David Koch epitomises Australian ignorance on the 2nd Amendment and freedom

In case you missed it, Sunrise’s David Koch went head to head with Gun Owners’ of America Executive Director Emeritus Larry Pratt last week as part of the Australian media’s week long grave dance on the Las Vegas shooting. The Australian Hunting Podcast also did a breakdown of this which you can find here.

Larry Pratt is an authority on all things firearms and law in the United States. He has twice famously taken out Piers Morgan and many others that have attempted to duel him. He has several legendary debates on Youtube and I would suggest you familiarise yourself with the man’s work, as well as over at Gun Owner’s of America.

Larry was attempting to address questions from Koch on why the 2^nd amendment was written and necessary. He has previously spoken at length about all other things firearms related, be it crime, law, and the rest.

Put short, this “interview” was as badly conducted by Sunrise as their interview with Cassie Jaye and Koch shares the same sewer as Piers when it comes to journalistic integrity. Koch has recently outdone himself with his “debate” with Milo Yiannopoulos. Lacking any actual argument other than his teleprompter issued talking points, Koch resorted to the usual laughing, sneering and interrupting when Larry was trying to make a point.

Koch used the long disproven “muskets” argument while using a platform that would not have been envisaged in 1789 to deliver his litany, further adding to this debacle of an interview. Koch also tried to bring up the issue of tobacco laws as if it was somehow related, but completely failed to mention how bad the illicit tobacco market has now become that Australian Border Force cannot stop it and organised crime is now a $36 billion a year enterprise.

Now whether or not you agree with Larry is immaterial, it was the complete ignorance by Koch on display which appears to be the rule rather than the exception among Australians when it comes to the issue of firearms, freedom and the United States.

For Australians, who still have a foreign power as their head of state and have a government that is increasingly becoming more authoritarian every day, to lecture another country about how to conduct it’s internal affairs is quite frankly, a joke. Americans don’t care what others think of their country, why should they care what David Koch and his ilk thinks?

Sure, there are arguments to be made that freedoms in the US have been encroached on and used as a cover by nefarious types to commit things like state surveillance on citizens. There’s also no question that Congress and respective states, eg California, have continued their best efforts to circumvent the Constitution on free speech, firearms and the rest.

However, the fact that the document still exists and stands the test of time is a testament to it’s foundation. The fact these freedoms were fought for and won is the main reason Americans are so protective of them – they are aware of the price paid. Australians writ large never had to fight for their freedom, so how can they understand why Americans are so protective of it or have the right to lecture them, particularly those enjoying the comforts and benefits of said freedom without having to pay the cost?

Recent examples of this cognitive dissonance in Australia include outrage over the sight of Spanish Police beating voters who went to the polls in Catalan, Kim Jong-Un or the tactics of Maduro in Venezuela, yet screeching and squealing that America “must disarm”. Well those governments and scores of others are exactly what you get when you allow the state to run roughshod over it’s citizens and give it the monopoly on force. Australians are seemingly unfortunately still ensconced in this “convict mentality” where authority knows best and is not to be questioned.

Jesse Ventura summed up it well when he said “the 2^nd amendment is there so that citizens would have the ability if their government became oppressive, then they could defend themselves against oppressive government.”

This American veteran summed it up even better when stated “the threat of tyranny today is no less than what it was in the 1700’s, the 1800’s or the 1900’s.”

And Stefan Molyneux expanded on that when he stated that “there is no such thing as gun control, there is only centralization of gun ownership in the hands of a political elite and their minions.”

Now add to that John Howard’s most recent comments that Australians “shouldn’t have a bill of rights” pretty much spells out his real motivations for the 1996 laws. This from the man that disarmed us and walked around with armed security, yet there is still a cross section of the Australian populace that fawns over him or the classic “I didn’t agree with John Howard but he was right on this” crowd. Useful idiots, I believe the term is. Throw in Daniel Andrews’ recent comments about “civil liberties being a luxury” regarding recent indefinite detention law changes and there you go.

The 2^nd amendment exists because Americans have a very health distrust of their government. Given the daily disgraces witnessed in this country, why should Australians trust theirs? The 2^nd amendment also exists to give the other amendments teeth and most importantly, it’s your last line of defence against tyranny.

While far from perfect like any other country, at bare minimum the United States has freedom of speech and the right to protect yourself. Australia bans people from coming to the country because their ideas might hurt people’s feelings and disarms and charges people who defend themselves.

I rest my case Kochy. Stick to giving pensioners dodgy financial advice.