Guns Part 3: A Shooting Lesson | Revisionist History | Malcolm Gladwell

Oh Malcolm Gladwell! How long I have waited to hear this series on the American gun manufacturers? Thank you and Major Kudos. I realize we are far from a solution to this gigantic crisis but Please Please continue this? My sister and I adore you, ALL your brilliant work and ALSO your huge heart. ❤❤❤

I learned so much from this one podcast. Weapon bans is just smoke and mirrors.

Credit to Malcolm for calling out BS from the other side.

We're Subsistence Hunt our annual meat supply (1-2 caribou and game birds + a deer if needed). We had an AR-15 for semiautomatic practice, but really it was the least practical firearm in our collection. Someone broke in our house and out of ALL the high end costly firearm they ONLy stole that one. We never replaced it because it doesn't serve a purpose in our household.

Thank you for desiring an honest conversation. I am a fan of your work, guns are my life, and I want to do all well-reasoned action to reduce and prevent violence. Maybe I’m a rare breed. A few clarifications: There are lots of points of dishonesty from the anti gun movement - one being including ALL gun violence, including that which saves lives. They also count suicides, they count the death of murderers and rapists who are stopped by a gun. They do not count the 1-2 million crimes that are stopped every year by simply brandishing a firearm. All rifles, from assault rifles in the hands of police/mass murderers to single shot hunting rifles only kill 200-300 people in the US every year. This is vastly less than death by fist, deaths by hammers and other blunt objects, does not compare to the knife death count. Pistols kill many more people. I deal with civilian, mil and le, and have never heard the term “spray” or any “technique” like it. It’s not a thing. Rifle bullets are often smaller and lighter than pistols, the most common rifle discussed here typical shoots a tiny 55-62 grain bullet, as opposed to 9mm being 115-147 grains in typical weight. I very, very much appreciate your effort to fully understand this issue, as it is incredibly complex, and please continue to explore the positive aspects of firearms. After lots of research and thought, I am absolutely convinced that the myriad of benefits FAR outweigh the cost. There is no better tool for women and smaller individuals to defend themselves from the brutes that would otherwise rape and rule you - and this also applies to the individual(s) defending themselves against the group that would commit genocide against them. ❤

"you get used to the violence of it" 😢

Thank you so much for this truly balanced look at this issue! I hesitated for months to listen because I'm so tired of both sides misrepresentation/misunderstanding of the issues. I did especially appreciate pinning down one of the most frustrating things about the whole debate: the definition of "assault" weapons or rifles. It is used so loosely that most conversations about control get hung up there. While I'm not surprised to learn that this was done deliberately, the exact details of how were new history for me. One nitpick on the contention that an AR15 is not a hunting rifle though - while it is true that it is not useful for what most consider "game hunting", it is, in fact, considered the ideal weapon for wild boar hunting (which have been labeled an overpopulated nuisance problem in some states & are causing problems for cattle ranchers). So, not only is it not a "weapon of war", it is actually a necessary tool for some hunters doing good. I've found it's a tough spot to be in, to both support responsible ownership & support control, yet not agree with the general talking points of either side. I look forward to the rest of the episodes now - there are a few more key points that I do hope you get to. Honest conversations like these are what is needed to actually come up with real world workable solutions.

This platform concept must make the AR5 a real toy for boys sort of possession. Which makes it even more scary given the gadget addiction that is typical of so many guys

You're all MAD

Excellent

When they have the option (time), why do police choose assault rifles over their readily available handguns? Almost all footage I see of SWAT, they carry assault rifles. Also, a specialist in ideal situations should never be used as a real world example. Using an F1 driver's speed on closed city streets to determine the speed limit in that city would be ridiculous.

I’m not a lib and I found your channel after the Douglas Murray debate. Your honesty in this video is respectable

Mr. Gladwell says, "...But an AR-15 is more like a firearm platform than a specific kind of gun." He then goes on to say, "Even the federal ban on assault rifles, in place from 1994 to 2004, was just a ban on some of the add-ons." Really? The assault weapons ban of 1994 specifically named the Colt AR-15 (and copies or duplicates) as among the banned weapons, not simply "add-ons", as Mr. Gladwell calls them.The text of the federal assault weapons ban of 1994 said, "* (b) DEFINITION OF SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPON- Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: * ‘(30) The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means-- * ‘(A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms, known as-- * ‘(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models); * ‘(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; * ‘(iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); * ‘(iv) Colt AR-15; * ‘(v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC; * ‘(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12; * ‘(vii) Steyr AUG; * ‘(viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and * ‘(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;

I agree that handguns and automatic rifles are distinctly different instruments. However, it could be that the shooters are in different categories. Teenage son products shooting indiscriminately may prefer an automatic rifle. Handguns, however, might be used by so-called professional, criminals or murderers, so intend to kill someone they know this is why proximity and precision counts with handguns more so than the automatic rifles.

Wait, Is it not a fact that after the assault rifle ban in the 1994 mass shooting deaths dropped, and as soon as the ban expired they shot up (pun unintended) again? Why doesn’t Malcolm tackle that one.

@malcolmgladwell I completely understand your frustration with the blatant lies told by the gun control guy, but I fear you let the gregarious and affable gun rights guy seduce you. Use some basic math and logic and the gun guys own numbers: he said it takes 6 seconds to shoot an entire 30-round clip and 3 seconds to reload. I think 3 seconds is pretty fast given that most mass shooters don't have his level of training, but we'll use it anyway. That means that in 60 seconds a really focused killer can empty 7 clips and fire 210 rounds. His argument against limits on magazine size is that if it only takes 3 seconds to reload, there's no time to rush the shooter and disarm him. But 99% of people aren't going to rush the shooter, they're going to try to run away. And if you had limited clip size to 10 rounds, using his numbers again, it should only take 2 seconds to fire 10 shots, but the same 3 seconds to reload, which means in the same 60 seconds, the gunman will empty 12 clips and fire 120 rounds. So my question is this: are you more likely to escape alive from a situation where 210 rounds per minute are being fired, or are you more likely to escape alive from a situation where 120 rounds per minute are being fired? The gun rights guy was more genial that the gun control guy, but he was just as misleading. All he did was smile while he made you look left when you should have looked to the right.

How can something be 'less lethal' ? It either kills or it doesn't

There are a number of problems with this narrative. 1.) You didn't have your gun expert fire as many rounds as he could with 10 round magazines. I think that would have slowed him down somewhat. 2.) It is not all that difficult to turn a semi-automatic gun into an automatic one. I know of two ways. One is to equip it with a "bump stock."" The other is to file away the catch on the receiver so that it doesn't stop with each round. Of course, the same can be done with a handgun. 3.) The round from an AR-15 compensates for having less lead in its round by hurling it at a much greater velocity. The amount of kinetic energy of a bullet (or any moving object) is 1/2 its mass times its velocity squared. Notice that it is the velocity part that gets squared. So if a bullet weighs half an ounce and travels at 1,000 feet per second, it has less kinetic energy than one that weighs 1/4 of an ounce but travels at 2,000 feet per second. It is the kinetic energy that does the damage. A well designed bullet is very efficient at transferring most of the energy that launched it into its target. It does this in two ways: 1.) It tumbles and sometimes breaks apart, spreading the damage, or 2.) It flattens out within the target. A bullet that passes through its victim is not considered a very effective bullet. The goal is to get it to expend all of its energy within its victim. A "bump stock," by the way, is an automatic trigger-puller.

You do what happens a lot in arguments… you get side tracked on an issue which is off topic. Whether a person can fire 30 or 70 rounds in less than 7 seconds does not bear on the fact that a shooter can kill 250+ people in a minute. That seems to me should be the problem we need to look at. Now we get off onto the tangent that mental health is the real issue. And so it goes, and the children die.

Wrong again. The gas tube on an AR is below the barrel. The rail on top is only for scopes and other accessories. There may also be a rail below the barrel. The AK and others has it's gas tube above the barrel. Magazine change pause could give a trained person (police) who might anticipate the reload time enough to advance their position enough to get around a corner and deliver a lethal shot. So magazine size DOES matter. I don't care what old boy says Regarding the BAR. It is huge, and heavy and has far more power than required to kill any human. Bullets are three times the size of the ARs. Magazine only holds 10. If it held 30 it would wear a person out carrying it around. Bad choice for a mass shooter. It's also not very accurate and doesn't have a pistol grip. Geraldo was part right . Earlier versions were very easily converted to full auto with a $100 kit available by mail order. The 2017 Las Vegas mass shooter used a bumpstock to convert hus semi auto assault rifles to full auto. He killed 60 and wounded more than 413. He wouldn't have been able to mount nearly that toll without his weapons firing in fully automatic mode.