On Weapon Bans and "Normal" People (Reply to Matt Easton)
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 05. 2021
- Normalcy is a tricky word, and a surprisingly nebulous concept when you try to define it. Either way, there are certainly insiders and outsiders when it comes to specific interests, hobbies, subcultures, etc. People outside of the sword community (or knife enthusiasts or "gun nuts") may find it hard to understand why anyone "needs" weapons.
So here is an attempt to explain why. Also my perspective on what sort of dystopian society we would live in the default was that everything you want to do or own needed to be justified and was banned otherwise.
The Scholagladiatoria video I'm responding to:
• Why weapon BANS are ME...
** Support the channel **
Help fund future videos, get bonus content and other rewards:
/ skallagrim
www.subscribestar.com/skallagrim
/ @skallagrim
Books about history and/or martial arts, swords, knives, video/audio equipment, and other stuff I recommend (as an Amazon Affiliate I earn commission through these links):
US - www.amazon.com/shop/skallagri...
Canada - amzn.to/2HeOCMA
Other ways to support the channel by shopping through affiliate links:
Kult of Athena, my favorite online store for reproductions of historical arms and armor, fantasy swords, etc:
www.kultofathena.com/?koa=259
Where to get HEMA gear and practice swords:
www.woodenswords.com/?Click=1799
** Social media & merch **
How to contact me (can't always reply, since I get too many messages):
/ skallagrimnilsson
See a list of my video uploads:
/ _skallagrim_
/ skallagrimyt
Channel-related shirts and other merch:
skallagrim.spreadshirt.com/
teespring.com/stores/skallagrim
My side channel (for rambles, vlogs, opinions, gaming, etc):
/ @skallhalla
** Music **
Outro:
"Highland Storm" by The Slanted Room Records
theslantedroom.github.io/stev... - Zábava
"we need to ban butterfly knifes so people dont hurt themselves"
Chainsaw jugglers: adorable
I still can't tell why exactly they are banned, along with switchblades.
@@alexsm3882 Politicians who watch too many movies. Especially with switchblades.
honestly, every time someone brings up danger or people hurting themselves, just show them the science of effects of a high suger diet.
It's WAY worse than any weapon, yet somehow we just accept that.
@@Nerobyrne the overly high obsession with "safety" is so stupid.
there is no such thing of being safe
the world is not safe to be in at all!
people are dying as i type this comment.
its like
as long as you are careful the odds of getting injured by anything
is mitigated
not absolute 0 but it is reduced.
@@Boomrainbownuke9608 "people are dying as i type this comment." Well stop typing then you bastard!
That never gets old. “Drive me closer! I want to hit them with my sword!”
That needs to be on a shirt
@@Megatron_95 It already is, cause it's a quote from Warhammer 40K.
@Itachirevived canuckified God damn it 🤣🤣
In what video does it happen?
@@ailediablo79 proselytize elsewhere.
Earl: What kind of fuse is that?
Burt: Cannon fuse.
Earl: What in the hell do you use it for?
Burt: (visibly confused) My cannon.
Tremors reference for the win
"Florida man fires American Civil War era cannon at neighbors backyard during dispute"
@@kailaine3974 I have not heard about that one.
But I know 10 other guys in fl. That also own a cannon.
So I could see the possibility. Love florida.
@@tbjtbj4786 wasn't actually in florida lmao. Surprisingly this was New York
www.nydailynews.com/news/national/man-repeatedly-aimed-fired-unloaded-cannon-new-york-neighbor-home-article-1.1517907
@@kailaine3974 ok thinks
A little ga town right across the line has 7 set up in there courthouse square. I have looked at them. They are capable of being loaded and they have balls by them. Would they be safe to shoot no idea. But there capable enough its surprising there like that.
And I have heard this from a game warden thats a civil war collector. He was called to look at some cannon balls at a hunting camp near natural Bridge ( a battle sight)
He came in then ran out the door telling everyone to get out.
One of the 2 balls they were using as a log guard on the fire place was a explosive shell not a normal iron cannon ball.
When there is a talk about weapons being inherently bad, I always remember Conan. "It is not the sword, but the hand that holds it."
Yeah, especially if most of the hands in the country are bad. Then a law is issued in the country prohibiting these instruments, since the government has to rake the trash that most of them do because of their narrow-minded mind.
... also the lamentation of their women, or something,
Right but obviously there is a line somewhere, like I don't want my neighbor to have nuclear weapons or exceptionally volatile chemicals in their house. Obviously swords should not be banned but there is a line in the sand somewhere where most of society wants you to be trained and qualified before owning some kind of dangerous material or object
@@xXEGPXx meh if you want to mess with radioactive or toxic chemicals go ahead just remember you're responsible for what happens with them
and worse the hands that are a-holes about that hand sitting doing nothing to any other hands and just likes cool things
"Ban swords!"
"do you have (insert household object)?"
"Yes why?"
"OhmyGosh you could hurt someone with that, ban it lol!"
they should ban rocks. do you have any idea how many people have been injured or killed from rock relayed trauma?
"D'you 'ave a loicense for 'at potato peela'?"
"Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which We the people tell the government what it is allowed to do. We the people are free." - Ronald Reagan
@@iamzid I mean all guns are essentially is a tool that throws super hard rocks at people super fast haha
@@SimuLord unfortunately quotes rarely live up to what they stand for.
Canada, where nunchuks are banned, and they are literally just two sticks attached together with some rope. Also just banned scary looking air soft and paintball guns.........
Australia makes you register nerf gell blasters guns as real firearms.
And this is why we've taken to calling them "markers", because there have been pushes to do the same thing in the US.
They'd effectively outlaw the game of paintball by turning the whole thing into "assault with a deadly weapon".
@@DH-xw6jp lol
@@ssholum Well luckily, we still can use paintball guns, just not scary looking "assault style" ones. I think banning them outright will be the next step though, they do it in little steps, cuz they can't get away with big ones usually....
i think that banning them is a bit far but, only use them in regulated facilities should be the goal. Soft/paintball guns ecxist because poeple wanted to shoot each other and not kill one another, thats why they were made, and relegating that to special places designed for safety of use is only logical.
"Need" has never been the requisite for ownership among free people.
this is an excellent line
explain that to dynamite aficionados.
@@Dewydidit Well, in the US, you can legally make explosives and own them... you just can’t transport them or make them into a fragmentation grenade :)
This is why I hate the import bans in place in the US. What was considered a "military style" firearm when the bans were authored are highly collectible now and I think it's sad that they are disassembled and defaced so they can be imported to one of the few places they won't be totally destroyed.
@@Isometrix116 That's strange... I wouldn't try explaining that to a judge.
"Under federal explosives law, it is illegal to manufacture, store, distribute, receive or transport explosive materials without a federal explosives license or permit (FEL/FEP)."
www.atf.gov/explosives/illegal-explosives#:~:text=Under%20federal%20explosives%20law%2C%20it,permit%20(FEL%2FFEP).
That reminded me of an article "By the numbers - the average Australian doesn't exist ... not a single one of us is 'normal'". They analyzed the census data and found out that not a single person in a country is average
Fuckin' A Australia.
On average, people have 50% male and 50% female reproductive organs.
@@alemfi good one (=
@@alemfi technically more like 48% - 47% and 5% other/incomplete/none (guesstimate)
HA! Knew it! Australia is a fabrication of CGI and fake news!
wow, first skall called metatron a weeb, now calls matt a mundane normie, reckless lol
now i want to see him calling shad an uncultured swine
Nevermind him, Skall's just mad because he's not in that RPG campaign with the others. ;P
@@Logaan777 "no I won't be an elf, let me be the dwarf ! :( :( :("
Skall (unknowingly) called Shads Excalibur sword a cheap wallhanger :)
What'd I miss? When was the weeb comment?
shad is uncultured. he threw nunchucks on the ground. twice.
Skal: "I don't use illicit drugs" [huge puffs of white smoke rise in the background]
he never said he didnt produce them
Only pipe weed
In Canada weed has been completely legal for quite a while
@@chadfalardeau5396 one could also make the argument drugs are processed and weed isnt so depending on definition cannabis isnt a "drug"
I thought Skallagrim didn’t smoke? Or his old stance was that it wasn’t his thing, and it wasn’t something he needed.
Burden of proof. That's the key take away for me in that whole rant. The burden of proof should initially be on those making a claim, don't harass me for a rebuttal or a response. Make a solid, factual argument with supporting data first then we can talk about it.
OH yeah.... You're completely right.
I love how you phrase it as "why do you need" sets up the default for others to tell you what you're allowed. I can't get that out of my head now.
I hate people with the mindset of "I don't understand it, I fear it, BAN IT!"
Roblos admins when they see a guy with a name they cant read:
Welcome to humanity.
fun innit
@@nordoceltic7225 you just described my mother 🤣
Her: “Why do you have all these weapons?”
Me: “they’re first and foremost tools; how they’re used defines them. Second, I think they’re cool. Thirdly, they’re an expression of humans ingenuity, creativity and a symbol of the development of intelligence and understanding how our world functions. Using that knowledge to manipulate the very environment we are surrounded by to aid in survival. Finally, they’re cool, did I mention that?”
Her: (reeeeeeeeeeee)
Certainly happens a lot, but there's also people who ban things, not just out of general fear, but because it's just a smart idea to keep out of most people's hands if possible. Like most nuclear fissile material. Or having invasive species as pets in areas where they're already becoming a problem.
Another reason why Matt speaks out about this kind of thing is that Britain has been seeing weapon bans as of late, and on top of that he runs an antique sword business, so it especially matters to him.
Britain has some very backwards thinking politicians with a severe case of "disconnected from reality". Am I insulting Britain as a whole? No, just its politicians.
@@LazyLifeIFreak You should insult Britain as a whole lets be real
In the UK you get jailed for "Offensive" Tweets.
I'm rapidly tiring of it. I live in the UK, and I've been collecting swords for the better part of 20 years. It's been getting harder and harder to add to my collection, and the legislation is dumb as shit and entirely reactionary. The worst part of it (for me) is a general belief that swords are illegal. This isn't helped by knife amnesties. We had one in Nottingham a few years ago, and it puzzled me. For starters, none of the blades handed in to the police were illegal. I also had to wonder how many of those blades had been used to commit a crime, and the criminals were taking advantage of the amnesty to dispose of the evidence. I actually had to argue with a cop a few years ago who'd been informed of a "dangerous weapon" I was apparently in possession of. The weapon in question?
An old machete I was using to clear brambles and thicket.
So the constable came over, made a lot of unnecessary notes, asked my neighbour some questions (I have no idea what they were), and eventually buggered off. When I later related the story online I got a total nutcase screaming at me, saying that there was "no lawful reason" for anyone to own a sword, and that I was a danger to society. Thankfully the vast majority of people told her to stop being such a nutter and she skulked off, but there does seem to be this idea that swords are illegal or should be illegal, even amongst people who should know better. That cop wasn't the first one to ask me questions about a blade or imply that I wasn't allowed to have one. In recent years it's gotten harder to buy legitimate collector's pieces, partly because a few years ago a kid bought a piece of crap online and used it to kill someone.
I'm starting to rant, and I'm aware that when I rant I can come across as unfeeling and not a little selfish, but I'm sick and tired of the "Oh you have swords? So you're a psycho with an illegal weapons collection?" attitude from so many people. It's a breath of fresh air when someone gets excited about them instead. A few years back we had to move house, and some of the moving men were highly entertained by my swords. It's a funny thing to see child-like glee on a grown man's face when they pull a sword from its sheathe and announce that they're a viking.
Of course I have sympathy for those hurt by bladed weapons, all the more so for people who've lost loved ones to a knife attack. But banning the things won't work, and just makes life miserable for those of us interested in blades. Humans are remarkably capable when it comes to improvising weapons with which to do murder, and banning "samurai swords" and "zombie knives" isn't going to do any good.
@@TitusVarus bro the UK jails people for speaking on the internet, your country literally has a "corner for free speech" where cops still arrest you for "Offensive speech" if you haven't left already, you should.
"Where is my Super Suit???"
"Why do you need it!!!"
"Cuz it's a crime to fight crime, *NAKED!*
@@hippiehippo9030 Naked vigilante is TWO crimes!
I read super slut, quite different
I like the common ethic definition of "freedom" (hope I translate it rightly): "the freedom should be gained as far as someone others freedom is not restricted by this"
Love this one
Guy trips over your dogs leash.
Canadian Police- "We need to confiscate that leash sir; it's considered a weapon now."
Reminds me of that one shitpost about how in the future, people will be arrested for “assaulting an officer” when they’ve removed the battery of one of those robot dogs cause it tried to crush their windpipe
@@chaotic_enby2625 God, the scary part is it could actually happen, considering tear gas is only considered a deadly weapon if people kick them back at police
Not just Canadian cops, I can assure you. In the US, NRA nuts loaded down with more rifles than a Rambo movie are considered "patriots", while me with my rapier is considered a dangerous wackjob, even though I'm not going to attack anything that moves or anyone who dares to disagree with me. I LOVE to short circuit the brains of gun nuts by pointing out that the 2nd Amendment allows people to "bear ARMS", not "bear FIREarms".
@@kitirena_koneko Bro no actual pro-gunners will give you shit for liking swords. You're not "short-circuiting" anyone's brain.
@@kitirena_koneko the muskets at the time of the revolution were military firearms. And the militia is the whole of the people minus a few select Representatives.
Patriots have their heads explode when you explain that bearing arms is the point of the second amendment because you are literally twisting the words so far out of shape that pretzels look straight.
The second amendment is a protection against an out of control government by having the people the armed well enough that the government cannot oppress the people without a heavy toll in blood that is more than the government is willing to bear.
Just look at the cliven bundy situation. The federal government decided to ignore that Cliven Bundy was paying state taxes, and tried to take all of his animals and thus take his livelihood away.
The militia rose and stood in the path of the government, and the government backed down because they were in the wrong.
It was later revealed that the people who were attempting to oppress cliven Bundy in his family had a list of people who that they had managed to injure or grind their faces into the dirt or other such abuses of power, and that they were targeting the family because they could and not because of any actual legal reason.
The second amendment also protects from people like you who would take everything away because you think you're protecting us when you're making us more vulnerable.
* Came for the knowledge, stayed for the beauty. *
Quick note: due to the energy dump in the collider you could probably line up a ton of pizzas and cook them all in one instantaneous go if set up right... only a mild taste of radiation would be detectable i swear!
And they'd still come out less burnt compared to the shit my girlfriend makes
@@RS-xq6je one of those people that need a “do not allow near kitchens” tat eh?
Skall: "Who cares, it's not a beauty Channel"
Also Skall: "Here's how I take care of my beard"
I actually like asking people why they have "abnormal" items specifically because I love hearing the breadth of answers they provide.
One guy likes having swords because he thinks they look cool in his apartment. Someone else practices martial arts with theirs. Someone else likes keeping them around because they bill themselves as an amateur historian.
It's interesting to talk to people about the things they like. Collapsing items down to exclusively their "purpose" denies them the capacity to be artful expression, or really anything other than sterile practicality.
you've made me think about a certain era in recent human history
*cough* 1918-1945 *cough*
i have a very keen interest in the world during that time period, its probably one ov my oldest interests and got me into studying history, philosophy and politics among other things, but it really feels like i can only "talk" about that time period from a particular perspective or else be labelled something derogatory.
this is also why i'm scared about owning any kind of historical memorabilia from that time period that doesn't belong to the allies.
I think you would be fine unless it has a certain windmill on red background flag on it. Maybe even the iron cross one. Most people are quit ignorant if something was used by germany during ww2 with that flag.
So i would say to you sir, relax; and dont let fear control you. Never let ppls oppinions influence you to that point. Trust me, its a slippery slope and a trip to unhappy anxiety land.
Do what you love and screw other ppl. Like i said, in most cases they wouldnt know and you can be selective as to who knows about it.
@@desperado3236
did you just call me sir? assuming my gender!
by the nine divines, ASSAULT!!
but i wholeheartedly agree, and i suppose it isn't fear so much as i feel i just cant express interest in the other sides story without being silenced or people just outright ignoring my opinions, even though i always try to be as unbiased as possible, i guess its more a lament than anything, all of history should be allowed to be discussed and remembered nomatter how ugly it may be.
but ja, the majority is ignorant to a large margin, and most people don't want to hear an opinion unless it confirms what they already believe to be true.
I asked my buddy why he had a pipe
He just said "I like nicotine" and continued to puff
Dude doesn't make excuses lol
The idea that an item must have a practical purpose would end with everybody living in a bare cubicle with no furniture, regular rations of vitamin- infused protein bars and water, some drugs to keep them from being depressed, a toilet in one corner, a rationed shower with plain, unscented soap and ditto shampoo, and a sink which turns on only when the toilet has been used.
He was so close to saying, you can do whatever you want, unless it infringes on someone else.
Glad I'm not the only one who essentially thought that. And that's something that I try to live by.
@@slydoorkeeper4783 Good on you. We should all aspire to such.
True freedom. Cheers to that, mate!
That just creates the laws we have today, with one more step.
Words "infringe" on people these days, and therefore words get banned. Based on your assessment, I assume this is accepted - so long as its a democratically arrived at position. Sure sounds like "freedom" to me.
The only way to govern a society of free people is by moral standards, using a moral doctrine that is set in stone, timeless, and unchanging.
Freedom isn't being free *to* sin, but being free *from* sin.
@@WilliamMcAdams Oh wow, I wish I had more time and disposition to reply to that. All I'll say is that:
1. Words don't infringe on anything
2. Democracy is a direct attack on freedom
3. No one needs to govern a society of free people.
4. A moral doctrine is pretty useful, yes, else people will try to be shitheads and make a government because they think you can solve problems with force
5. Though we may disagree on the terminology, there already is a "moral doctrine" like that, and people who believe and follow it. It's just hard to convince our slavers-, I mean, the government that we don't need them telling us what to do.
6. I don't even know what you mean with this last sentence. But if I interpreted it right, I can't disagree more. Freedom and sin don't even make sense in the same sentence
"Do you need your gun?"
"Why yes, officer. The fact you are asking that indicates exactly *why* I need it."
It should be politician not officer.
Who do you think carries out politician's bullshit? They don't come to your house themselves to take away your property and rights, they have pigs for that.
I understand why in the USA it probably isn't feasible to get rid of guns quickly now, but don't you think society is better of as it is in Scandinavian countries where guns are rarely ever an issue?
@@Lasair517 My primary concern is not the preservation of every single instance of human life at any cost, so, no, I don't think things are better in Scandinavian countries.
@@stupidanon5941 Less death and more happy people percentage wise, yet you think Scandinavia is worse off. Curious stance to take, tell me, why?
You know, I really appreciate these last two vids you have posted. They carry a lot of "wisdom" in them, a lot of thoughtfulness and logic to them. Keep up the great work.
"Even if something was designed to do one thing it can be used to do the other"
Everything can be a hammer basically
except bananas...
@@ianhelyar9553 Are you sure about that?
Also... bananas were not designed... they evolved...
@@michasokoowski6651 Nah, they were designed. Farmers have bred them into helplessness. They no longer have seeds and can only reproduce by suckers. Every banana plant is a clone. (also, a green banana might possibly work as a single use weapon/hammer)
@@ianhelyar9553 Well, there are many types of bananas, you are talking about cavedish banana, which is a product of genetical modifications.
There are many breeds of bananas which weren't geneticaly modificated, various breeds of bananas can also be hard enough to work as hammer, these are the ones that you have to cook them to make them edible... well, they wont poison you but they wont have much nutritive value nor will be tasty.
And when it comes to selective breeding... its still an evolution.
@@michasokoowski6651 Your points are valid, but I have never seen a banana that would work well as a hammer, even the wild, seedy ones have practically no tensile strength to resist an impact, although the first hit might upset your victim and inflame his desire to harm you.
"Why do you need all those swords?"
"Do you play golf?"
"Yes, why?"
"Why do you need all those golf clubs?"
this also works with womens shoes.
If they think I have too many knives, wait til they hear about my guns lmao
Exactly. People are materialistic in nature there for want things and get bored. And we watch Hollywood movies, with weapons in them, therefore wanting the weapons in the movies. Not to mention history, video games, board games, art, books, etc.
@@A.Clifton talk about demolitionranxh then, Matt's got enough guns to start a war
N+1 for hobby stuff
You make a really good argument here linking the vernacular facet of the concept 'normal' - the problem is certainly about a sort of negative liberty (freedom 'from') with respect to one's own choice to take risks as one sees fit, but I hear as well in what you are saying that this is also about human flourishing as an expression of the unique path each person is treading through this world. And that last point, I think, is the best - respect.
Skall, I’ve never smashed the like button harder on one of your videos this hard before. Thank you for making this video.
"Why do you need this?"
"Because I like it, bye."
Like seriously, does these people have everything just purely useful without one unnecessary thing in their life? I don't think so.
Exactly, I'm sure 90% of those people have some sort of figurine, painting, book or movie collect, really anything that is a hobby that outside of putting dopamine in the brain, doesn't do anything. At least half the hobbies I'm into could have a practical purpose beyond "its just being nice".
@@slydoorkeeper4783 Yep and a good number of them have books just because they think they look good on a shelf or coffee table. This is the world we live in and these are the kind of people that vote in it.
I used to be afraid of fire arms but after meeting and going to the range. It's actually pretty fun. I see the interest. Like many think its not as black and white as it's made out to be.
@@slydoorkeeper4783 Yep, exactly that. I myself have large LEGO collection, I build fantasy Warhammer armies and I love it. It serves literally no purpose other than just my pleasure. And what of it? It pleases me, my gf likes it so what do I care for opinion of some random blokes? :)
@@johntheknight3062 i used to love Legos so much as a kid. And to this day will occasionally find myself wondering the aisle. Once I get my own house I may wind up getting back into it. But currently I've been mostly doing Magic the Gathering and playing Pathfinder 1e. Those literally have no purpose beyond maybe serving as an excuse to talk to people or theory crafting, you know, gettingthe brain juices flowing. But otherwise they pretty much don't have a purpose. There are other things I can do to get the gears turning, or to have a reason to socialize.
As a child I used to get banned from playing console games on exam period. It offer no benefit so my parents lift the ban.
I think you articulated your point nicely. I happen to agree but even if I didn't that's the kind of approach I can appreciate. A level headed debate with very valid points. Plenty of food for thought. Thank you for doing what you do, I really do find your channel informative and entertaining. Keep it up :-)
Skallagrim, lately your videos have been hitting the the spot. Not even so much for the info/ opinions (which are lways appreciated) but for the witt/ sense of humor. Then your video about social media burnout. 💯👌
Guy at work: "Hey man you got a knife on you?"
*unsheathes and hands them my Tod Cutler stiletto*
*visible confusion*
normal is a setting on a dryer.
I bought a rondel dagger from Tod a few months ago. It's one of the nicest things I own, and I'm irked that I cannot simply wear it on my belt as one would have done in years past.
Now hand them a kukri and see how they react
Insane, but if that was in the UK and he could come up with some work use for the stiletto it'd be legal.
“Setting on a dryer...” I love that! Gonna use that!😁👍
Fantastic.
In the 80s 90s they panicked over Horror movies, Role Playing Games & Computer games and claimed they were the reason for the violence in the streets... I grew up during that time and did them all and still do which means i must be a serial killer.
I guess it is a good thing that psychologists have soundly disproven those claims.
Don't forget "hardcore music" during the 80s
“If you listen to heavy metal music, the devil will make you kill your mom.” The hysteria is, and always has been, hilarious.
snowboards and skateboards too
stay away from my family, demon!
Towards the end you almost said it
“i'd rather have dangerous freedom than peaceful slavery“
You should’ve said it
But then there’s the opposite to that you may resent me but you will be alive to do so
This is literally a theme in One Piece. The land is the domain of the civilians. It is safer for the most part with governments protection. But the sea offers almost boundless freedom. It is the domain of the pirates though, anarchy loving individuals. Adding to that the sea is unpredictable and home to giant monsters. When you're in the sea, you are free. But you're also subjected to more danger.
@@gwydionrusso3206 I would rather be dead than under a boot, that, by the way, could kill me whenever it's wearer decided it was convenient to do so.
@@gwydionrusso3206 The people I would rightfully resent, being those who would keep me alive in this case, would do so only to profit from me, and you for that matter, and the entire history of power-grabs on Earth is proof enough of that.
Hammers nail into board, misses and hits thumb. [incomming hammer ban]
The ban hammer?
Ban boards to be extra safe!
In the us more people are killed each year by hammers than ar15s
Government: We need to ban *insert guns, swords, knives, etc*
Also Government: Here rebels in far off land, have all the guns, swords, knives, rocket launchers, etc you want.
That your government doesn't want you to have.
Me, a non-intellectual: Wait a minute.
far off land?
laughs in fast and furious
Criminals also don't care about weapon bans, they get them through illegal options anyways.
The even better one is when your government gets caught selling those kinds of weapons to criminals in another country to try and bust them for arms trafficking, but it backfires and they just essentially sold them a bunch of those types of firearms
@@ThrashTillDeth85 I do believe I know the exact one you're referring to. OFAF.
That's when I usually say:
"Instead of asking the "why do this". Make sure to have a good, universally valid, argument to "why not"!"
I like how his personality (or at least the part he shows us) stays consistent. He may have been overconfident a time or two (*cough* reaver cleaver *cough*) but I’ve never witnessed him doing something completely out of character like disrespecting his audience. And while not all of his videos are meant to be educational, I like how you can at least take something away from each video. I’ve been watching his vids for a few years now and I think it’s time for me to subscribe. I’ve put it off for so long because I didn’t think it was necessary, honestly. The more I watch his channel, the more his content comes up in my feed. But he’s definitely earned my subscription and, if I’m not being too much of a fanboy, I encourage others in the same boat to count your reasons to subscribe. Thanks for the years of entertainment, Skall!
Jörg Sprave was chatting about the same sort of thing the other day in a home defense themed chat. Showing how he had to lock up some things dazed mainly on the design & intended purpose.
Totally agree with how parents being protected from their own accountability from having responsibility & problems. It's like government low key used "parents concerns" as a way to censor & restrict their citizens. & of course the bad & gullible parents are the force to push this type of policies.
Thats so fucking true. Parents groups are the worst
as someone who's currently studying to become a teacher i can confirm groups of parents are the worst; they're whiny, entitled, completely undermine your authority and expect you to both treat their child like a god while also teaching him discipline. not all parents are like that of course but from my own limited experience and the experience of all the many older teachers i know most groups of parents are just all around terrible people
@@revanruler6404
Parent: Doesn't want to bother with child, parks it in front of teh TV or PC with no supervision and maybe the video game with an age rating far higher than the age of the kid, THAT THEY BOUGHT! ("BUT IT'S A GAME!!!")
Kid watches/Plays stuff that is not for kids
Parents: "TV AND GAMES AND THE INTERNET ARE TO BLAME!!!"
It's like how video game publishers were forced to put ratings on video games because of parent's complaining about how a game turned out be too violent for their little Johnny. Then what happens now that video games have ratings and brief descriptions of what the rating means in terms of the particular game, complain that the game is too violent for their little Johnny. Even though there's a rating plain as day on the back of the box saying that the game is violent and is probably not suitable for kids the age of little Johnny.
As a parent, if I fail at parenting, I'm not using the government to punish others. I'm going to try to reflect on my failures and do better. Especially because half the stuff they complain about is stuff that I like and I'm smart enough to know that it will turn and bite me in the butt eventually.
Why we like weapons
Well duh, Because they’re awesome
Yes
The thing is you don't need a reason to own a firearm unless you're living in a Oppressive Regime.
Edit: btw that's every government on the planet.
@@refugeehugsforfree4151 Okay Mr Mujahideen.
@@CarrotConsumer show me in history a Non Opressive Government.
Worldwide they shut down small Private Businesses while Walmart And Amazon's stocks skyrocket and they make record profit.
Government IS Opression just on a Scale.
I like things made of metal the most. :D
this is an excellent video for voicing arguments. Seriously thank you for putting words to issues that i cant. (as for the stance on illicit drugs. My biggest issue is it tends to lead to various crimes such as robbery, thieving and burglary. and if i recall thats not a small statistic. I would have to recheck the police database for drug fueled/caused/based crimes. But i recall it being pretty common problem.)
I was 3 minutes into the video before I realized Skall isn’t holding a coffee cup.... That’s what happens when I watch CZcams at 4 in the morning....
Bob Ross indeed could landscape with a pizza cutter
KAKAKAKAKAKAK this is wonderful! PRANK! IT is terrible! I looked in the mirror and saw something UNPRETTY: my face. KAKAKAKAKAKA! But I am happy agayn because I have TWO HOT GIRLFRIENDS and I use them to get vi*ws on my hilarious v*deos! KAKAKAKAK!!! Good day, dear ap
I watch Bob Ross to fall asleep lol
I wanted to give you a like, but you currently have 69 likes on that comment and I was raised with the belief, that nice things shouldn't be broken up...
I think that almost any painter, with a little bit of practice , could paint with a pizza cutter. There are some painters who don't paint using brushes but with palette knives, a tool used by painters that looks like really small trowel. They put some paint on it and lay it on like a brick layer lays grout. The same principle would apply using a pizza cutter, the painter would just have to adapt to the spinning blade and how that affects the application of paint, but they even might be able to take advantage of the spinning blade to create interesting effects.
@@Riceball01 no no. I mean he could landscape with a pizza cutter, not paint with one
Drives car with a sword. Now that beautiful
fly me closer, I want to stab them with my knife.
Warhammer 40,000 reference
@@foxhound963 pilots holding a javlin whilst flying. Trying to joust eachother
@@aphantomsong5262 WW1 would like to have a word about airplane jousting
@@aphantomsong5262 hahahahaha 😅
I like your take on this Skall Thank you for this.
Thank you for a different prospective on this subject
As dog collector I have to say that this dog bann thing is very annoying
Banning dogs is bull crap. Only a p*ssy would suggest such a thing. Dogs are a gift to the world.
@@donz6211 "hurr durr well i don't have a pitbull and they look scary so you shouldn't have one either"
Just a quick point about the mention you made for serial killers. Of course they look normal! That's the very reason why they can become serial killers to begin with: No one suspects of them.
If they had a strange appereance, manners or hobby, the moment someone dies everyone would distrust them and they would have a very hard time repeating the crime.
The lunatic isn't the guy swinging swords around in the open.
Lunatics tend to not want to draw attention to themselves...
A person who looks like a serial killer, probably never gets a chance to actually kill anyone or can only do it once... if they are lucky lol. Watch out for the normal looking people! :)
You made some excellent points, Sir. Well done. I really enjoy watching all of your videos. I am not really into HEMA, but you have a calm and relaxing Vibe about you. Keep up the good work.
This needs to be said, and it needs to be said more often and louder. Thanks, skall.
All sorts of "normal" people have unique hobbies that, while at their jobs and family get togethers they would be called "normal", on their own time they have hobbies that set them apart.
It's a beauty channel. I've always thought Skal had style.
Skal is also a very beautiful man
He should get into shape though. Put on some muscle.
He would look incredible with loads of muscle
Very well put! I have to say you made me think. After seeing Matts video I actually felt *more* in favour of bans. His arguments were terrible and just came off as "boohoo my toooys", but you actually put thought in to this.
My man made me so happy to hear him be so based with freedom. It’s refreshing
Proposition here:
Making swords legal to openly carry would reduce knife crime. Now hear me out; knives are effective for mugging because they are easy to conceal yet deadly. Swords are a lot less easy to conceal so they wouldn't be used for mugging, however its superior damage and range make it a far better weapon than a knife. So someone wielding a knife wouldn't jump someone wielding a sword, they would be at a disadvantage. If everyone openly carried swords for self defense like in the middle ages, knife crime would probably decrease.
(Loving the classic intro btw)
The problem there is that I imagine most knife crime is done via ambush.
(I'm too lazy to look it up so I could be wrong)
However, an assailant with a knife charging you can reach up to 21 feet before the average man with a holstered handgun can draw and fire.
I think this would also be relevant to drawing a holstered sword.
Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill
so allowing people to open carry swords may reduce muggings via intimidation (The person open carrying a longsword with a sharp pommel will look like a rough target indeed) I Don't think it would be very good anti-knife defense unless the guy announced his presence from a distance before attacking you.
@@caliber5965 A fair point. For the handgun example, I believe most of that time would come from aiming the shot; the main skill of using a firearm. The action of unsheathing a sword and swinging it in one motion is potentially faster than drawing and aiming a gun.
Think of a more nimble weapon like an arming sword or shortsword that can be wielded with 1 hand.
@@gokuuzumaki70
I'm fairly certain drawing a sword and then getting it into a position from which you can swing stab or block would take longer than it takes to draw and fire a handgun.
However.
If you drew your sword and slashed upwards on the draw it would be slightly faster. (Also mostly speculation as I've never quick drawn a sword though I have drawn handguns.)
When you fire from relatively close range at an assailant with very limited time you usually don't really aim. you put your body into the correct position that you've been trained to use (Assuming you have trained) and you pull the trigger. The position is actually pretty accurate at close range because you're just aiming forward from a stable frame.
However, open carrying a sword (Which I'm totally for btw :D ) would probably deter would-be assailants in the first place.
@@caliber5965 Yeah for me it's the opposite; I own a bastard sword but no guns (I'm from the UK). I'd say you're right, if someone caught you off guard with a knife, he'd probably kill you no matter what weapon you had, unless you had it ready. I'd be most effective as a deterrent as you said.
The problem with this that _I_ had in mind was that public scuffles would become, well, swordfights. Which could end fatally, but at least HEMA would be a relevant skill again.
@@gokuuzumaki70
now I'm just imagining it becoming a cultural thing for absolutely everyone to carry a sword for self-defense in the UK. That would be epic.
knife crime and violent crime would go down significantly, though mentally challenged individuals injuring themselves would surely skyrocket.
Also in this case, if someone goes for a violent scuffle "Assuming everyone involved is armed" They are knowingly entering with the intent of lethal force. That means they would have been going for the kill anyway. #MakeSwordsRelevantAgain
"Normal people" who refer to themselves as such, are usually not the brightest.
I really do love your final points about how any one extreme view is never really the right answer, too much control being bad, but no control is equally dangerous when you offer no help TO your people
I really enjoy hearing these level headed points! Just as my mind sees it, being an Australian who has lived in a country primarily without guns, my points are going to be more about that, but I don't think myself infallible or beyond criticism either, these are just my thoughts
My general view is: If it involves only you, then it's fine, this includes drugs, just know what you do and don't put in your body! (Though potential criticisms about driving under the influence, then the problem becomes OTHER peoples, but this is more grey)
If it involves others: It might be too dangerous (Guns don't inherently involve OTHER people, so I can see your points about that! I just fear about how easily they can involve others)
As far as people are, there are a lot of questionable people in the world, people who are bad at regulating their emotions (Easily angered) or simply don't understand their selves/others (young teens) these are prime cases for people who might abuse the power gain of a firearm for emotional/illogical reasonings when they aren't thinking right
"How easily abusable a gun can be VS recreation sports/exercise where you are the only one involved" basically
"Things are dangerous, but all things are dangerous"
I would personally say that a gun is just a more extreme version of danger
If someone was trying to make a nuke, that is just a more extreme form of danger, but should that be limited? Maybe their reason for making a nuke is entirely innocent and scientific
But the inherent risks of allowing that action carries obvious risks
This is an extreme example, but to people who don't have guns in their lives, that is how guns can appear
"Bans are to protect theirselves"
I suppose this applies more to drugs, but the problem is, if a person has ready access to something which can cause significant harm to another, more than a knife, but a gun, you get school shootings. That person is not in their right mind, and the damage they COULD inflict would have been significantly lower if they didn't have ready access to a gun I feel
If the ban is to protect yourself, I agree that is silly! but if it's to protect others when humans have shown poor judgement and moodswings, allowing them to have devices of greater harm comes into question, you did make a point about "How people can seem normal but be murderers" If it was easy enough to weed out all the suspect gun owners, that makes me wonder how reliably you can really do that, I just don't think you can, maybe I'm wrong there
These are just my thoughts! I'm not 100% against the idea of guns,I've had very convincing arguments from American friends before, and they aren't all insane people, and they felt safety by OWNING guns during riot times, there are some very justified use cases for owning weapons, I just don't know if both sides having access to them makes the problem better than both sides having less dangerous weapons
Cheers, sorry for the long post!
Best video you've ever made and you've made plenty of great videos!
People think violence and crimes exist because weapons exist, rather than the other way around.
An addendum to that is violence is a byproduct of our "progressive "(not in a political way) nature. We are always advancing, dominating, and growing. That same drive makes us prone to violence. You can't have one without the other.
Hah, right? People think chemical weapons and improvised explosives need to be banned, but criminals don't follow laws anyways. Carrying explosives and deadly chemicals should be legal and I'm insulted I can't bring my WW2 grenades into my local courthouse.
@@cautemoc4624 We should just arrest criminals after they detonate explosives in dense urban areas. Problem solved.
@@iitim2152 curious how the most violent societies tend to be the least developed ones.
@@verybarebones Whats your evidence and how do you define violence.
As long as you are not hurting anyone it's no one else's business what you are doing.
and most people agree. live and let live. It's always the extremists on either of the far sides of the political spectrum that want to shout about what you should or should not do, buy, watch, think about, ingest, either in the privacy of your own home or otherwise. As long as you don't actively contribute to or cause unnecessary suffering and destruction then you are invited to my BBQ.
But that's thought too simply. You don't give everyone a a-bomb as long as they never used it before. You have to do a hazard assessment in law. What is the worst that can happen and what is the worst that happens if the law is in effect. Law making is a bit more complicated..
"Damn dude, your sword explode again?"
"No, no it didn't"
Great work on this video you make a lot of good points
More of his point in a nutshell: A moral society doesn't default to banning things unless otherwise specified.
In other words , normal society. Oh wait. . . Nothing.
Have you ever stabbed someone? No reason.
@@rinnhart
"Have you ever stabbed someone? No reason."
When someone says there's no reason... there's always a reason.
I think the massacres and lives lost to gun violence justify an “otherwise specified” when it comes to certain firearms.
When it comes mads shooting and what not. It doesn't matter what you ban when a person has lost all hope or will to live or are just evil they will use whatever tools are available. The idea of banning guns or knives on that alone isn't a good argument. Everyday tools can be used as weapons i.e. a hammer. You can make bombs out of household chemicals the list can go on the real problem isn't the weapons, because they are nothing more than a tool. The problem is with current society and the way people treat other people like crap. The world has become nothing but bullies and bullies often times know they can do whatever because "normal " law biding citizens won't stand up to them
I mentioned this on Matt's video, but worth saying here too.
"Criminals use items to do illegal things!"
"Let's make those items illegal! That will stop the criminals"
If that logic worked, we should just make "breaking the law" officially illegal, that would solve all crime.
That is a dishonest argument. Making certain weapons illegal is about limiting access to them. The less there are in circulation, the more difficult it is to buy a weapon on the black market. But regulating weapons is always the far better option than making them illegal. We dealt with most gun crime here in Europe by strictly regulating our guns, not by making them illegal. And here in the Netherlands, we did something similar with drugs (although we're falling behind to the rest of the world). Most people here only smoke 1 or 2 joints in their life because of said regulation, because it just isn't made special here.
Yea I mean even If you banned anything that could even be considered a weapon that won’t stop someone who wants to kill someone since you could do it with no weapons or just a rock
I'd like to see someone brave enough to fully commit to this dumbass argument & insist we shouldn't have any laws at all because the presence of anyone who breaks them proves they don't lessen the likelihood at all.
While I don't agree with this or most weapon bans you're completely misrepresenting the purpose of... any ban really. The law won't stop them. We all know this. Even the politicians who put it in place know this despite what you may think. The law itself was never intended to to stop or even reduce numbers. Nobody who put it in place had the thought process you put forth. It was just to make it harder to obtain in the first place hopefully lowering the numbers on the street which in turn would hopefully lower the crime rate with said banned item. This is NOT the case like 99.9% of the time because usually there's somewhere just a few hours away where the item isn't banned and can be bought legally to be illegally imported back in. Really easy as long as your not crossing borders to do it. Better methods must be made but it was never going to be the law itself that stops or reduces the numbers.
It's less about making them fully illegal and more about supervising access. For example in europe guns aren't actually illegal, but you can't just walk into a store during a bad day and buy an arsenal there and then. That means those that have legit intentions can get them legally and it makes the illegal market much smaller.
Agreed. When there is a question, err on the side of freedom. Your freedom to swing your fist through the air, however, stops where my nose begins. Think people often tend to overcomplicate things when they spout talking points. Nice job Skaalagrim!
Thanks for the very intresting filosophical opening for my day. As a bonus I decided I will start a balisong forging project on my workshop today. While thinking of this.
its as simple as.
My rights end where yours begin.
your rights end where mine starts.
my rights don't end where your feelings start
your rights don't end where my feelings start.
EXACTLY
Your right to swing your sword ends at my body. 😅
@@galacticbob1 thats pretty much the long and short of it yes.
soaked news paper rolls cant protest however
@@nutterforever I was adapting the idiom I go by for determining personal rights:
Your right to swing your fist ends at my face.
Or; you can do whatever you like, as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's right to do whatever they like. Strive for a world where everyone can be mutually autonomous.
Edit to add: I'm not sure if the "long and short" sword pun was intentional, but I'm here for it. 😆
@@galacticbob1 I will be honest the pun was 50/50
You'd be perfect for a L'Oreal commercial.
Also: "Normal is an illusion. What is normal for the spider is chaos for the fly." - Charles Addams
But it’s perfectly normal for flies to get eaten, they even use saturation as a defense mechanism. so that statement, like most philosophically inclined nonsense, is inherently flawed.
@@Primenumber19 I think you're looking at the quote at a different angle. It is normal for a Spider to eat a Fly whilst chilling in their web all day. It may not be so normal for a fly to eat a fly chilling in its own web all day, because the "normal" fly doesn't make webs.
@@bennett475 I get your point but I find my self straining to see that statement from that angle. Based on your interpretation the statement would be better said as what’s normal for a jellyfish is chaos for a tree. But that’s not what he said, the writer specifically choose two animals with a pre existing dynamic. Hence my interpretation. Also hence why I hate a lot of philosophy. The tenet of I know what I don’t know and freedom created by the Age of Enlightenment are all genius, but most philosophy is just stoner culture wrapped up in the pretty package of academia.
@@bennett475 only because you chose to apply normality to an individual, not the entire set. It is not normal for a fly to be eaten by a spider, but it is normal for flies to be eaten by spiders. That statement is nonsense because it does not understand that normality is defined by statistics, and general trends. The statement, "it is normal for flies to be eaten by spiders" is a statement that applies to both groups. We don't need to look at the bizarre concept of a fly spinning a web to refute this. The other commentator is right, almost all of philosophy is just statements made by people who thought they were smart, while they weren't.
@@Primenumber19 Reading isolated quotes on the internet I can see why you would think that. But there is a lot more to it than people trying to sound deep.
Well there’s a certain concept of rights vs privileges that must be earned. This is often applied to things that are especially easy to misuse or can create easily serious hazards, such as explosives, pilot licenses, and access to classified information. There are many other examples of this, often in professions and in regulated industries.
Not when it comes to weapons in this country.
I love the dog analogy! It's like the best argument I've heard!
My man, did you just kink shame me for my basement torture chamber?
If he didn't I will you should stick to tentacles
At least he didn't say anything against the "open yard deep in the woods torture place". Would it be the case, i would have to be offended
As long as it’s safe and consensual have fun I guess
Basement?? My guy, throw a play, do it public! It's just dam good acting! You will say, or I miss interpreted the rules!
When I was young a local dude was caught with women in a dungeon he'd built.
My friend: "Dungeon?.Why'd he not just use a regular pervert torture chamber?"
Beauty channel Skall is now my favourite Skall sub species
shadow of intent
There should be more Beauty Skal!
We need his makeup routine
He does have a beard care video floating around.
Nice SoI pfp \m/
An interesting thought experiment on the topic of what it might be like to live in a "safe" society is found in a novel titled *Fledgling* by Sharon Lee and Steve Miller. From Baen. Recommended.
Might be of interest.
well spoken my man, I chiefly agree with your point about how nothing has a single use.
You are always very logically consistent. Love your comments!
Careful Skall, youtube isn't too happy with talks of personal responsibility and freedom, might get in trouble with Susan. I agree with you 100% on this
Yep, just ask literally any gun tuber about their monetization. It is non-existent because educating and informing people about firearms is bad apparently!
What?? How dare you, uh, something something scary and vulgar content!!!
@@hallofguns8174 that's one that really baffles me. Trying to punish people for safety education of all things.
@@datpolakmike CZcams: "Guns are bad so learning anything about them is bad!"
Someday someone needs to make Guntube.
Really good job making the philosophically sound pro freedom/responsibility argument concise... also Skallagrim for 2021 Victoria Secret
Nice. That makes sense. I think the same way. Thank you!
Skall: and please have a civil discussion
Me: *sadly puts down dung pommel*
what is that?
@@hallofguns8174 a pommel made outta sh!t
@@PenitentKnight pommel made out of shit, the shit pommel. pommel made outta shit
Me: *sad pommel noises
@@PenitentKnight ewwwwwwww......
thankyou for speaking out. i am a Canadian and i have to hear a lot of these arguments when i speak of my "scarry black hole punch".
My condolences from Montana
I find that the most consistent and universally beneficial practice in such matters is to simply "...Err on the side of freedom; even when liberty means sacrificing some security.". As an American and a libertarian, I find such thinking to offer the safest of options. Plus it tends to be the most intellectually consistent, making it hard to counter in most cases.
idk, I kinda prefer not having to go through a 12 point checklist to survive a routine driver's license control, caused by the fact that the police has to assume that anyone doing a slighlty suspicious move is pulling out a gun to shoot them...
@@sh4dy832 Sounds like a problem with police. Not a problem with your rights and freedoms.
I wouldn't really call myself a sword or ancient weapons enthusiast, but I like watching your more historical videos. I also have a trebuchet in my backyard that I built with my kids one day when they said they wanted to learn something about science. I felt I should say thanks for talking about weapons bans, as I am a gun owner and avid target shooter, and I also enjoy off-road vehicles, both of which seem to have been under constant attack for quite a while now, especially here in Canada. I agree with your stance that "need" should never be required to justify anything that doesn't hurt others. One of the things I like to point out are golf courses and the massive resources put into having perfect grass for rich people to walk around on occasionally, and how much food could be grown and harvested with the same amount of water, fertilizer, and fuel used for a hobby. It's unfortunate that people have become so divided and fearful of anyone who isn't exactly like them, that they feel they need to legislate or shame others into conforming to their idea of "normal".
Like an old sayng : " The more a society is corrupt and decadent, the more law and rules is impose on the people."
So all the regulations that prohibit murder, theft, harm, exploitation or that define taxes, honest trades, private and public properties, ... make us corrupt and decadent?
@@MrBloodyBat You are Strawmaning his statement. Those are laws that someone is infringing against the rights of someone else or private property. Owning a sword doesn't infringe on the rights of others. Until you use it against someone else against their will. 😉
@@skorrie3849I see your distinction, but there hasn't been made one in the original comment. The saying is very general. It states that there is an increase in corruption and decandence, related to an increase in laws and rules in general. It could be shortened or simplified to "Order and legislature is corruption and decadence."
After reading it a few more times, I may be wrong. The correlation is backwards. Corruption and decadence means more rules and laws. An institution with many laws isn't per se corrupt, but a corrupt institution has many laws. I suppose that's what the saying means?
@@MrBloodyBat I see what you are saying. I think it's more a case of "Rules for thy, but not for me". Less freedom for us plebs, while the elites do pretty much what they want.
@@MrBloodyBat Yes
ima be honest, the pizza cutter at 4:15 was a bad example IMO
That thing doesnt even cut Pizza propperly.
Actually noone knows what that things function is for since it seems to fail at literally everything.
I don't know what Dollarstore pizza cutters you have but ours works just fine. :)
sharpen it
That is reason why weapon bans should be lifted, if pizza cutter is not working use specialised sword :D.
"A sharp pizza cutter is wielded by a chef. A dull one, wielded by a fool."
Get yourself a pizza cutter with a larger wheel - problem mostly solved (e.g. unless you like your pizza extra crispy).
Fully agree. "Need" is not a hurdle for exercising rights.
That said, there is a circumstance where "why do you need this" _does_ apply, even to guns.
It's a perfectly reasonable question when trying to figure out WHICH KIND would best meet that need.
Definitely a beauty channel, don't let anyone tell you otherwise!
This kind of stuff always cause alot of trouble... I admire how you can speak so calm and with wisdow
Alfonso X, King of Castile: “Had I been present at the Creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better ordering of the universe.”
So much for El Sabio. His dad was pretty badass though.
Skall, I’ve always said we should be free to do whatever we want, as long as we don’t harm another person or their property. Glad to see your thoughts are pretty similar. Harm and risk of harm are pretty close on the spectrum I think lol
Skall: this isn’t a beauty channel
His hair: are you sure about that?
The intersection of the fearful and the controlling is a stagnant, unhappy place.
5:40 That’s the problem Skall, I’m beginning to think some people DO want to live in a dystopian nightmare. But that’s only because they mistakenly think they’ll be the ones in charge. They’re wrong, they’ll be at the bottom of the heap with the rest of us while the politicians that created the nightmare enjoy the spoils.
Until society breaks down and its total anarchy.
I live in a region of the USA that literally fought a war to defend living in a dystopian oppressive nightmare. They lost that war, but soon enough rebuilt their beloved oppressive dystopia - just in a different form.
@@LazyLifeIFreak *anarchy is not chaos, anarchy is a specific well organised polticial and economic system (anarchy is actually so organised you don't need laws because people are that intelligent and respectful, at least in theory). the idea that anarchy is chaos is actually pure propaganda, now would badly applied anarchy cause chaos sure but every system if applied badly will lead to chaos
@@IsaacKuo Oh, you mean the dystopian oppressive nightmare of not having slaves? Ever considered that for the enslaved half of the population the southern states were a true dystopia?
@@revanruler6404 there’s a huge flaw in that argument for anarchy; people are not intelligent & respectful. One look at Twitter will tell you that. It’s like communism, it’s looks like a good idea on paper but in the real world it will never work. People in large groups do very stupid things & get emboldened when bad ideas are reinforced by the group.
I just want to be left alone to live my life as I see fit. Call that whatever you want, I don’t care. You don’t tell me how to live & I won’t tell you how to live. But unfortunately (at least here in the US where I live) our government is constantly trying to impose its will on those of us that want to be left alone. Big city rules & laws shouldn’t apply to me; I live in the woods with my dog. But our current administration seems to think rules that apply to someone living in an apartment complex in Manhattan should also apply to my cabin in the woods. I disagree. Quite a lot.
Appreciate the video. Good points.
“gather the townsfolk! a new skalagrim video has been uploaded!”
alternative title: my shower thought about me arguing with matt easton.
I also think of Matt Easton while in the shower
@@bretalvarez3097 i dont want to know the context.
Good thought 💭 about Matt Easton whilst washing my no no zone 🍕🤤🥷🥔🏹
So classic case of "blame the tool not the person using it."
Next time i'll propose to ban water because sometimes cause people die by drowning.
We need water, we don't need swords.
@@CarrotConsumer we don't need added sugar either and i don't see that getting banned anytime soon
@@CarrotConsumer Could need sword, but the situations that need us to use sword is very rare unless it's part of that person's job/hobbies. So yes, i admit my example is very poor. And because this video already points out everything i think about this "bantastic" issue, i think i have nothing else to say.
@@CarrotConsumer You don't need swords, don't get one. I need a sword to keep these crackheads away from me at work.
This is the most common misinterpretation of why weapon bans exist. No one is “blaming the tool”. The issue isn’t the tool itself. The issue is how proximity and availability exponentially increase the likelihood of abuse or accident. If there is a gun in a house, the odds of that gun being misused goes up significantly. The argument is completely valid. The debate is about where we as a civilized society draw the line. And there IS a line.
I love the "you don't need a......" argument. I don't need an electric guitar. I have never owned an electric guitar,so nobody needs an electric guitar. The counter argument would be that electric guitars don't hurt/kill people. I have seen a lot of videos of electric guitars being smashed in violent ways, and yes even causing injury and death. Perhaps we should ban electric guitars.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Well articulated and intelligent discourse. Although to be fair id say the thumbnail is a bit much