Episode 652 Scott Adams: Bad Gun Control Arguments and Hollywood Blacklisting

Date: 2019-09-04 | Duration: 39:06

Topics

Hollywood rejects “blacklisting” people…they remember the horror Eric McCormick’s weasel-out tweet Whoopi is opposed to blacklisting and destroying lives Why are BOTH sides of the gun control issues…talking nonsense? Bad arguments list and analysis Will FEWER guns, or MORE guns, lower gun deaths? The point is that BOTH options can be tested small

If you would like my channel to have a wider audience and higher production quality, please donate via my startup (Whenhub.com) at this link: https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:10]

hey everybody come on in here where's all your comments comments must be delayed there you are all right beat John good to see you hey Jordy do you southern all right you guys are quick and you know why you're here to enjoy is the simultaneous up all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass of Stein the cellos tanker to thermos elastic and keen to vessel of any control it with your favorite liquid I like coffee are you ready good morning from the gym Tom get ready with your beverage simultaneous hip on oh that's good stuff all right I'm gonna make you quick today well they would say that but then they don't so you've probably been following the story of Debra Messing and Eric and mcCormick to Hollywood stars who have been asking for the list of the names of donors to Trump so that they can do what

[1:12]

donors to Trump so that they can do what well people said what don't you know that Hollywood has a bad bad history with black listing and that if you are if you're okay with with black listing you don't understand the Hollywood history and so even Whoopi Goldberg went hard at messin and mcCormick for suggesting that we should start black listing people for their political voting and I think that they got embarrassed too into adjusting their opinion but I want to read to you eric mccormack tweets all right so here's the setup so they've had eric mccormack investing he asked for the list of who's donating to Trump because so that they could not work with them anymore in other words so they can actively discriminate against those people who are donated but so people said well that's the black lists and here's how

[2:13]

that's the black lists and here's how McCormick's is trying to weasel out of why he did you ready for this I'm gonna read his actual post he says I want to be clear about my social media posts from last week okay he wants to be clear so he's saying that what he said was unclear it's funny because it didn't sound unclear which has been misinterpreted in a very upsetting way oh he's been misinterpreted and it's upsetting him now he says in underlines I absolutely do not support blacklist or discrimination of any kind okay that's clear at least he's being clear he doesn't support that but now it makes you wonder why he's asking for that information why is he asking for that if he's not supporting it but he goes on to answer that question he says as anyone who knows me would attest meaning that he doesn't like blacklist and that he says I simply like to understand where Trump's major donations are coming from

[3:13]

Trump's major donations are coming from oh it's a quest for knowledge I simply like to understand where Trump's major donations are coming from notice he changed it to major donations did you see that little sleight of hand so he's he's trying to get away from any donation from any citizen is bad and therefore any you know if you gave $10 to Trump you must be a Nazi that's the problem because you know some 40% of the country are pro Trump and he realized that he just lost all of their business so he's trying to he's trying to insert this word major before donations so that he can sort of weasel it away from people who were donating and make it more about the major donations you know the big corporations you and I hate the corporations right we're on the same team those big corporations with their major donations we're against that right so that's this first weasel move is

[4:14]

so that's this first weasel move is putting the word major in there which wasn't there before and they says I simply like to understand where the major donations are coming from which is a matter of public record which it is I am holding myself responsible for making educated informed decisions that I can morally and ethically stand by and to do that transparency is essential huh he's not blacklisting he simply wants the list of people who voted a certain way so that he can educate himself and make informed decisions that he can morally and ethically stand by totally different than a blacklist totally different wait no it isn't it's exactly a blacklist so he wrote this whole thing to say I don't believe in blacklist and here's why I believe in blacklist they're both right here I don't believe in black this let

[5:16]

here I don't believe in black this let me tell you why I believe in blacklist let me tell you black lists are very important for my moral character and all that so here's the thing I wonder about both McCormick and Debra Messing do they have any smart friends who are willing to give them an honest opinion because think about it imagine you're you know you're a famous celebrity do the people who want to hang out with you tell you when you're this stupid do they have even one friend who's gonna say Debra Debra you know I know you feel passionate about this I get where you're coming from you don't have any bad intentions but do you understand what you're doing do you actually understand what you are doing don't do this it's the dumbest thing anybody ever did in the world and I feel as if you and I could not have done what

[6:17]

as if you and I could not have done what Eric McCormack and Debra Messing did because one of our friends would said Scott we got to talk this is the worst idea you've ever had but I feel like nobody talked to them do they literally have no friends who are willing to tell them the truth because this looks like some serious bubble stuff here alright I decided to make everybody angry at me by writing a blog post in which I called out what I call the dumbest arguments about gun control just to make everybody hate me I took the arguments on both sides which arguments do you think I took from both sides that are the dumb ones all of them every one of them one of the problems with the gun control argument is that both sides are talking nonsense why is that is it because everybody is dumb in the world well yeah some people think that but that's not the specific problem here the specific problem and the reason that

[7:19]

the specific problem and the reason that both sides are talking nonsense complete nonsense is because nobody can say the truth do you wanna hear the truth people like guns if they like guns because they like guns sometimes they like them because they're fun and they like to shoot them sometimes they want them for defense they feel that makes them feel safer some people want to protect the country they have reasons they want guns but most of them are bad at least when they most of the reasons that are given in public are bad because the real reason mostly is selfish all right people don't usually like to share selfish reasons in public because the topic is about America in general so can you go into a conversation about what's good for America in general and say you know I don't really care what's good for America in general this is what's good for me you can't do that so instead you come up with some BS argument about why

[8:21]

come up with some BS argument about why it's good for the country in weird ways now there is at least one good argument in this bunch and I'll tell you what it is in a minute but let me tell you the bad countries the bad arguments first bad argument is that other countries do this is that so as soon as you say another country has strict gun control and low rates of crime you're not saying anything useful because there are so many differences between the United States and any other country that you're just being done if you look at Japan or look at Great Britain it's just a dumb argument right now what would be a better argument but imperfect would be to say there's a city in the United States that's very similar to this other city they both have similar problems similar rates of crime etc similar demographics and this one city made a change and then five years later we can see if anything anything is different in their statistics now that would be a reasonably good argument and

[9:22]

would be a reasonably good argument and even that would be imperfect but at least you would be in the rational you know field but comparing the United States to Japan to many differences it's a useless comparison Great Britain useless so that's the first big argument bad argument the other bad argument comes from the anti-gun people who say that you're your private guns even the ar-15s etc even those would be no match for us to ending army should the United States turn into a dictatorship and they want to they want to crush the citizens it won't make any difference that you have your puny little weapons because you can't stand up to the you know the military of the United States stupid argument totally stupid arguments because the weapons that the citizens have are not meant to shoot down drones and take out a nuclear bomb and you know knock down a jet that's not what they're for if we ever got in the situation

[10:24]

for if we ever got in the situation where there was a military coup and then we had a dictator the citizens guns would be used for kidnapping assassination and disrupting economic situations and it would be very good for that for example if you were in the military and you decided to side with with the dictator people would know who you are I mean your neighbors know if you're in the military or not so if you're in the military and you haven't you know if you haven't defected and laughed you must be with the dictator at about that point your family would be rounded and murdered I'm not saying I'm in favor of that I'm just saying that's what would happen so the families of all the people who were complicit in some kind of a takeover of this country the families would be rounded up and murdered the friends would be rounded up and that would be very effective in making people maybe now support the

[11:25]

making people maybe now support the government so there would be a massive murder spree in this country like you've never seen before and the government would say we could control this country we could but we'd have a country we didn't want to own because we wouldn't be able to go out in public no leader would ever be able to see the sunlight again we have so many so many weapons in this country that anybody who was associated with the government let's say there was a dictatorship that took over they would never be able to see the sunlight again because there would be bullets fired in their direction every time they went out in public so the no match for standing army argument is stupid because that's not the matchup it would be it would be more of a guerrilla war and killing of family members and for that our guns are quite sufficient then there's a slippery slope argument the slippery slope says if you do anything in the realm of gun control

[12:26]

anything in the realm of gun control eventually your guns will be will be taken away the slippery slope argument is magical thinking it's sort of a form of word thinking that because the word slippery has the has slippery right in the word there must be something about the situation that's just going to keep slipping but there isn't slippery slope is magical thinking everything goes in the direction is going until something stops and no exceptions it's a basic rule of physics if I drop a ball from my hand it will keep going to the ground until it hits the ground or something else stops it right every policy goes in the direction it's going until the public says oh that's far enough and then they stop so take seatbelts for example the fact that you have to put on a seat belt in your car is that a slippery slope to having no cars it is not although someday we'll probably have no cars but it's not because the seatbelts

[13:27]

because the seatbelts alright so pretty much everything in the world looks like a slippery slope if you're on the side of not wanting to happen but stop saying slippery slope because it's magical thinking as if there's something about this one case that it's the one case where public opinion won't stop it when it goes too far it's never happened before probably never will happen it's just magical thinking here's another bad argument it's in the Constitution we have a constitutional right to own firearms that is a terrible argument it might be a true statement I'm not arguing the fact of it I'm just saying it's a terrible argument because the Constitution was written with provisions that it can be adjusted and updated and changed so it doesn't matter that is in the Constitution it matters if we want it to be in the Constitution because if 60% of the public's let's say a supermajority 2/3 or whatever if two thirds of the public want something to

[14:29]

thirds of the public want something to change in the Constitution we can do it the Constitution predicts that and allows it and indeed we've we've changed things so that you know they're the right to vote has changed for example slavery changed for example so if your argument is it's a constitutional right that's a stupid argument because that that can be changed whatever the public wants to now you might say it's hard to change but that would be a different argument others say it's a god-given right I would say that's magical thinking because I don't well let me lump together the other bad argument I don't have listed on my post but one of the arguments is Scott Scott Scott it's always said as if I don't understand things and and here's the argument Scott I have to I have to get Dale into to explain this to you Dale where are you here's Dale Dale explain to me about

[15:31]

here's Dale Dale explain to me about rights all Scott Scott Scott you're so stupid because you think rights are something the government gives to you no no the government does not give you rights it can only take away your rights so you don't you don't have a government given right to a gun you just have a right to a gun and seem stupid argument it might be true in some philosophical sense that rights are something you're born with and the government's just take them away but that's just word thinking it has no practical meaning in the real world in the real world governments exist and they do restrict your rights in a billion different ways so if governments exist and they do and they can restrict your rights and they do then for all practical purposes the government

[16:32]

practical purposes the government decides what rights you have and the government grants you those rights by simply not acting against them now you can say Scott that's totally different in a practical sense your rights come from the government I know you don't want that to be true I know you think that on a philosophical level it's not true but in a reality level it's true so I'm sorry if I'm arrogant and condescending but I'll block you so you don't have to see it alright another bad argument is the Constitution refers to militias not ordinary people editing guns here's what's wrong with that argument you and I are not on the Supreme Court if you and I were on the Supreme Court we could have a good argument about whether it's about militias or it's about private gun ownership that would make perfect sense because we're on the

[17:32]

make perfect sense because we're on the Supreme Court and somebody brings us that question and we don't do it but if you and I are not on the Supreme Court it is complete stupidity for you and I to argue about what the constant tuition means completely irrelevant it's irrelevant what you think the Constitution means because you're not in the Supreme Court neither am I now I could I could read the Constitution say huh I don't see that there but it doesn't matter it only matters if the Supreme Court ceases there and they have decided now did the Supreme Court massage the meaning in the Constitution to make it allow people to have firearms for non militia purposes it looks that way to me it looks like the Supreme Court sort of created a right and at that language that wasn't necessarily there before in the way that governments create rights as I currently as I just explained but I don't care because I'm

[18:35]

explained but I don't care because I'm not on the Supreme Court and that decision is already made so arguing about a decision that's not your decision to make and has already been made by the Supreme Court it's a useless useless argument here's another bad argument but people will just use other tools to kill what about that story from China where somebody killed eight school kids with a knife you attack the classroom I guess sure people will use other tools to kill throughout history people have used other tools to kill here's why this is a stupid argument it's it's a stupid argument but you know I I want to say it's suboptimal or use other words but it's hard that's just a stupid argument and here's why when you add friction to any activity of humans they will do less of it pretty much every time so if you make something harder to do you get less of it but you'd never get zero of it you can't

[19:35]

you'd never get zero of it you can't make it you can't probably can't add enough friction to the gun situation to make zero problems that's probably not a thing but you can make it harder how do we know that's true well you don't see a lot of mass murderers using army tanks why is it that you don't see mass murderers using actual military tanks it's because it would be really hard to get one Oh lotta friction why don't you see more mass murderers using fully automatic weapons because you can buy one they're just really expensive and there's more hoops to jump through and they don't make them new so you'd have to buy use one but you could get one or you can get one maybe from the military illegally somehow you could do that but but it's hard and so you don't see that weapon used so in every realm of human behavior adding any kind of friction changes behavior somewhat and you can certainly try try it in different places and see

[20:36]

try try it in different places and see if it works or not so yes people can use other tools to kill but any friction will change the number of people who use guns to kill which is not to say I'm in favor of that friction by the way don't don't assume that when I'm talking about the bad arguments that you know my opinion because that's not in here nothing I'm saying here is going to give you my summary opinion of gun control because my summary opinion is I'd like to keep guns because they would be good for me but I'm pretty sure it would kill other people so that's my opinion many of you have a similar opinion all right some people say that criminals can always get guns so all you're doing is keeping it away from the law-abiding people that's a terrible argument it's a terrible argument yes it's true the criminals would be more capable of getting illegal guns even if even if the laws changed that's true it's not on point though

[21:38]

that's true it's not on point though because I'm not worried about the criminals so much because you're right they will get guns but what about the 18 year old who's got some mental issues if an 18 year old with mental issues and no criminal contacts he's not part of the criminal underworld you know he's just not a criminal he just has some mental problems if you make it harder for that kid that eighteen year old to get an ar-15 that probably makes a difference right even if it doesn't change what criminals do you we can make it a little harder for the 18 year old with a mental problem to get a weapon alright so the argument criminals can always get guns is off point it's true but it's off point because there are a lot of people who have no criminal record no criminal contacts and you'd also want them to have a little trouble getting a gun if they had a mental problem others say that gun deaths are not that high if you subtract out the suicides

[22:39]

high if you subtract out the suicides which apparently are something like half or two-thirds of all gun deaths and you subtract out the criminals who are shooting other criminals that you don't care about as much you get down to what some people would say is a pretty reasonable number maybe 10,000 10,000 a year but that's a bad argument because we would not stop trying to fix something that killed 10,000 people a year if it were any other topic and it killed 10,000 people a year there would be a whole industry trying to reduce that 10,000 to zero you know and other people have said hey but swimming pools and you know bicycles and other things are killing more people but you look at the swimming pool industry and look at all the things they've done to make swimming pools safer they have all kinds of technology I've got a pool cover online in my state you'd have to build a locked fence around your pool so that the neighbor can't can't wander into it so every industry that kills ten

[23:41]

so every industry that kills ten thousand people a year is working very hard to get that number down guns are no different so wouldn't matter if it's twenty thousand or ten thousand or even five thousand you would still try pretty hard to get that down to zero so it's so it's not an argument to say the deaths aren't really that high other people said Scott you're ignoring the most important part you're ignoring all the lives that are saved to buy guns meaning that people when people own guns it makes crime less likely because there's so many people with guns that the criminal doesn't want to go there what about all the people who would have been murdered except they had a gun you're not including those Scott that is a terrible a terrible argument here's why we're looking at the net deaths looking at the net if the net can be driven down by whatever change it is and wait for it

[24:42]

whatever change it is and wait for it wait for it whether that change involves adding guns to a situation or whether that change involves subtracting guns or making them harder to guess somehow or anything else aren't they both good it doesn't matter how you get there you know so long as society agrees that it's a reasonable step so because you can test these things I would be in favor of some places adding more guns in other words they're probably places in this country where adding some guns would actually make people safer don't you think there are probably other places in this country where adding guns would make things worse don't you think now that's just a supposition but it feels very testable Texas might want to try adding some guns to a county maybe Chicago wants to try something different and maybe we learn which one of those

[25:44]

and maybe we learn which one of those works and maybe we see that it's different in one place than it is in another so I'm not telling you that we need fewer guns to reduce gun deaths I'm saying that it can be tested and that is probably not the same in one region versus another region so so I'm not ignoring the number of lives saved by guns I'm looking at the nets and the net number of people dead can be driven up or down based on your policies so let's try some stuff and see what it does all right some people say that testing some kind of gun control in one state won't work because people can just drive across the state border and get their gun there that's a terrible argument it's a terrible argument even though it's true so things can be true and also terrible argument so it's true that you could drive across the state and do something you couldn't do in the other state but number one that that ignores the fact

[26:46]

number one that that ignores the fact that you could also have a law in the neighboring state that says you won't sell guns to people from another state that wouldn't be obnoxious would it yeah if California said you know if you live in California you have to abide by our gun restrictions but if you're a resident of another state you can't buy a gun at all because you know you know you live in another state so if you live in another state go deal with that state when you want to buy a gun I can imagine that kind of a law and that would not seem too obnoxious to me and that would also you know allow you to test within one state at least more easily now suppose that the neighboring state doesn't play along let's say the neighboring state says yeah we're not gonna have a law about your state if somebody wants to come here and buy a gun it's legal here they can do it so let's say the neighboring state does not play along and you can go there and buy a gun without the same limitations you

[27:47]

a gun without the same limitations you would still be able to pick that effect up in other words you would be able to measure this guy lies this guy lies gets blocked you would still be able to measure whether it made a difference because again it would add friction it would be harder to go to another state so you would expect there would be some some decrease in gun deaths if the change that you implemented made a difference it might not be as big a change as if all the neighboring states were the same but you would be able to measure it if it made if it made any friction you'd see it you should also be able to measure the distance from the border so you should be able to see that the gun passes for example don't change much for people who live on the border of another state because like you said they could just drive one mile buy a gun and come back but it might it might make a difference to people who are in the center of the state who would have to drive a few hours

[28:49]

drive a few hours we'd have to drive a few hours to get a gun illegally that would be friction so you should be able to measure what works is what doesn't even if there's some bleed across the states all right here's the here's maybe the worst of the worst arguments you raise this this is the dumbest of all the dumb gun arguments and most of you have said this argument and there's just no way to there's no way to shade this this is a dumb argument and here it goes like this Chicago has the tightest gun laws and also very high gun violence therefore say the bad arguers that's evidence the tight gun laws don't make you safer because it's not working in Chicago is it immediately obvious to you why that's a dumb argument or does that sound like a good argument to you here's the problem which locations implement the strongest gun restrictions would it be in the places that have no deaths from guns no because why in the world would

[29:52]

guns no because why in the world would you put gun restrictions someplace that doesn't have any problem with guns the place you would put your strongest gun restrictions is where you have the most gun problems you should expect that every place eventually every place that has lots of gun problems should eventually become among the most gun restricted places of course it's not an argument against regulations it's a description of how those regulations got there in the first place because it was an emergency if they're trying to do what they can with their limited tools now I'm not saying that those gun restrictions work and I'm not saying they don't work I'm saying that there's an obvious reason why Chicago has lots of gun restrictions it's because they're desperate and the other whatever else they've been trying hasn't been working you would expect other other cities with the same problem to also be moving in the same direction so those are the

[30:53]

the same direction so those are the worst arguments the best argument for owning guns was sort of embedded in the batter sort of the the opposite of the bad the best argument for gun ownership number one a gorilla an armed gorilla movement in this country is a good defense against the government trying to abuse the citizens even though it doesn't stand up to a standing army it wouldn't need to as I said it would be kidnapping there would be assassinations the country would be completely unlivable so nobody would want to conquer it because it would just become a shooting a shooting gallery so that's a very good reason I think that argument is strong it does protect the Republic now what about let's say some foreign country let's say China just taking somebody randomly had plans to conquer and occupy the United States could they do it no and they couldn't because there

[31:56]

do it no and they couldn't because there are enough guns that the locals could wipe out the police force in an afternoon you know so the first thing they do is if the police force was somehow on the side of the the dictator the police would be wiped out in an afternoon it probably wouldn't even take all day to do it like all the police would be murdered by the end of the day now that's of course the police who are loyal to the dictator only here's another good argument for guns that in some places they make you safer that's a really good argument because I'm pretty sure that there are statistics that show that in some situations extra guns work it would be good to know what those situations look like and maybe we need to do a little more testing but it should also it's very important also to note that what works at one place isn't necessarily going to work in another so those are good arguments and I would stick to the good arguments so as I said

[32:57]

stick to the good arguments so as I said I'm pro-gun strongly program under no situation could I abide by confiscation of guns and I think the buyback gets gets close enough to confiscation that I don't think I could support that but having having a discriminatory a very discriminatory gun policy I could look at that and buy discriminatory I I say targeting young white well just males they don't even have to be white but young males probably need more restrictions on gun purchases than women then people who've been in the military than people who already own guns so there are a number of categories of people who should not be restricted because there they seem obviously safer than other categories but if you've never owned a gun you've never been in the military and you're 29 years old and

[33:59]

the military and you're 29 years old and you just your first gun is an AR maybe we should look at that a little bit closer Scott that did not come off very well dude all right so all the people who just make stupid personal comments will get blocked anybody who has an argument totally open to it so let's I'm just gonna block all the rest of the people who are making your personal so all the people who who are saying it's just a bad argument it's stupid bla bla bla you know you're you're losing this Scott all the people would say that it's because I've destroyed their argument and they don't know what to do about it they feel bad so do you feel bad that I just destroyed your best argument because that happened to a number of you and it probably is not pleasant all right well it looks like people got that message okay if somebody has an argument that I did not include

[35:02]

has an argument that I did not include because I did add I did add some extra arguments at the end let's say I had an update okay I included the updates well so somebody is groaning because I said young white males before I changed it to just young males because I am a white male and I was once young I feel qualified to speak about our extra risk if you were insuring somebody to buy a car you would say Oh young males are riskier than young females we'll change the price if you were to get a loan the bank would look at all of your particulars of your life to decide what your risk was I don't think we can ignore the fact that most of the gun crime comes from young males I mean how do you ignore that that would be it

[36:02]

do you ignore that that would be it would be ridiculous to ignore it now it would be discriminatory but so is your car insurance and some rent somehow we live with that somebody says you misunderstood the Chicago situation restrictions are a century old irrelevant it's irrelevant because a century ago why do you think that they put in strict gun control that's because they had a problem it doesn't matter when it happened
somebody says mental health issues in this country can't be ignored yeah I mean that that's a given as I've said we've become sort of a zombie country there is actually a zombie apocalypse happening now and the zombies are the people who are on drugs or have mental problems and are not getting the treatment that they need their brains are effectively not working but their bodies are and they they get

[37:03]

but their bodies are and they they get to march around in public just like everybody else so there is a zombie apocalypse the zombies happen to be on drugs or have mental problems or both and it's getting bigger all right how come the inner city crime is ignored we have to pick out the white males oh uh nobody's ignoring it nobody's ignoring inner city crime this was a sermon not a persuasive argument okay you get blocked for word thinking so weird thinking is when you try to you try to make a point but all you've done is put a different word on something this was not persuasive it was a sermon a sermon would be if I had a point of view the sermon would be I was trying to persuade you toward a particular outcome that didn't happen here I simply told you the arguments you

[38:05]

here I simply told you the arguments you shouldn't use because they're weak all right a lot of you want to make this racial but I choose not to at the moment
all right all right so I appear to have triggered many of you by using the phrase white male because many people are saying but wait it's not you know the white males are not the ones statistically with the problem will you stop commenting if I agree that's true would that be enough to make you stop saying that because I agree that's true so you can just stop making those comments because now we're all on the same side you're not disagreeing with me all right that's all I have for now I gotta go you're ready to do something else and I will talk to you all later