselves and how many people actually buy guns to actually go out and do harm?

Jason: Well, I don't know. I mean, you don't those ... have access to those kinda statistics. I think that the large majority, almost, like, let's say 95-98% of people who purchase guns do them for completely legitimate and above-board purposes and have no intention of doing violence, in any criminal way, to people.

I think that one thing that we kind of forget about is that a lot of people who buy guns for self defense are buying them with the intent to shoot people who try to rob or rape them. And so that when you end up having shootings where people are dying and everyone's like "Oh my god, people are dying from being shot," it's like, yes, but the people who bought the guns for self defense were intending that in the first place. And so people kind of have this sort of, like, out-of-sight out-of-mind mentality when they have that argument. They say "I wanna buy it for self defense" but then they get cowed like one of the callers talking about the whole liberal and the conservative flip-flopping - they get cowed into saying "I just posses a gun as a deterrent. I don't actually intend to shoot someone who tries to rape me. I'm just going to fire a warning shot." And that's bullshit. That's complete and total bullshit. So a lot of times you find people that, when they buy it for self defense, which is legitimate, that they are gonna shoot somebody who breaks into their home or they are gonna shoot somebody who tries to rape them. And we need to see the statistics of shootings, in that context, that a lot of those shootings - like when ...

Caller Patrick: Mmhmm.

Jason: There's several anti-gun arguments that're like: in all the states with conceal and carry laws, there are a large number of shootings. Well duh. Everyone's carrying guns for self defense, therefore, when they defend themselves, they are going to discharge the firearm which leads to a bullet being ejected from the barrel and into another human being. That's why they got the gun. So of course there are more shootings but there is less crime. Which is what the gun lobby is arguing, he's saying "Yes, there's more shootings but less crime."

So yes, I do think that the majority of people buy them for legitimate purposes and sometimes, to be honest, that legitimate purpose is shooting another person to protect them from raping you or robbing you or some other thing.

Joe: And that brings us back to the fundamental ... the underlying problem, which is a problem of ... within society.

Jason: Violence.

Joe: Of violence in society.

Jason: A culture of violence.

Joe: And what we just spent the past two hours and fifteen minutes trying to investigate, which was what are the causes of the social ills and injustice in society that ultimately leads to, leaving aside psychopaths and people who kill people for the fun of it ...

Jason: Right.

Joe: ... but the things that cause people to commit crime against other people. And it's ultimately people fighting against each other and it has to be by design because in an ideal human society with normal human beings, you would not have that. People, generally, just want to live their lives peaceably and get on with the thing of life, you know.

Jason: The thing to come to terms with is, we're never gonna get back to that ideal society because ...

Joe: No.

Caller Patrick: No.

Jason: ... because we've intermixed so much, you know, with each other, you know, that that genetic material for being a psychopathic person is inside of kinda like everyone, you know. Anybody could be psychopath type of thing, you know.

Joe: Or can be psychopath-ized.

Jason: Or can be psychopatholigized. So what we're having to deal with is a situation where we're never gonna get to the perfect society. So we have to come up with realistic ways to defend and maintain the peace at our society, and one of the solutions on offer, which I happen to agree with, at least in part for a lot of the issues, is that people should be able to own weapons for their self defense.

That's in line with the constitution. That's in line with the established laws. And I think that it is a reasonable solution at this period of time. And that, as is proven in all other countries that have gun bans or serious gun legislation, other types of crime rise. Japan has the strongest gun laws. It's number six in the entire world for violent crime and yet has no guns. So obviously, the guns aren't getting rid of that. China, you know, has very strict gun laws, I don't know the specifics of them, but there was a story on CNN where some Chinese professor was criticizing America for their shootings and at the same time there were a series of spree stabbings in elementary schools. They didn't have any guns but they had knives, type of thing.

And you see that consistently ... I have the statistics here, I'm not gonna read 'em. But in the U.K., and France, and Germany, they've all had school shootings, they've all had spree killings. But they also have very high instances of burglary, violent assault, etcetera and so forth. I mean, the statistics don't really lie. They're substantially higher than even the United States. The United States has a population like five times bigger than these people and this extant culture of violence. So, I mean, you know, it's impractical in society to take away all the guns you know and that doesn't solve it.

Joe: And it's not gonna happen in the U.S.

Jason: It's not gonna happen in the U.S.

Joe: I mean, the government isn't even intending it. Let's just make that clear. As far as we're concerned, the government is not intending to take your guns away. That's a phoney debate..

Jason: Yeah, it's a phoney debate.

Joe: ... to redirect the ...

Caller Patrick: There was a film, wasn't there? The Boys From the Hood, remember the film The Boys From the Hood?

Joe: Yeah.

Caller Patrick: Where they had like a gun shop on each corner so that they would have the African Americans shooting each other.

Joe: Mmhmm.

Caller Patrick: Just to [inaudible] out and buy the guns to kill them.[inaudible] An amazing film.

Joe: When you say cointelpro, you say a lot, you know?

Jason: Yeah.

Caller Patrick: Yeah. Yeah. So anyway, I forgot my name showed up when I called you. I was gonna be one of those callers, you know.

Joe: Yeeeah.

Caller Patrick: One of those last minute callers, who [inaudible]

Joe: We had to cut ya off.

Caller Patrick: [laughter]

Joe: Your voice is recognizable, whether your name's there or not.

Caller Patrick: I'm so sorry fella. I'm sorry. But, yeah, education and the evolution of the mind is where we really gotta go and that's so difficult isn't it?

Joe: Yup. But we do what we can do, you know? Alright, we're gonna wrap it up.

Caller Patrick: Alright. Tusen tack. Thank you very much.

Joe: Thanks for callin', Patrick.

Jason: Thanks Pat!

Niall: Thanks Patrick.

Joe: Good to hear from you.

Jason: Take care. Stay safe, man.

Joe: Alright. So, yeah, like we said fifteen, twenty minutes ago, I think we've done this, to death, even though Jason disagrees. I think we've done it to death. Because we've said as much as we can say on it. And I hope we have said a few things that have maybe helped people to understand ...

Jason: Yeah.

Joe: ... what's really going on and not get caught up in the black and white thinking and the whole redirection of social anger and frustration away from the real source of the problem, in society today, which is corrupt government. And that's where everybody on the planet should be directing their anger if they have anger, and frustration, and grievances that they need addressed. They all stem from corrupt government and that's our final word on the matter.

Jason: Peaceful way. In a peaceful way.

Joe: We're gonna call it quits, for tonight, 'cause it's late where we are.

Niall: Thanks again to Jason for coming in and giving us an awesome rundown on facts on the matter, when it comes to gun control and the real problems. Next week, same time, same place. SOTT Talk Radio. Goodnight.