Video: Matthews engages in thoughtful, nuanced discussion of 2nd Amendment limits
posted at 10:12 am on April 20, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Psyche! Chris Matthews speaks to a guest protesting the Washington DC handgun near-ban and decides to conduct a reductio ad absurdum argument to make Skip Coryell look like a nutcase. Unfortunately, Coryell doesn’t take the bait, leaving Matthews to rail about bazookas and the danger of citizens, er, protecting themselves. Jim Vicevich captures the moment:
As Jim says, Coryell would carry a cop instead of a gun, but a cop is rather heavy. Seriously, though, several states have now passed must-issue concealed-carry laws that require the approval of permits unless the applicant has a disqualifying event in his or her background. Minnesota is one of those states. Violent crime has not increased as a result of that legislation, and even Chris Matthews managed to survive the Twin Cities in 2008 during the Republican National Convention in the midst of armed citizenry.
Guns aren’t the problem; the problem is that criminals have guns while the government disarms law-abiding citizens. No one needs a bazooka, but those law-abiding citizens who choose to carry a gun for their protection should be allowed to do so — and our founders clearly felt the same way.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Bazookas are okay provided you keep them pointed at Chris Matthews.
Mr. Joe on April 20, 2010 at 10:14 AM
Giving this man a TV show was one of the worst ideas since the Manzere.
blatantblue on April 20, 2010 at 10:14 AM
Or as I tell people, “I carry a gun, because a cop won’t fit in my pocket.”
mwdiver on April 20, 2010 at 10:15 AM
I think the recent propaganda effort by the 0bama regime to paint any dissent as potentially violent, is a precursor to new gun “control” efforts.
Rebar on April 20, 2010 at 10:16 AM
Fixed.
Shock the Monkey on April 20, 2010 at 10:17 AM
OT: In other news, Deadfish Rahm wants to be mayor of Chicago. Ooh. Definitely need a gun for protection if he is mayor. Crime will be more pervasive than it already is.
andy85719 on April 20, 2010 at 10:18 AM
Matthews interveiwing Gary Busey? Ratings gold?
Inanemergencydial on April 20, 2010 at 10:18 AM
Since the 2nd amendment is at least in part (if not in whole) meant for citizens to protect themselves against a government gone tyrannical — not an amendment for self-defense against common criminals or for hunting — then technically, it probably applied to things like canons, and should apply to bazookas and personal nukes.
TECHNICALLY, that is. Obviously, the founders didn’t envision the consequences of people having their own nukes when they wrote it.
Daggett on April 20, 2010 at 10:19 AM
Chrissy’s jealous because he carries a teeny-tiny gun in his pants, that tingles when Obama reads his teleprompter.
fogw on April 20, 2010 at 10:20 AM
By the way, a bit of comforting news from Arizona. No need for a permit to concealed carry.
Every day, over 99% of guns carried by law-abiding citizens kill and injure no one.
MadisonConservative on April 20, 2010 at 10:21 AM
They probably didn’t envision the government having nukes, either.
It’s a sticky situation, but ultimately, the original language of the second amendment was intended to keep the populace as well-armed as the government.
MadisonConservative on April 20, 2010 at 10:23 AM
We could probably use nukes more responsibly than the government.
andy85719 on April 20, 2010 at 10:23 AM
The Bro!
mikeyboss on April 20, 2010 at 10:23 AM
LOLOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbsSeVr5NSI
Wait for the 1:33 mark.
blatantblue on April 20, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Typical lefty ploy…take the argument to the extreme to make a pro-gun advocate look crazy. Don’t try to argue actual facts and figures, because an anti-gunner will always lose doing that. Someone online tried that on me years back in a forum. Something like… That I wanted everyone to have missile silos in their backyards…idiot.
So, so glad my verboten MPA mini 9mm is already on the way…now to get more ammo.
Battlecruiser-operational on April 20, 2010 at 10:25 AM
I don’t know. The first thing I’d want to do is take off and nuke the entire DC site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
Now – is that responsible? Maybe so…
Daggett on April 20, 2010 at 10:25 AM
In speaking with a co-worker about gun control, I learned that the big city near his home has the same problems as so many do: While only the cops are supposed to have guns, the criminals get them somehow.
Maybe must smuggle ‘em in from here in Virginia.
It’s a long smuggling route though… the city is Paris.
raybury on April 20, 2010 at 10:26 AM
….but how cool would it be if you DID have your own bazooka?
Oh, you think your little doggy is gonna poo on my lawn again? Say hello to Mr. Bazooka!!!!!
search4truth on April 20, 2010 at 10:27 AM
Are you going to scream Allah Akbar while doing so?
/sarc
mwdiver on April 20, 2010 at 10:27 AM
Would have loved to have sissy chrissy at the range yesterday morning breaking in and scoping in a brand spanking new bushmaster varminter special. The police chief of ******** could not attend due to a prior engagement.
fourdeucer on April 20, 2010 at 10:27 AM
I would never know Chris Matthews existed if it wasn’t for Hot Air.
volsense on April 20, 2010 at 10:28 AM
You don’t?
/sarc
mwdiver on April 20, 2010 at 10:29 AM
I knew someone who used to own a bazooka. Are they illegal?
Joe Caps on April 20, 2010 at 10:29 AM
How would you tell the difference?
pjean on April 20, 2010 at 10:29 AM
So how many private pilots own a Mig21? How many private collections of battle tanks in the US? (a second hyperlink risks the wrath of the comment filter.)
Skandia Recluse on April 20, 2010 at 10:30 AM
Isn’t Matthews one of those journalists who insists the AWB was to stop people from getting machine guns? (Which showed how little he knows about these things.)
Dave_d on April 20, 2010 at 10:30 AM
Hell yes, we need bazookas. Limiting Americans today to semi-automatic small arms in the face of modern militaries would be equivalent to the Founders limiting Americans to slingshots in the face of muskets. The 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting, and it is not about self-defense from violent crime. It is about self-defense from TYRANNY, and if the government forces have full-auto weapons or bazookas, then by God, every law-abiding American should have that same right of ownership. Period. If you recall, the Americans of the 18th Century were allowed to carry the same weapons that the standing army had. What changed in the language of the 2nd Amendment that this should be any different now?
Beo on April 20, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Say hello to my little friend…
SurferDoc on April 20, 2010 at 10:34 AM
amen bb
cmsinaz on April 20, 2010 at 10:34 AM
Did any really expect Chrissy to say something intelligent?
GarandFan on April 20, 2010 at 10:34 AM
O/T
Icelandic Volcano Webcam http://bit.ly/ac6x72
Way cool -
TheBigOldDog on April 20, 2010 at 10:35 AM
—Ann Coulter – How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must)
Inanemergencydial on April 20, 2010 at 10:35 AM
I am still somewhat stunned that people actually watch Chrissy’s show. He is almost as bad as Olby. Unwatchable.
search4truth on April 20, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Chris Matthews is an idiot. You must pass a background check to get a carry permit. If all the good people at the Lubys in Texas has a pistol, those victims would be alive today.
Stupid man.
saiga on April 20, 2010 at 10:37 AM
WTF should Chris worry about how “big” the gun is the guy carries? Tingly…
upinak on April 20, 2010 at 10:38 AM
What kind of concealed weapon killed all those people in Oklahoma City. Ammonium nitrate I believe. Isn’t that an agricultural fertilizer anyone can walk in off the street and buy in bulk?
If someone wants to do harm, they will find a way. No gun legislation will stop the bad guys. As I recall, a bunch of Middle East thugs armed themselves with passenger jets not to long ago.
fogw on April 20, 2010 at 10:38 AM
At least learn how to use one:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/184782/bazooka/
davidk on April 20, 2010 at 10:39 AM
That is correct. Any controls put in place by the government since then directly violate the intent of the 2nd amendment. Most colonial militias after the War indeed were equipped at least as well as the small Federal standing Army and some from wealthier communities were even better equipped.
Johnnyreb on April 20, 2010 at 10:40 AM
Well if you can get a bazooka legally registered as a destructive device, why not?
darclon on April 20, 2010 at 10:41 AM
favid.. the instruction are on them. If people can’t read them then no need to touch them… or become like a jihadist back blowing.
upinak on April 20, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Picked up an AK last week with 6 mags. Bulgarian made. Used, but in excellent condition and 500 rounds. Not sure about the scope, though…
T
karl9000 on April 20, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Does Chris Matthews actually get paid? And just think about the morons who pay him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ultracon on April 20, 2010 at 10:46 AM
iron sights!
blatantblue on April 20, 2010 at 10:47 AM
If you get a ‘carry cop’ with a shoulder strap, does that help?
Sometimes, you just have to live with stupid.
tarpon on April 20, 2010 at 10:48 AM
Why not? I love Allah Akbars, especially the chocolate peanut-butter ones. They’re the protein bar for terrorists — gives you that burst of energy you need just before you blow up.
Daggett on April 20, 2010 at 10:49 AM
Notice the liberals always make guns out to be penis extensions…but conservatives rarely do?
Really makes you wonder who has the obsession with the size of their genitals.
MadisonConservative on April 20, 2010 at 10:50 AM
I believe there’s even a private owner of an F-16 in the US, but I couldn’t find a link to back that up. He didn’t buy it from the US, but from a nation we had sold some to awhile back.
You can buy a couple of updated and Americanized SU-27s for $5 million a piece:
http://www.prideaircraft.com/flanker.htm
Top speed: Mach 2.35
strictnein on April 20, 2010 at 10:52 AM
Ole Chris pooty poot probably thinks that permitting concealed carry can lead to a CC permit for a bazooka!
“Is that a bazooka in your pocket, or are you just glad to see?
Cybergeezer on April 20, 2010 at 10:52 AM
I read “Dune” as a teenager and the Great Houses all had nuclear weapons.
That science fiction might be closer than we think. If Iran goes nuclear, so will Saudia Arabia. The House of Saud will have nukes. So why not the House of Windsor?
bonnie_ on April 20, 2010 at 10:55 AM
As the proud owner of a number of “sports utility rifles”, one fully automatic — and legal — I’d love to add a bazooka and an RPG launcher to my collection.
They would come in particularly handy for dealing with the armed illegals regularly trespassing on my South Texas ranch. Indeed, my sherriff might like to have a set, too.
TXUS on April 20, 2010 at 10:55 AM
It’s a good thing that we are not allowed a bazooka as a personal defence weapon. If I had one I would be tempted to take out the msnbc transmiter so we wouldn’t have to be treated to these vinyettes of chris being a total donkey. He is perhaps the rudest host on tv, even eclipsing o’really. /s (for the challenged)
chicken thief on April 20, 2010 at 10:57 AM
I totally disagree on that point entirely. Regular citizens have no business owning LAWs, SMAWs, Javelins, Carl Gustafs, or whatever. Weapons such as those in the wrong hands could do a lot of harm. There is a significant difference between a Glock .40 and a RPG-7.
Additionally, do yourself a favor and get over the notion that your personal weapons are a self defense from government tyranny. 1) The thought taking up arms against American soldiers is absolutely descipable. 2) You wouldn’t last one minute against “government forces” 3) Stop feeding the Chris Matthews’s of the U.S. ammunition by making such statemens.
Shock the Monkey on April 20, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Hey Chris, are there limits to the 1st Amendment?
For the record, I’m pro-bazooka. I would sleep much better at night if everyone in my neighborhood had one.
flyfisher on April 20, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Is Chris Mathews FOR keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of crazy people?
Just asking …
Because the guy who sends tingles up his leg isn’t.
HondaV65 on April 20, 2010 at 11:00 AM
Is that like one of those baby slings you wear like a backwards backpack?
James on April 20, 2010 at 11:01 AM
A pea shooter in the wrong hands can do a lot of harm.
That’s why they were banned during the Apple Festival Parade in Murphysboro, IL back in the day. Too many horse’s butts burning too many horse’s butts.
davidk on April 20, 2010 at 11:02 AM
An armed citizenry makes for polite society.
av8tr on April 20, 2010 at 11:02 AM
I want one of the SU-27′s. In fact it is my right to own one. Since I am finacially challenged and it is my right to own one the gvt has an obligation to provide me with one. I am checked out in a 182 how much more complex could one of these be?
chicken thief on April 20, 2010 at 11:02 AM
Matthews: “Do you think that everyone in Washington DC should be armed?”
Coryell: “I think they should have the choice.”
Libs love pro-choice only when it gives a woman the right to destroy her baby.
carbon_footprint on April 20, 2010 at 11:02 AM
Here in Northeast Ohio, an Ashtabula County judge has advised citizens to arm themselves and be vigilant. Due to budget cutbacks, the Sheriff can only afford to have one patrol car out at a time, in a county of over 700 square miles.
When seconds count, the police are minutes away…
skydaddy on April 20, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Ed- I was part of the group that got the MNPPA (Minnesota Personal Protection Act) passed. Minnesota is not a “must issue” but a “shall issue” state. The Sheriff still has the capacity to deny and the denied applicant has the option to sue in district court.
There is a problem here and in other conceal carry states (a bad term as in Minnesota were can openly carry a firearm, but I do not recommend it for a number of reasons). If I have a right to defend myself and my property and my loved ones and the innocent, but I have to satisfy state requirements to obtain a permit that I have to pay for and that permit can be revoked by the state or the underlying law or regulations changed in a capricious manner, well, then I don’t have a right. What I have is a state granted privilege that can be revoked. Rights can not be revoked except by the entity that grants them.
And if the state believes God grants those rights to me, then the state had better be on the side of God and guarantee those rights (hhhmmm…where have I heard that before?). If the state grants rights and not God, well then…welcome to Europe. The place my great-grandparents fled.
I don’t live in Europe.
I will never live in Europe.
Period!
Amendment X on April 20, 2010 at 11:04 AM
Picked up a nice little SKS over a year ago. Sweet piece.
mwdiver on April 20, 2010 at 11:06 AM
Hahaha
I know what you’re saying. However, if you put one of the rocket delivery systems I mentioned on the market, wait for these things to make to it to a place like Queensbridge or any other “rough” area. Once these things become as easy to obtain illegally as a firearm, you have a major problem.
Shock the Monkey on April 20, 2010 at 11:07 AM
Dunno about tanks (I know a guy with a working halftrack), but I’ve met MiG-17 owner Will Ward at several airshows. http://www.warbirddepot.com/aircraft_jets_mig17-ward.asp
Will also has a Mig-21.
http://www.warbirddepot.com/aircraft_jets_mig21-ward.asp
skydaddy on April 20, 2010 at 11:08 AM
When seconds count, the police can be there in minutes. I know, cliche and worn out, but still so very true.
iurockhead on April 20, 2010 at 11:10 AM
My dad has a saying:
“Would you rather pick up a phone and call ADT, or pick up a fo’ty five?!”
blatantblue on April 20, 2010 at 11:11 AM
D’ya think anyone would ever say something like…”A bazooka? Jesus Christ Chris, are you ever gonna stop acting like a f’n child?”
LtE126 on April 20, 2010 at 11:11 AM
You bring up some good points. Why can’t anyone have a machine gun or a greande launcher or a bazooka? But, it becomes cost prohibitive (sp) to own a jet fighter or a bomber or even better, an aircraft carrier.
Mirimichi on April 20, 2010 at 11:11 AM
something along those lines
you know the home security commercials
they grab the phone
“help is on the way!”
let’s just reach into a quick safe
help is right there
blatantblue on April 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM
Well you wouldn’t last very long against American soldiers because they have bazookas and stuff … just sayin’. :D
Also … what was the equivalent of a bazooka back in 1776? It appears to me that the Colonials used as much advanced technology as they could get their hands on.
Also … why wasn’t the thought of taking up arms against British soldiers apparently NOT so despicable to Colonials? Most Colonials came from roots in Britain. In fact, many Colonials were related to British soldiers. Many British soldiers WERE Colonials themselves.
Yet when pressed – the Colonials certainly did pick up arms against them.
The argument that American citizens would never pick up arms against American soldiers is ridiculous. If that is the case then you may as well confiscate the guns – a huge chunk of the reason our founders installed the first amendment was to protect against tyranny – foriegn and domestic. Of course – the thought of picking up arms against American Soldiers today is despicable – but that is not the “test” here. The true test here is … if the American government became usurped and tyrannical – and also controlled the armed forces … what would the American people do? Fight the soldiers protecting the tyranny or submit to slavery?
Which do you think Washington, et al would do?
Which to dyou think Washington, et al actually did?
HondaV65 on April 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM
Who are you to say they can’t own them responsibly? Suppose they’re a weapons systems engineer, or a former military member who is trained in the use of them. Suppose they aren’t. If they commit a crime with it, they’ll be charged for that crime.
There’s a good chance that a number of soldiers would defect in such a situation. However, it may have to be done one day. Want to see the National Guard disarming innocent citizens? Here ya go.
Tell that to insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s pretty impressive that if the government does turn completely tyrannical, you have already surrendered yourself to them.
So you favor the elimination of the language of the Second Amendment? It’s clear. If you don’t like the notion of fighting back against a tyrannical government, then you are against the entire meaning of the Second Amendment.
MadisonConservative on April 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM
If claiming a right to protect oneself is ‘rhetoric’ as Chrissy tried to dismiss, then it’s ‘rhetoric’ when a reporter claims First Amendment rights to keep sources confidential.
Liam on April 20, 2010 at 11:13 AM
Dude. We all know that if you have Broadview security, the alarm automatically scares away every intruder.
Shock the Monkey on April 20, 2010 at 11:13 AM
A Memphis police detective once told me that if someone ever tries to break in my home my first move should be to call 911 and ask for the fire department.
If it ever happens I’ll grab my Remington 870, hand my wife my .45, and then call 911 and ask for the fire department.
flyfisher on April 20, 2010 at 11:13 AM
lol thats what i meant
Broadview!
“omg an alarm!”
blatantblue on April 20, 2010 at 11:15 AM
That’s my plan…
ladyingray on April 20, 2010 at 11:16 AM
DYI
http://sclipo.com/videos/view/how-to-build-a-home-made-tank-2-5-scale-part1
davidk on April 20, 2010 at 11:16 AM
word!
or at least, grab yo gun, assume your position, THEN call 911
blatantblue on April 20, 2010 at 11:17 AM
The guy has so few viewers anyway. I suspect the constant updates here of his daily gaffes keep him in the news where he would not matter otherwise.
Among all the afternoon and early evening cable yak shows he is the least watched.
I personally cannot stand to look at the guy.
FireBlogger on April 20, 2010 at 11:17 AM
One person? Perhaps not. But the advantage comes in numbers. The more people who own guns, the less likely the government is to try something stupid. In large enough numbers, citizen gun ownership is an effective deterrent to crime and tyranny.
DangerHighVoltage on April 20, 2010 at 11:18 AM
Uhhh, no. Madison wanted to place nearly the exact same wording of the Second Amendment into the body of the Constitution. Think about that for a moment.
Now, as the Constitution flowed from the Declaration, the arming of the citizens is to protect their life, liberty and property (which is an expression and outgrowth of their lives and liberty) from any threat-government or individuals.
As the Founders were quite concerned about a standing army, they relied upon the militia, the armed citizen. So, to a certain extent, the argument can be made that I should be allowed to own the most modern long guns available.
Amendment X on April 20, 2010 at 11:18 AM
Ideally, you call 911 in one of three situations:
Intruder has fled.
Intruder is disarmed and bound.
Intruder has daylight shining through them.
MadisonConservative on April 20, 2010 at 11:19 AM
Bingo. The government needs to fear the people, not the other way around.
MadisonConservative on April 20, 2010 at 11:19 AM
911 or 9mm? or as a photo I saw of Chuck Norris’ home that had a wood carved pistol out front with the painted caption: We Don’t Call 9-1-1.
cartooner on April 20, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Parking could be a problem.
davidk on April 20, 2010 at 11:20 AM
My old man, RIP…who was a Chicago Fireman (just like me) used to tell my Ma..”If you ever think someone in breaking into the house, call and say you have a fire in the basement. You’ll get 20 firemen there in a couple of minutes and every copper that wants to get credit for a save”
I tell my family the same thing.
Who cares if they give you some sh-t about it, we go to all the hospitals and public schools all day for nonsense, nobody says sh-t.
LtE126 on April 20, 2010 at 11:21 AM
Has Chris Matthews ever spit on a black Representative?
N. O'Brain on April 20, 2010 at 11:22 AM
Just tell them you’re pro-choice.
When they ask for specifics tell them that you support their right to protect their body by performing late, late, LATE term abortions on bad guys.
darclon on April 20, 2010 at 11:22 AM
Oh you forgot liberal rule 175. I’ll remind you
#175 Insurgents always win against armies, every single time regardless of any other fact. There is one exception to this rule, if the insurgents are American then they insurgents always lose.
This explains why the US lost in Iraq and Vietnam.(What do you mean the US won in Iraq? Are you telling me a lib can be wrong?)
Dave_d on April 20, 2010 at 11:25 AM
Bazookas? I’m more worried about Matthews getting hold of a CO2 pellet – whatever that is.
forest on April 20, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Libs always pull the old argument that the 2nd Amendment really means the right for militias, not private individuals, to carry arms.
And now they’re calling tea parties militias. You figure out the rest.
They always end up shooting themselves in the foot.
Christien on April 20, 2010 at 11:28 AM
I don’t mean to quibble… or to sound like a crazy… but our founders did not include the 2nd Amendment to allow us to keep criminals at bay. They included the 2nd Amendment to allow us to keep the government at bay… or to put the government down, if necessary.
The problem is that the government’s military technology has advanced at leaps and bounds while the average citizen’s has not. At the time of the writing of the 2nd Amendment the government and the citizen had the same (or similar) weaponry.
I think that Chris Matthews has a point… though I think his conclusions would be wrong.
I am not for private ownership of tanks, fighter jets, or nuclear weapons… but I think that might be more because of culture than logic.
therambler on April 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM
Listen in to Jim Vicevich’s radio show any time of the day at http://radioviceonline.com/live/ It’s great.
jnelchef on April 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM
I’m a strong believer in gun control: You hit your target first time, every time.
I wonder how safe Chrissy would feel if his studio didn’t have guards to protect him while he’s there. Chrissy probably lives in secure building, if he rents an apartment or owns a condo. He may even have an out-of-town address. It must be nice having others provide him protection from street crime, which is the only issue Coryell addressed.
Chrissy would have had kittens right on the air had the subject of tyrannical government come up. Too bad for Chrissy that people carry firearms legally against those who carry them illegally. And all his rhetoric–like asking the old cynical question about carrying a bazooka–isn’t going to convince anyone they don’t a right to self-defense anywhere in America they go.
Liam on April 20, 2010 at 11:32 AM
What are you talking about? If I had an aircraft carrier I’d had plenty of parking to spare! :P
Ash on April 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM
If it really got down to that, I don’t think our military would fire upon the American people. Where do the military people come from? I believe they come from the middle of America and they are smart enough to know that there would be a tryannical government in place. What I’m saying is, do you know who the Tea Party people are? They are the grand-parents and parents of the military.
Mirimichi on April 20, 2010 at 11:38 AM
Shock the Monkey on April 20, 2010 at 11:39 AM
Slip fees would be outrageous, and you’d be competing with all the other aircraft carriers for wharf space.
unclesmrgol on April 20, 2010 at 11:40 AM
So, what exactly does Matthews think the 2nd Amendment means? Does he think the founding fathers wrote it to protect the right of federal government to be armed from being infringed by itself?
Socratease on April 20, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »