Would Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ban assault weapons? What about gas stoves, Roundup herbicide, or prescription drugs? Reason spoke with him about libertarianism, vaccines, accusations of a "conspiracist mindset,” and more.
I like RFK jr. but I disagree with him on his 2a stance, even if Republicans had the numbers and were okay with banning so called "assault weapons" that doesn't make it Constitutional. The 2nd Amendment is a restriction on government, not civilians. Our natural rights can't be voted away.
Thank you. A consensus does not justify taking away the essential rights of peaceful people. Gang rape and lynch mobs are ruled by consensus...might doesn't make right.
If the next-to-zero chance of a bipartisan bill on this issue passing is enough to throw away the only candidate talking about free speech, anti censorship, and getting corporate influence out of our alphabet agencies, then America will never change.
have seen many republicans thst have said they will be voting for him, no one respects the constitution more than RFK, also Trump did gun control as president so RFK is looking much better.
@@playdiscgolf1546 words have meaning... Do you take issue with the term when it's spoken favorably(Brandon Herrara uses the term all the time) or only when it's used to paint a negative picture?
@@taylorhickman84t’s propaganda. Politicians know damn well that military rifles are inaccessible to the general population. They know machine guns were all but banned in the 80’s and it takes serious money and connections to be able to get your hands on one today. They KNOW that the AR-15 rifle functions EXACTLY the same as the handguns that kill more people than all other types of guns combined but they hate the AR-15 cus it’s the most effective gun for self defense, and they WANT to commit atrocities against we the people but they can’t do it while we’re armed with the most effective self defense weapon on the market. If it was TRULY about “saving just one life” they would go after the handguns considering handguns are used in around 98% of all gun deaths. It’s not about saving lives. It’s about controlling people and disarming innocent people. If they wanted to save the lives of innocent people they would keep hardcore criminals in prison instead of giving them a slap on the wrist and releasing them to victimize more people.
@@playdiscgolf1546I refuse as well. Any president that tries to disarm us poor folk if enough of his rich buddies vote for it is a dictator not a president
We already have assault weapons banns its not a big deal. These weapons didn't exist when the constitution was written. For example the second amendment doesn't give you the right to own a cruise missile. Though some states like new York and cali seem to be in violation of the second amendment in my opinion
@@raymondkidwell7135 The whole point, the essence, of the 2ndA was for people to fight back a tyrannical government. So in essence, yes, you do have the RIGHT to own suchlike weapons as the government possesses.
@@raymondkidwell7135 The assault weapons ban was completely ineffective. I think you're either reading the cherry picked stats and/or too content in your delusions to face the actual facts on the matter. The solution is addressing the mental illness issues that we have in this country, not stripping the good and responsible people of their rights (i.e.; the vast majority of gun owners & those who are OK with the 2nd Amendment yet simply choose not to possess any firearms) to address the glaringly obvious mental instability of a comparable few. And I'll own all the cruise missiles I want. But, then again, why would I want them? Do you have any idea how much the cost per unit, let alone the maintenance, storage, and support equipment that would be required to utilize said proverbial missiles? It's an impractical weapon for a civilian, and they're prohibited from purchase anyway. It's a poor example if you were trying to make a point and sound intelligent. Get the real, hard data and understand it completely before you speak, instead of willfully going along with what the MSM tells you to believe. People will like you more if you don't go around sounding like a dramatic, unintelligent, misinformed, and half-crazy boob that simply regurgitates the baseless drivel that CNN, FOX, and the major TV news networks feed you. Operate purely in irrefutable facts, not political spin, and you will be much more apt to be taken seriously. P.S.- There is NO current federal assault weapons ban. It expired on September 13th, 2004. It only covered the manufacture and sale of certain firearms and wasn't an all out ban on all semi-automatic rifles; that's NEVER happened. Also, all subsequent attempts to institute a new AWB have failed. Why? Because the politicians know that if there was a full ban, then things would probably not turn out too well for any of them in the very near future. And that can't happen. Their positions of power, connections, and money are too important to them; and it all takes votes for them to keep it. No votes = No power = No money = Can't be allowed to happen. Hence, no complete ban on semi-auto rifles or firearms in general.
@@raymondkidwell7135shall not be infringed is very clear, the founding fathers weren’t dumb and knew that technology would improve and guns would be more sophisticated in the future. The only power we hold over the government is the ability to put an end to a tyrannical government. This is why Hitler disarmed Germany.
A president shouldn’t get elected to “ban” things. He should be elected to fix things. There is no gun problem. There’s a mental health problem, and we need it fixed immediately
@@InsomniuhVr We can start by creating a culture that doesn’t glorify mental illness and drug use. We can give parents the option for school choice, so troubled kids can have access to more nurturing environments. We can house the mentally ill who are currently living out of tents in large blue cities. We can stop incentivizing broken homes to stay broken. There’s a lot of changes we can make to strengthen our country.
Republican consensus and Democrat consensus does NOT equal American consensus. A few hundred people don't speak for the people. They sure as hell don't listen..
Every human being has the basic human right to defend their life and the lives of those they love. The second a politician stops acknowledging that, they are dead to me. Every one of them thinks they’re better than us, their lives are protected by “assault weapons” but we can’t defend our own? Kick Rocks
They may not be at first, but politics will turn you into a moron. (What I mean by that, is that you start to lose common sense, and start to look at the world with a Blue or Red glasses) That includes the general people who follow politics on the news.
RFK Jr. is an excellent candidate for president because he knows how to make both Democrats and Republicans happy, even on the topic of the Second Amendment. He's really smart and understands that Republicans wouldn't want to agree with Democrats on gun rights. That's why he's able to gain support from people in both parties, as well as from independent voters. RFK Jr.'s ability to bring different groups together and find common ground shows that he would be a great leader as president. He knows how to work with everyone and make progress on important issues, which is what we need in our country.
Yup he has a democrat primary to win, some of these trump supporters are borderline stupid considering Trump did gun control as president and imposed unconstitutional lockdowns and on top of all of that, sided with tech giants to censor Conservatives as both RFK and DeSantis have said. RFK wouldn't go anywhere near these things.
@@Bankerguy many of them will return and do you know how many democrats he probably won with this comment? not to mention the fact that he also said he's not gonna take anyone's guns which is good enough for a lot of people
It’s funny we here this word thrown around a lot lately. Did you know the word “democracy” is not in the constitution or the Declaration? We are a republic…that is designed to protect the individual rights of the people. If you are in the minority on an issue, in a democracy, you lose your rights.
“Democracy” is 2 wolves and a sheep arguing over what’s for dinner. It’s mob rule. Where the tiniest majority can rule over the minority with just one vote more. That’s why we’re a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. Yes we do use some Democratic methods but we’re NOT a democracy. “And to the REPUBLIC for which it stands”. Not “and to the democracy for which it stands”. Got it?
Hes saying that to appease those who desperately want assault rifle bans, republicans would never agree to that. There will never be a consensus. He's saying he won't dictate against the process of government.
@@zzmymel The president signing the bill in or rejecting it is part of the process of government. Is he saying he'd sign any bill that gets a majority or that he was lying in his first statement?
@@makueb5605 Then that is even worse if he only said it because he doesn't think it would happen. And Trust & Believe, the Republicans aren't for us any more than the Dems.
What? That’s literally what politicians are for. If most people wanted something, I’d better hope my president elects to make those changes. To think anything otherwise just because it’s an example you disagree with Is childish
@@makueb5605 Saw quite a few familiar names from the GOP sign w Dems on those red flag law b.s never say never Crenshaw, Massie possibly Lee ( not to sure)
Translation: "I don't want to take away anyone's guns. But if the opportunity presents itself, I'll take away everyone's guns." Guys, this is a perfect example of politician speak, literally saying the opposite of what people think you are saying. DON'T TRUST POLITICIANS!
There's a process for doing that, but it isn't a simple process. It also requires two thirds of the states to be in agreement. It won't happen in my lifetime, but it can be done. They would need to ratify the constitution to so. They never try to do it the right way. Because they know they don't have enough support to do it properly
Even if he's elected, there's not enough good democrats for him to hire into his cabinet and other positions anyway. We'd just get the same thing we have now.
To be fair, there are some chicken shit republicans and RINO that have even worse stances than he does. But any attack on the 2A is too much for my vote.
In a town hall meeting, he said that “Our Supreme Court has a very strict interpretation of the Second Amendment. The idea that any sort of assault weapons ban can be put forward is nonsensical.”
they aren’t talking about self defence, silly. They are talking about the weapons used in the nearly everyday occurrence of public massacres in the US. Often of little children trying to learn at school. It’s the only nation in the world where such a perverted problem exists.
I would vote for him in a heartbeat. His positions are grounded in reality and the likelihood of their successful implementation. He doesn't make extravagant promises, which is a breath of fresh air for me as an American voter. I appreciate straightforwardness and a commitment to honesty. We deserve leaders who will clearly outline their plans and deliver on them, without any unnecessary deception or political spin.
@@michaelwills1926 Yep. OP didn't even realize the completely unawareness of self-contradiction within literally a ten-second span: I won't take away anyone's guns, but if the corrupt federal legislature wills it, I'll sign it into law. Most people don't have the requisite attention span to deal with this stuff.
@HeavenrzOfficial I don't have anything else I need to listen to. If you are willing to violate our constitutional rights, you're out. That's non negotiable.
@@monikaramirez8067In the unlikely scenario that something like that would play out, the supreme court would likely step in. It aint gonna happen. You cant put the genie back in the bottle.
Very true. Unfortunately we can’t vote for trump either, under those standards, as he allowed the unconstitutional lockdowns to happen under his watch. Idk who to root for these days
He shrugged, like a good lawyer would. “Are you going to ban any meds?” They ask. “None come to mind!” He exclaims and looks away caked in wonder. Rich people, please start to divest your money and work out ways to balance the wealth and redirect it towards more small businesses! There’s plenty to go around!! 🤗
He said he would ban “assault weapons” if there was a consensus between both parties, which if that were true, congress could just change the constitution through a convention, if congress and the states had a constitutional convention and amended the 2nd amendment, would you follow it and turn over your weapons? It would be constitutional, or are you saying you will only follow the constitution if it matches your outlook on the world regardless of what the constitution says?
@@Mistro07"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" the constitution isnt what grants me my rights. the government was established to protect my god given rights. the bill of rights was made to restrict the government from infringing those rights. if the govenment was to ratify the constitution to infringe those rights it goes against the very principles it was made to uphold. and then you just have to keep reading the declaration of independence, "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness..."
@@Mistro07no i would not hand them in. And i know all my other friends wouldn't either. I also know my local police force wouldn't enforce it. I'm sorry, but your dream of a gunless America will NEVER HAPPEN
Yep, same here. Give me a Democrat like RFK Jr. who won't take my guns, including my AR-15s, and I will vote for him. Until then I'll keep voting Republican. Sorry, my constitutional/civil rights come first. "They killed my Uncle and my Dad, so I only want them to have the assault weapons!"
Look up what an Amendmant is. Thomas Jefferson wanted the constitution rewritten every 20 years. We are not following the founding fathers wishes. They designed the constitution to be changed and wanted us to change it and modernize it.
This proves that no matter how good he's been, he's still a democrat. Therefore he is no good. His response on guns here was very bad. I don't care what democrats and republicans "agree" on. There is a constitution for a reason which specifically states that the rights of the 2nd amendment shall not be infringed upon. Assault weapons exist for individuals so they can keep their government in check. That is their main purpose.
@@petdoctor3 "Well regulated" at the time referred to something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only NOT the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so, that's why the founders wrote it. People like you who try to use the idiotic "well regulated" argument like to ignore everything else except the first three words of the 2nd Amendment, so I'll refresh your memory, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the **people** to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". The Constitution doesn't grant us or give us our rights, it recognizes the natural individual rights that we are all born with, rights like, the right to self defense, freedom of speech/expression, freedom of religion, etc. can't be legislated or voted away, the government can't take away something that isn't theirs. And if they try We The People have the American birth right of rebellion, "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it" - The Declaration of Independence.
@@petdoctor3I agree on that. We have been slacking on maintaining a well regulated militia to stand up to our government every time it tries to violate the constitution.
If your a safe, trained, proper gun owner - then these little restrictions should mean nothing to you. Not a big deal….. You also need to get over the fact that the government is NEVER taking our guns away. Get over it
@@sparschaler3536 government officials who infringe on rights violate their oath to the constitution. We have a right to bear arms. If an elected official can just sign away your rights then they are just privileges that you don't get. Except it's "gun rights" not "gun privileges." Any government official who attempts to infringe on the people's rights deserves prison. They are criminals.
Assault weapons are not specified in the 2a. So banning them wouldn't be unconstitutional. Edit: A lot of people are confused here. I did *NOT* say assault weapons aren't included in the 2a. I said that assault weapons aren't specified in the 2a. I'm trying to say Congress can *legally* and *constitutionally* choose to exclude them if they had enough numbers.
@@boulevard14 Yes they are. The Supreme Court has already ruled in cases like Heller, McDonald and Bruen that semi automatic weapons in COMMON USE today are protected under the 2nd Amendment.
So another words, if government on both sides of the isle agree in banning assault LIKE guns THEN he would follow along. Does he have that same stance if the all sides of the government agreed in banning all guns??? Isn't that the whole reason we do have the rights in THIS NATION is to be able to stand against this government if we should ever have to? Yes that's the reason.
@@YG-kk4eyfirst we dont live in a democracy. 2nd the government is instituted to protect our god given rights. when it becomes destructive to those ends, it is our right and duty to alter or abolish it and to institute a new government.
@@YG-kk4ey 1. we don’t live in a democracy. 2. The bill of rights /constitution is a list of what government(I.e) Congress can’t do to you. That is why there is a legislative branch to keep them in check. Educate yourself before it’s too late
George washington explicitly made it so the constitution says we arent even allowed to repeal like any of the amendments passed before 1800. So like the first 5 or 8 of them or something like that are off limits. We cant even repeal them if 99/100 voters vote to. Its right in the constitution where it says you cant just repeal the first ones, and you cant even repeal the ones after that without passing through a bunch of hoops and even then youll probably fail because usually people who try to ban human rights lose in the long run. Also, rfk sounds like hes dying.
@@hivolume Still doesn't matter. Owning arms is considered integral to the natural right of self-defense. That's why it's so hard to pass a Constitutional Amendment, rightfully so.
WOULD I BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS? NO. WOULD I BAND GAS STOVES? NO. WOULD I BAN ROUNDUP? YES. WOULD I BAN MAJOR PRESCRIPTION? NO ,UNLESS THEY ARE NOT SAFE. IF PRESCRIPTION IS NOT SAFE YES I WOULD BAN IT
would you ban gas stoves: "no" would you ban guns: "um..um..um.. if people wanted me too" would you ban cancerous weed killer: "I would expose them leading to a ban"
@desireeweber34 why would i tell him to? Haha, if 51 percent said yes compared to 49 percent said no, then he would? Nah... you gotta be strong on the constitution no matter what. The 2nd Amendment is there for a reason. No, like i said. I will not vote for that
@@MrLee-cy1pw Irrelevant. The same could be said for anything. Red flag laws as another example, and one that's far more likely to reach "consensus." He'd happily go aling with it. I'd sooner eat a salami and shit sandwich as vote for this guy.
The answer is no. He isn’t interested in the issue at all, and knows there would never be an agreement between parties. He’s intelligent enough to answer in a way that will keep the crazy libs on his side.
Have you read the second amendment there is a reason its never happened it’s because noone will ever actually do it too much money involved thats why RFK knows to focus on why we’re violent. He states that guns are a cultural piece of many communities in America and that should not be infringed upon do your research
An honest man with morals. This is a person that believes in the rule of law, democracy, and freedom. We all have how views, some very strong. Here’s a person that puts democracy and the Nation first.
@@matthewvasile894 Well, I like him. The economy was better , my gas was cheaper and life was good. My problem is the constitution is a set of laws that grant us natural rights. Not government given rights. That means rights we all have just for being born. And any politician that believes that can be changed by popular vote is not trustworthy. Our government exists as a Democracy. But we are a Republic. Not Republican- but a Republic. And any politician how has no understanding of that difference should not be in office
Sorry, but a "bill" doesn't allow you to violate the constitution. No matter what congressional consensus you have. I like him, but that was a poor answer.
He knows he’d never get a consensus, he’s just throwing a bone to the ignorant suburban wives. That said, he’s only my second choice after Trump, but we absolutely need a man with a grudge against the deep state.
Watch other interviews with RFK Jr. He has said many times, even to the face of democrats, that he is not taking away guns. What he said here was to temper his stance for left-leaning voters, but the hypothetical will never happen
He was very clear on his position. Did he tell you privately that this was not actually what he meant? If not, why are you so willing to believe the exact opposite of what he stated? This is playing out like Tulsi 2.0 already
Rfk jr.I would never support any presidential candidate that would sign away OUR god given rights.The 2nd Amendment wasnt given by you therefore you may not take it away Sir.
Keep God out of the discussion. It is an Amendment, not even part of the original constitution and written by old, white landlords. God never whispered, mandated, commanded or insinuated that it is a right. The gun was never inveted when the bible was written.
And that’s it. He’s a democrat, not some crazy zealot liberal leftist. While I disagree with democrats on many things, I can appreciate a man who can put himself in the opposing sides shoes and think critically, even if the outcome of those thoughts differs from my own. His full statement on the 2A really displayed his ability to do that and is far more articulate than this short clip shows. Ultimately, his end statement was the same, but it was interesting to see his thought process, and I have a great deal of respect for someone who shows respect and understanding back towards me, again, even if I disagree with the end state.
@@ReconGaming14his statement on 2A was not a "Stand"! He didn't answer the question. One breath he says he would not take your guns away but in the next breath he is saying he would sing off on a ban..... The guy is full of shit and nobody to be respected as an honest man.
Australia's citizens don't have guns and look what there government did to them! Oh, they are still free and living like they did prior to having guns just without any mass killings.
You can still stay armed just NOT military AR-15. If you're that bad of a shooter and need an AR-15 you shouldn't have any. Owning a gun is like driving a car. You can kill somebody if NOT trained properly.
Yeah sorry, no go, the 2nd is not negotiable under any circumstance, its a violation of natural order and goes so far beyond silly words on paper.. Worlds apart...
Its not a gun control issue! It's a defend our society issue. Start protecting public places like schools with armed security guards that have to buzz people in.
But most deaths from guns occur in the streets outside of schools. But yes I agree the best solution is to get guns in the hands of law abiding citizens. Banning guns will make it worse because criminal minded people still will find a way to get them.
@@wildwarrior5680 It's also that laughable concept that criminals are going to hear a law passed and be like "You know what! okay I will conform, I mean it is the law. Here are all my illegal weapons."
@@USERNAME1-x5uWell yeah, that's why you need cops like the ATF or someone to actually _enforce_ the laws... Start throwing people in jail for violating the law. THEN people will follow it...
It would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the government (which includes the president) to outlaw the RIGHT to buy, keep, and bear AR-15 rifles. I think RFK Jr. is a highly intelligent and principled patriot, but he needs to think this issue through more carefully.
I agree but the issue is they've already subtlety restricted some constitutional rights. Such as the 5th amendment which covers the "right to travel" yet you can't walk on highways to freely move through the states and you have to pay unconstitutional tolls. And thats just one of many examples of how they've infringed constitutional rights over the course of 100 years.
@@taylorhickman84 No. "Bear" is not redundant in the phrase "to keep and bear arms." "Bear" means and meant "to carry" your gun on your person. "Keep" means "to store" your gun in your home or some other place.
It's is amazing that when the 2nd Amendment was written, muskets were used to kill the ENEMY, and now military assault weapons are able to blow a 4th GRADER to pieces! 😔 We really have "progressed," haven't we, in the name of PROTECTION?! 🤔🥺
The constitution pretended to create a centralized federal authority where there wasn't one before. The people who were pushing the constitution(federalists)did NOT want a Bill of Rights. "Congress shall have the power to steal resources from peaceful individuals without their consent". Can you deligate rights to the government that no one has? Can the government obtain the legitimate right to do things that no individual has the right to do? The constitution is a direct betrayal against the content of the declaration of Independence. DoI: "Whenever any government becomes destructive of the rights of an individual, it is the right and duty of the people to abolish it" Constitution: "Congress has the right to call out the militia to quell insurrections." The antifederalists did not want a centralized, federal authority(constitution) AT ALL because they recognized it as an authoritarian ruling class. But they couldn't stop it so they insisted on a Bill of rights. The bill of rights was like putting a velvet muzzle on a T-rex. But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist. Again, Do you believe that you have the right to demand a portion of your neighbor's resources without their consent? Do you believe your neighbors have the right to demand a portion of your resources without your consent? Can you deligate rights to the government which you do not have? Recognize that you were indoctrinated by the government for 12 of the most influential years of your life. Break free from the chains inside your own head.
@@robyn7 You have a lot to learn about American and World History then if you believe that. The Supreme Court is handing out Ls to a lot of constitutional violations as of late. Due process is taking course and is finally coming through. Extreme action by the people isn't needed to be taken up yet as the courts are now doing their job. We aren't like the bunch of crybaby terrorists who burn down cities because of an "ism" or knee jerk reaction without the facts. Additionally most people who are like myself don't live in craphole communist states so we don't have to (and won't) fight for the people who voted themselves into the hole they are in. We are keeping tabs on the people as well that we will and won't help if the time comes. But until then, we keep the fight through the courts as intended like civilized citizens until the courts completely fail us.
Sorry Robert but 2A isn't up for debate and it certainly isn't up to you or the modern circus of politicians to decide. We have no idea what kind of rights the citizens of our country need 100 years from now and you don't have the right to interfere with their rights. Sometimes being a centrist or moderate is the way to go, sometimes one side or both is just wrong
He said he would if both parties voted and agreed and a large majority of Americans wanted it to happen, which will never be the case. But if that was the case would you rather have the president look at the people of the country and go “I don’t care what you think”?
He's definitely a train wreck with a voice that's so weird voice i can't stand to listen to flip flopping around.Whatever the heck is the matter with his lousy voice?
