Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #407 - National Guard DEPLOYING Over Rittenhouse Verdict w/FenixAmmo & RecoilMag

Episode Date: November 13, 2021

Tim, Ian, Luke, and Lydia host Forrest Cooper of Recoil Magazine and Justin Nazaroff of Fenix Ammunition to break down the National Guard being deployed in Kenosha, Wisconsin, the gun-related shenanigans taking place during the trial, Justin's evolving stance on the police, examples of red flag laws gone wrong, and how constitutional carry is expanding in the US, possibly signaling the demise of gun control in the country. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When you guys send super chats before the live stream starts, they do appear, but then they get erased right away as soon as we go live. So I just want to make sure you guys knew because we actually had a really good super chat just now that I thought was the best possible intro for tonight's show. It was a super chat, and I forget. I think it was from someone named Jordan. It got erased from the super chat already, but he said, The defense in the Rittenhouse case got to the one-yard line and then fumbled. If the jurors agree on provocation, all self-defense is out. And theoretically, they could then get Rittenhouse life in prison. They could get him on intentional homicide. It all stems from the fact that the prosecution first was able to admit false

evidence, computer generated imagery, not from the night in question because the defense didn't understand how to explain. It was not real evidence. And then they said, if this is in this splotchy image that was made on a computer, makes it look like how Rittenhouse pointed his gun. And the judge said, okay, jury will, the jury will be instructed on the provocation, uh, potential provocation, which means if they say to the jury by, by raising his weapon and they're going to say it, they're going to state it as fact. He raised his weapon. Therefore you can't claim self-defense with or without evidence. They can now just say it as a big win for the prosecution. 500 national guard are on standby being deployed to the, to the perimeter of Kenosha because riots are expected.

And we have an exclusive story, the Daily Mail. We got the emails that were sent to the judge, death threats, insults. I think the judge cracked. I do. I think he's a good guy, but he gave so much to the prosecution at the last minute. It was shocking. That being said, it seems like for the most part, he got to the edge of throwing out the gun charge against Rittenhouse and then walked it back and said, but we'll give the jury instructions. And based on the jury instructions, they're going to acquit on the gun charge.

Unless, I guess, provocation comes in and they just say guilty on all counts. We'll see. We've got a couple good dudes here who are hanging out with us. You guys just introduce yourselves because you're gun dudes and we'll talk about guns. I call dibs first. So my name is Forrest Cooper. I'm the digital newsroom editor for Recoil magazine. And so I get to contribute to both our off-grid and our Recoil publications for online.

And they're all four of our magazines for print. We cover gun culture, new stuff coming out. We cover, I mean, everything from censorship, for example. Grand Thumb got kicked off of Instagram a couple days ago. I think it was yesterday, actually. Possibly related to Rittenhouse. We don't know. And that's part of the design.

But, yeah, that's who I am. Forrest Cooper, digital newsroom editor. Something that you guys get tonight if you listen to Tim Pool. We've got recoilweb.com slash timpool. Again, recoilweb.com slash timpool for 25% off an annual subscription to Recoil or 25% and or 25% off our Book of the Year 15. Sweet. Well, I had to beat that hat. I showed up already.

I did nods on the show first. Okay. Well, I guess I'm number two then. My name is Justin. I'm the CEO of Phoenix Ammunition Company. We are basically known as mostly Twitter trolls. Occasionally we make ammunition. We service the competition markets and tactical training communities primarily.

What are you wearing? These are DT NVG night vision. Like the best of the best? Yeah, they're pretty high up there. They're the best that you can get before you get to quad tube setups where you've got a larger field of view. That night vision is such a flex.

I'm very jealous. You got a flex on the pores i mean if i sell enough t-shirts i might be able to afford a similar rig and uh the t-shirts of course sold on the best political shirts.com like the one i'm wearing right now detailing how we're pretty much um in fahrenheit 451 brave new, and 1984, all simultaneously, I think, perfectly describes our dystopian, technocratic future that we're all living in. The V for Vendetta one. You knew what I was going to ask. I have this shirt with three dystopian

futures coming together, explaining what's going on, and then I have one with, I believe, 10 or 12 dystopian movies, novels, and books, also detailing with the more extensives. But thebestpoliticalshirts.com, and I think I could say I called it. Hey, everybody.

The other night we learned that following the raid on James O'Keefe and Project Veritas, in all likelihood the FBI is leaking privileged legal communications to the New York Times that Project Veritas is suing. We are in Stasi, Gulag, SS, whatever authoritarian nightmare world you want to live in. We're here. Law enforcement for the federal government is going after journalists for their legally protected private communications. Yeah, great shirt, Luke. Yeah, I mean, we're in it.

At least we got that going for us. I want to see you dress as a 360-degree model of that, of the Venn diagrams, like just a big sphere of diagrams. You got to put Hunger Games in there, to be honest. And Cock-a-corn. I have Cock-a-corn. Or maybe like a helmet. I have Hunger Games. I have these Venn data.

I got a whole bunch of other stuff. Watching Nancy Pelosi officiate that billionaire's wedding with no mask on, I was just like, Hunger Games. That's what these people are. That's Spain without the S. see officiate that billionaire's wedding with no mask on i was just like hunger games yeah pretty much these people are that's spain without the s i'm glad you guys are here and hopefully we will go deep on weapons or guns i guess you would say oh yeah definitely written house basically one of that gun charge so we'll we'll talk about that for sure yeah i'm really excited this is such great timing with you two weapons experts to talk about the written house case so let's get into it

all right before we get started head over to timcast.com become a member and you'll get two weapons experts to talk about the Rittenhouse case. So let's get into it. All right. Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com, become a member, and you'll get access to exclusive members-only segments from the show. And you'll help support our journalists. You'll get an ad-free experience. And don't forget to go to the store and check out our Step on Snack and Find Out shirt. Yes. Because I'm really excited about that one because it's like one of the most fun shirts

we've ever made. And it's got like a cute little angry snake on it. And we ordered a bunch of samples so we can like you know give to friends and everything i'm really excited for those shirts so again become a member like this video right now smash that like button subscribe to the channel share the show with your friends yo here we go 500 national guard troops will be on standby in wisconsin for rittenhouse verdict as police forces across america brace for acquittal. Yeah, it does seem extremely likely there will be an acquittal. But my friends, we have an update on

today's news. It definitely seems like the prosecution has thrown a Hail Mary pass, might actually get, they could potentially get all counts. You see, the prosecutors were able to introduce fake evidence because the judge didn't get it because the defense didn't get it. And now the jury will be told that that computer generated images is actually video from the night in question. And I'm just sitting here like, how, how did this happen? How did the defense screw this one up? We got Andrew Bronk over at Legal Insurrection says written Rittenhouse trial day nine prosecution, big win on provocation, lacking any factual rebuttal to self-defense. The state will argue that Kyle Rittenhouse was a provoker with intent

eliminating self-defense privilege under Wisconsin law that cannot be regained by withdrawal from the fight. Now here's where, here's what's important. What you see on the screen, for those that are watching, yeah, tell me what that is. No, no, no, for real. If you're watching right now, if you're watching live, if you're watching on a YouTube clip, that image on the screen, I'd like you to comment and say what it is. It's a

Hunter Biden painting. What is it? What do you guys think it is? I think my favorite comment was it was a sign going through a state of being raptured. Oh, because it's expanding? Yeah. All right. Let me explain.

On the right side is a small image, and you can see a sign, and you can see some blurry-looking people. On the left is the AI-enhanced image that you can clearly see is not enhanced at all. Take a look at the sign. It's got a ghost sign behind it or emerging from it. I don't know what that is. Why? Because a computer attempted to decipher what a larger version or a clearer version would be. And this image is actually nonsense. They introduced this image on the left, which by their own admission was enhanced by an art of by an algorithm, which means a computer generated the image, not a sensor capturing light from the day in question. That is to say, the prosecution was able to admit evidence that they say shows Kyle Rittenhouse pointing a weapon at someone, but it's not real. It is not actually a photo from the night in question. And the judge said, oh, I guess

we'll just let the jury decide. Now it's going to happen in closing arguments. The prosecutors will say definitively as a statement of fact, we showed you a video clip and image of Kyle Rittenhouse pointing his gun at these people. So it's no wonder why Rosenbaum attacked him. In fact, Rosenbaum was acting in self-defense, not Kyle Rittenhouse. As a statement of fact, they can now make that claim. And the jury might be like, oh, well, if that's true. The only thing the defense can say is, come on, you couldn't actually see what was in that video. And they'll be like, well, but the prosecutor is not lying, is he?

He's not lying, is he? So I would like to present to all of you my um algorithmically enhanced image from that night yes this is uh as you can see uh right here that is kyle rittenhouse you can tell because he's got an angry face and his mouth is a squiggly line and this thing in his hand it's not a boomerang in fact it's a handgun because he had a handgun and then these these these two are the people and you can clearly see he's pointing his weapon. Now, I would like to state definitively, I showed you a picture of Kyle Rittenhouse pointing a gun at people. Well, it was a drawing.

No, a picture is a drawing. It's as real as a drawing of a picture. A drawing is a picture. I can say as a statement of fact, I have a picture of Kyle Rittenhouse pointing a gun at people. I mean, it's stick figures. I drew it just now in 10 seconds. That's what the prosecution is doing.

And they're getting away with it. They showed a drawing of a picture. That's what that is. That's what it is. A computer drawing of. I got to tell you, what's really amazing is they kept doing this. When the judge was like, OK, I got to decide on instructions. Play the video for me.

The prosecutor goes, put it on the 4K screen. And the defense goes, you can't because that will add pixels. And the prosecutor goes, you don't know that. And he goes, it's common sense. And the judge said nothing and sits down and watches. Okay, it's simple. A 4K screen, which I'm pretty sure the screen we have here is 4K, has, you know, what is it? It's 4K because it's effectively 4,000 pixels. It's a little bit more than that. That means when I zoom

in, pixels on the screen in front of us have to be filled in with pixels that don't exist. So this is what computer programs do for digital zoom. It guesses what they might be, which is why when you look at the image on the left, the sign has a ghost. Look, look, no, for real. Like you can see there's a sign and there's a ghost sign behind it. Like you said, being raptured because the computer has no idea. It's guessing. And the judge felt falls right for it. He just walks right into it and the defense did nothing. And now the jury might just be like, all right, fine, whatever. He pointed it. Then the case is it's case closed, isn't it? Fortunately, you don't base a corporate seating off of a blurry picture if there was more evidence of him pointing guns video and pictures then i think this would be this might have some substance and what the defense has

argued and might work is they wouldn't just say it's a blurry image what they've said is if that image does show kyle rittenhouse pointing weapon it's with his left hand, which means he has to take the weapon off, flip the strap to his other shoulder, and then change his hands and then point it, which would not have happened. Yeah, it would never happen. I mean, I would look at that picture and I would have said as the defense, how can you tell me definitively where his face is in that photo? How do you know what direction he's even pointing and then i would have the guy circle what he tells me is the weapon and i would have said okay what you're claiming is the rifle in this photo accounts for maybe six or eight pixels of the entire thing there's no possible way that you can discern what is a rifle and what is the sling and you can't even tell me

whether he's facing uh toward the camera or away from the camera in this photo. So it blows my mind. Not only that, but that line of questioning is for the original, not the enhanced. For the enhanced, I would just say, is the enhanced image a photograph from the night in question? Right. And the answer is no. No. And then you say, okay, well then why are we admitting it? It's a computer. I would actually say the photo on the left, when was that file created? And he'd say last week. And I'd say, where? In my crime lab.

And I'd say, so it's not an image created on the night in question? No. Your Honor, I move to have this evidence removed from the court as it's not an image from the night in question. Yeah. Not to mention, weren't they saying that he was pointing the rifle at Zeminski in that photo? Yeah, but that still is provocation. Well, that's fine. yeah not to mention weren't they saying that he was pointing the rifle at zaminski in that photo yeah but but uh that still was provocation um well that's fine but then i would say uh why don't we

have zaminski here as a complaining witness because he endangered him just in the same way as being criminally charged exactly so if you if you're claiming that he pointed a rifle at this person and that's what provoked the entire attack and this person is not there and is not being charged uh how can we how can we move forward i'm gonna i'm gonna do this no sense i'm gonna do this rifle at this person and that's what provoked the entire attack and this person is not there and is not being charged how can we move forward? I'm going to do this. I'm going to do this. Ladies and gentlemen, what I have before you right here you can see in this picture. This is

ADA Binger. This is the prosecutor Binger pointing a gun at, that's Kyle Rittenhouse. I have a picture of the prosecutor in the case pointing a gun at Kyle Rittenhouse. Oh, my goodness. That's right.

I move to dismiss as it is a drawing of a picture. It is a drawing, but drawings are pictures. And I'm holding it. The funny thing is people who listen to this can't see this. So that's kind of the point. When I say I have a picture of the prosecutor pointing a gun at Kyle Rittenittenhouse it's literally a stick figure and there's a squiggly line in a circle like crude on purpose to make my point so there you go it is now a statement of fact that tim pool has a picture of ada binger pointing a gun recklessly i might add yeah at the defendant

at kyle rittenhouse with malice with malice yeah yeah'll say this. The picture shows murderous intent. Indeed. You do not have squiggly eyebrows, but you definitely have a yelling face. Yes. Yeah, that's why it's a circle. Let me modify it, and I'll put angry eyes. Angry eyebrows. Angry eyebrows and a big angry mouth.

There, look, now he's got angry eyebrows. I don't know if you can actually see it. That's malice. School children around this country had cops called for them for similar egregious actions, like you just committed to him. Just a heads up. Yeah, remember the kid who chewed his Pop-Tart in the shape of a gun? And the cops came?

Are you freaking kidding me? Here's a really good example of what you're dealing with, though. So we have false evidence that has been admitted because you have a judge who is trying to retain the regalia of the court. He wants he I think he's coming in good faith. And I think one of the things that we saw this last week was that the constant interaction between the judge and Binger was that the judge was consistently disappointed with his actions like he was hoping that binger was going to come and act as a prosecuting attorney should within the decorum of the court and so as you saw binger continuously bring things forward that were either a overtly malicious in the way that he was very manipulative in his conversation i get it you're when you're in a court of law and you're arguing your case

you have to become very articulate with what you're saying. But there's a difference between trying to make sure that the witness defines something and trying to change what the witness said to say a certain thing. Schroeder is in a situation where he is mitigating between two people, two groups, parties, whatever, two parties. And one of them is at least acting within the court, the rules of the court. And one of them is deliberately not. And he I think he's in a situation combined with this is probably the the most important case that judge has ever ruled over in his entire life. He already wants to end it. Undoubtedly. He's saying, like, I want to start a new trial on monday let's get it over with yeah this will be the most historical event of his life whether he knows it or not most likely the reason i'm so i got i got to bronca's

analysis is brilliant brilliant guy um because i'm reading this and i can see the strategy now of the state we've been sitting here laughing at the state about how stupid they are but they've been waiting to the very last moment and check this out bronca says the state about how stupid they are, but they've been waiting to the very last moment. And check this out. Branca says the state will argue this pointing of the rifle did trigger a violent response from Rosenbaum. Rittenhouse then led the provoked Rosenbaum across the parking lot where Kyle ultimately acted on his intent to use Rosenbaum's provoked attack as an excuse to use deadly force. Basically, they're going to argue in that video we showed you, he pointed his gun at him. And then acting in self-defense, in defense of others, Rosenbaum chased after him.

It was Kyle's intent to lead him to an open space to get him away from a crowd where he could kill him. That's intentional homicide. It's unbelievable. And there was no mention of that for the first week and a half of the trial? So the defense is going to have to rely on you saw him render aid. You heard from one witness, a journalist on the scene who said he was de-escalating violence. Does that narrative really fit? Now, I'm pretty sure the prosecution gives their closing argument last, though, don't they?

I'm not the one to know. They get the final word. I could be wrong. I'm pretty sure they get the final word, in which case they're going to be able to craft their narrative around what – I think there's a rebuttal. It's a half-an-hour rebuttal. Yeah. So they'll give their argument. The defense will then come up and get a half-an-hour.

I think that's what the judge actually ruled. Ultimately, I still think most people who have seen this aren't buying into that, and I've seen a bunch of progressives now tweeting out like he's going to be acquitted chris hayes is i think a big one where he said really yeah chris hayes had a monologue and he was like he just paused and goes based on what i've seen i think an acquittal acquittal is is going to happen in all honesty and i was like here come on you know if you've got msnbc saying he's going to beitted, I think he's going to be acquitted. I mean, I'll be honest with you. I've been pretty disappointed with the trial in its entirety just because seeing as how important this case is going to be as a landmark for future use of force, self-defense, people who conceal carry in general. I'm very surprised at how ill-prepared I think the defense was to answer a lot of the questions that they brought up, especially as it pertained to like the ammunition choice, the particulars of the weapons. You know, they were talking, you know, using terms like

re-rack the slide on an AR-15. They got this female cop up there who's, you know, just not even using the right terminology they first they said uh he should have had hollow points and then at some point they were trying to insinuate that his fmj ammo was designed to go through police armor vests right right you have all these cops up there and look you know i i can i can talk about my let's let's get into it all day long but like these guys are not firearms experts okay Cops are not firearms experts. Alec Baldwin was talking about how the solution for Hollywood is to have a police officer on set to clear firearms. I'll tell you this.

In all the professional – I've done almost 400 hours of professional firearms training. The only two times I've had a loaded gun pointed at my head were by police officers. And that's not to you know insinuate they're all bad but i i don't know if the prosecutor says something stupid can the defense object your honor that's you know stupid you know what i mean uh to be fair though like i think so if the prosecutor says something nonsensical i'm pretty sure that the defense can say objection you know false, or something like that. I don't know.

Because my favorite moment in the entire trial, and you guys as gun guys are going to love it, when he said hollow points are designed to enter the target and explode inside. And Kyle just like furls his brow like, I don't think that's right. And the judge goes, do you mean expand? Expand, yeah. They don't explode.'s right. And the judge goes, do you mean expand? Expand, yeah. They don't explode. The prosecutor was saying nonsense. The prosecution made the argument that because Kyle Rittenhouse was using full metal jacket, he was trying to shoot through people.

Sure. Because full metal jacket's designed to go through. And I'm like, where was the defense to cross and say, like, that's not true? Right. But the problem, that's not true? Right. But the problem was Kyle's not an expert. They didn't have a firearms expert. The bullet exploding, I think, what happens?

It goes in and then the pressure causes it to expand. Yeah, so hollow point bullets usually have a hollow cavity in the front of the nose, why it's called a hollow point. And what happens when it hits a soft target, they peel back and they become larger. Because especially with handguns you have to understand uh we use these terms switches and timers okay so if i shoot you with a handgun um i could shoot you say in like center mass in the face or or in the chest and that's what we would call like a switch right instant like like anthony huber okay he got shot and two seconds afterward he dropped to the ground why because he got hit right in the aorta, instant loss of blood

pressure and you're dead before you hit the floor. Same thing if you get hit in the brain, something like that, right? We call the brain box. Timers are, you know, if I shoot you three times in, you know, your lower abdomen, well, you may bleed out, but that might take five or 10 minutes. And in that five or 10 minutes, you can still kill me during that time period. So with pistol ammunition in particular, because it has a lot less velocity than rifle ammunition, you want the hole to be as large as possible so that they bleed out as quickly as possible. Rifle ammunition has some other wounding characteristics, which doesn't require it to be as large per se. But the funny thing is 55-grain full-metal jacket ammo, which is what he was using,

that's what the military originally specified in the original M16 rifle, and they chose that specifically because at velocities over approximately 2,600 feet per second, which it would have been at coming out of the barrel of his rifle, they are designed to tumble and fragment very reliably. So could they have passed through Rosenbaum? Potentially. But they didn't pass through Huber because there was no exit wound on him. They worked exactly as designed.

So this idea that full metal jacket is always designed to pass through somebody is a total misnomer and that to me was i can't believe that they didn't have a ballistics expert up there to explain these things the defense screwed that up they the prosecution i believe he said it's this it's it's what did he say it was designed to to go through pass through yeah and and and the judge called it a steel jacket steel jacket right you know It's not. It's a copper jacket. And I was just like, you're right.

The defense didn't have a firearms expert? That's insane to me because Kyle Rittenhouse could have said in that line of questioning, or they could have brought up an expert, and he could have said, the use of hollow point rounds suggests intent to cause more bodily harm. Sure. In fact, by Kyle Rittenhouse using a full metal jacket, which is much more of a standard, basic round for this rifle, it stands to reason if the round passed through, it would cause less damage and be less likely to kill.

They could have had someone testify there. You could argue that six ways from Sunday, though, because if I let's just, now you have the issue, I use a full metal jacket round that is not as effective when impacting soft tissue, creating a larger wound cavity so a full metal jacket round is going to pass is more likely to pass through therefore i was not interested in

killing them only seriously maiming them yeah i mean that's that's the murder charge it is still a murder charge but you attempted murder i mean that that so there's risk there right uh what he was trying to say is that if you were preparing for overpenetration, you were being reckless. But the argument could have been, you know, the prosecution suggesting someone else should use hollow points. Hollow points more likely to cause, you know, tissue damage, more likely to kill. Yes. I mean, if Binger's a prosecuting attorney, he should be disbarred for this level of incompetence. The point is he was being written as a charge of intentional homicide. If he said, you know, it's a standard round. It's very basic.

It doesn't have any kind of added characteristics. We're going through an ammo shortage. Right. The jacket is simply so that it doesn't put lead deposits in the rifle. In the barrel. In the barrel. It's basically just to keep it clean. And, you know, I thought to myself, if I use hollow point or any kind of polymer tip or specialized round, that might actually hurt people more.

And I don't want anyone to get seriously hurt. I just want to stop the threat against me. Sure. That would call into question the homicide charge. He could try and say, well, you're being reckless then. And I'd say, well, actually, like you mentioned, the 223s will tumble around inside, but not expand. So I was actually hoping that, you know, if, or I wouldn't say the word hoping, but I was

scared. In the event, if I used a more serious round, I would take someone's life. And I figured to myself, I don't want to do that. So I wouldn't. Yeah. And people think that this is just gun people like being pedantic with terminology. You know, we hear that a lot from anti-gun people in particular. Oh, you guys are so caught up in terminology, rifle, pistol, short barrel, etc. And my answer to that is always a couple things first of all this is like a common issue that we have to talk about with ammunition in particular there are people who uh that's that's like a myth you see on the internet oh if you if you're a home reloader

and you make your own ammo and it's uh higher power than what you would buy off the shelf you know if you use that in a self-defense situation they're going to use that against you and try to paint you as some kind of killer. So you should only use, I hear this from a lot of firearms instructors, that you should call your local police department, find out what your local police officers carry, which are almost always going to be a hollow point of some variety. And that's what you should use because then if you get up in court, you can say, hey, I shot the guy with the same thing that the Novi police or whatever police department uses. So I'm in the clear. Did you guys see Gage Grosskreutz say that.223 is a large caliber rifle round? Yeah.

It's just nonsense. They needed a firearms expert to be like, that's not true. Not true. It's actually on the smaller end, right? And lower chamber pressure? Chamber pressure is on par, but in terms of the diameter of the bullet and the muzzle energy compared to, say, like.308 Winchester or.30-06, which we were fielding in World War II. I mean, you're talking about almost double the muzzle energy. Could you imagine Kyle walking around with like a Barrett M82?

Well, yeah. I mean, he'd be ripped. He'd be huge. When we went to the range, Forrest actually held it up. It's not an easy gun to wield. What is it, like 70 pounds? It's not 70. It's 40.

It's a heavy gun. Without any optics, it's about 30. I think it was at 27. How close towards you is the center of mass on that thing? Not close. It's a heavy bullet. The barrel, especially on large rifles, the barrel is very thick. So that's where the majority of the weight in a firearm is because the barrel has to be able to withstand,

especially like long barrel with a 50 BMG. If you look at those under a really high-speed camera, 100,000 frames per second, you'll see the barrel wave. So they have to be very, very thick, and the steel is very heavy, so they're almost always very front-heavy. We should have actually grabbed some rounds to show. I wish we did. I literally, because I've got some in my car. We have the 50 BMG.

This is the misnomer. So, you know, you'll see, by the way, these are available on our website. They're serialized. Let's go, Brandon, Phoenix Ambulance. So, you know, this is a 50 BMG cartridge case, but, you know, the actual projectile itself, and, again, with the terminology, like being that this is what I do for a living, I say projectile because, you know, people will commonly refer to as the entire cartridge as a bullet uh but really the bullet is only the thing that comes out and so like i've seen ads from mom's

demand action where you'll see them uh showing the whole cartridge like coming out at the end of the day that's how stupid these people are a lot of movies. I want to talk about something else, too. Can we first cover up the 5-5-6, 2-2-3 question? Yeah. Because I think this is actually much more important. Going back to the Kyle Rittenhouse case, there are multiple things that are going on in this trial that the

person who's on trial is actually the American family. Like, you and I and every individual person. And the first example of the 5-5-6 question, the 2, two, three, right? I'm not going to go down to the arguments on what's the difference between five, five,

six and two, two, three for the remainder of this conversation. They're effectively the same thing. There's it. You're talking about years of change and long story. The two, two,

three round was designed to be shot out of a 16 or a 20 or 18, 16, 20 inch barrel, a longer barrel. So it can build up muzzle velocity. So the things that impact the effectiveness of that round are the load that is used the projectile that is used the rifling of the barrel the length of the barrel all of these factors go into play where you see where in or it

was maybe 10 years ago short barreled rifles concepts became super popular one of the reasons why the mark 18 has a 10.8 10.3 inch barrel is is because that's about as close as you can get before that bullet that projectile once fired does not move fast enough to produce what are they called hydrostatic yeah hydrostatic shock hydrostatic shock terminal wounding it's it you're looking at like very very detailed stories so when somebody says that the ar-15 is a deadly, dangerous weapon of war, they are simultaneously being met by veterans overseas who complained that using a 5.56 rifle with green tip rounds, armor piercing, language out the door,

were having issues because the guy was on drugs and would shrug it off. Back to timers and switches. That's why they made the 458 SOCOM, right? That's one of the reasons. were having issues because the guy was on drugs and would shrug it off, back to timers and switches. Yeah, exactly. That's why they made the 458 SOCOM, right? That's one of the reasons. I mean, they've redesigned the – so one of the problems they had in Afghanistan in particular was they chopped – so, again, the original M16 was designed around a 20-inch barrel, so you're getting 3,200 feet per second muzzle velocity.

They chopped that down to 16 inches. And then when you're in Afghanistan, Iraq, you're clearing these very small buildings. They needed to be able to maneuver around corners, so they chopped the barrels down even further. So now muzzle velocity, you're only getting about 2,600 feet per second, and that's right on the line where that bullet is going to not tumble but just pass straight through a target. And so they started to redesign. They went up to a 77-grain round, made the bullet heavier so that it would tumble a little bit faster. They increased the twist rate on the barrel. They started to play around with now they have a new version, the M855A1.

It's got a steel tip at the end, so it helps it to pass through particular barriers. And all these things were tested on what we saw in the Global War on Terror as they cut the barrels down. And they saw, yeah, 5.56 got a bad reputation for a little while because they were having a lot of pass-throughs. They had designed things to work against people with body armor. They weren't wearing body armor. They weren't tumbling so they had you know the military unfortunately is not very good at like redesigning the whole thing as a as a package they cut the barrel down they forget about the ammunition they redesign the ammunition they forget about the rifle and it takes a long

time to get all the way through i think one thing we're we're learning a lot about, which most of us probably already knew, if you're somebody who knows guns and you guys infinitely more than the average person, you know all the different reasons for different bullets, all the different reasons for different barrel lengths and styles, handgun versus rifle, heavy barrel versus, you know, et cetera. And what I've come to start realizing is in the past few years when I've been buying guns and learning about them, when you look at this trial, it really exemplifies how the average urban Democrat-type person thinks all that exists are AR-15s and bullets. They don't realize that, like, you're talking about.223 and.556. They can both be fired out of a.556, but a.556 can't be in a.223. That's correct, right?

For the most part. Through a bolt-action rifle, yes. You should not. The reason why that happens is because bolt-action rifles that were chambered in.223 40 years ago cannot handle the chamber pressure of the.556.

And that is true of 7.62 and.308. There's a similar issue. It has a lot more. I mean, there are more nuances, but a major nuance of that is because of the years that those bolt-action rifles were popular in 2021. I go to a gun shop. I was buying an M1A, and there was an argument over whether or not you should load 308 in an M1A because it was designed for 7.62 and they're functionally identical rounds, but the higher chamber pressure could be bad. And some guy's telling me a story about how one gun he saw

exploded. And everyone's like, that never happened. You're lying. And they're arguing about it. What I'm getting at is, uh, there was, I got into an argument on Facebook with some guy who was like, why do you need an assault rifle or whatever? And then I'm like, you know what? I'm not an expert, but I do know about the weapons I have and why I have them. And so I just explained like why the different kind of rounds, why the different kind of shotgun shells or whatever, why the different kind of shotgun. And it's like some are better at close range. Some are better at medium range.

Some bullets do one thing or another. And the issue is that the world isn't rifle, handgun, and bullet, which is what most of these establishment gun control type people and the prosecutor in the Rittenhouse case seem to think. So I want to get into the perfect example of this. And we were talking about it before the show. One of the questions asked to the prosecutor was, in the moment when Gage Grosskreutz was pointing the gun at Kyle, the prosecutor said, why did you think he was a threat? Rittenhouse says, because he was pointing a gun at me. And the prosecutor says, he's got a gun in his hand, right?

Yes. He could have shot you from 40, 50 feet away, but he didn't choose to. Why did you think that was a threat? And right now it's just like he was coming at me with a gun. And this is where I was like they needed that firearms expert to say, in the heat of a moment, with someone like Gage Grosskreutz, who is not a firearms expert who's trained, the likelihood of him actually hitting a target from 50 feet away while running is slim to none.

In the dark. in the dark in the dark yeah which which which would mean someone who he had a permit before it was now invalid he knows he won't hit the target so he's closing the distance to guarantee hit the targets in fact that proves he was even more dangerous right if he was trying to shoot from further away because someone does fire at kyle ritten after the fact. You hear the gunshots. Kyle just walks slowly away. Kyle was not threatened by the fact that other people had continued shooting after the fact, probably because he's like, they're nowhere near me. But the prosecutor got that question in and there was no one to rebut it. Well, I mean, it's also tragic because now that Gage is missing a part of his bicep, we're not going to be able to take him to a range and see his effectiveness at 40 meters.

You know, Gage Grosskreutz, I tweeted this out. I said, people keep cheering for this Kenosha guy who travels super far to go to a riot, bringing a gun he's not legally allowed to possess. I don't care if he's claiming he wants to provide medical assistance or be an EMT or whatever he should not have been there i'm talking about gage gross croats of course not kyle rittenhouse which is it's interesting that they keep saying he crossed state lines with a legal gun and i'm like gage gross croats traveled 40 miles with an illegal gun not that i think guns should be illegal sure in this instance like well and engages i mean first of all he's carrying a 40 so obviously doesn't know what he's doing um he's on his way to an idp like yeah 40 caliber 40 smith and wesson uh that's a that's an inside gun joke anyway why nobody uses 40 it's just kind of an overrated caliber it had its time and everybody kind of jumped on this bandwagon but it's a watered down 10 millimeter

because the the fbi basically invented 10 millimeter because there was a couple of bad shootouts they were involved in so they wanted something really really powerful which 10 millimeter is but then they found that their agents couldn't handle the recoil so then they watered it down and created 40 smith and wess, which is the same bullet, a little bit shorter case, less powder. And so for a while it was more powerful than 9mm enough to warrant it, but these days with modern powder and bullet technology, the difference in recoil isn't worth the added penetration, the lower magazine capacity,

the inability to put two, three rounds in the same hole, all those kinds of things. But what I was getting at with Gage is everybody in this country who concealed carries a gun on a daily basis knew that that guy, I mean, he was a liar, obviously, but the minute that that prosecutor said, so, you know, you carry this gun every day. And he said, oh, yeah, wallet, keys, gun every day. I leave the house the same way.

And the prosecutor said, do you know if you had one in the chamber that night? And he said, I don't know. Okay, everybody knows, right? We can get into the debate about should you carry with one in the chamber or not. The answer is yes. There is no debate. There is no debate. The answer is yes.

I don't care about your Israeli training or whatever. The answer is yes. But the point is, even if you subscribe to the idea that you shouldn't carry one in the chamber, at least you know. Everybody knows who is all serious about the fact that they conceal carry and having a gun. They know whether they have one in the chamber or not, period. When you pick the weapon up, you check. When you hand the weapon to somebody else, you check. Then they check.

Everybody checks. Everybody knows. you check then they check everybody checks everybody knows and um the other thing too is i remember watching this commercial for like workplace firearms mounting or whatever and it was like i got an ad on facebook for it and basically all of it shows that when they're putting the gun in there it's actually designed so that you push the gun with your hands to chamber around under your desk like what's the point of having a weapon unready to be used someone kicks your door in and threatens your life and you're like give me a minute to you know there we go all right we're good and it is it is funny too in the movies they always always rack the slide yeah right oh yeah always speaking of movies and checking your guns we have alec baldwin

and i mean really at this point in time they should have called alec baldwin on the stage to be one of them. Because he would have said, he knows what he's talking about. He's a famous Hollywood actor. Alec Baldwin was handed a firearm, pointed it at somebody, and pulled the trigger, believing that he was so holy of a person, he didn't even have to check the- I'm sorry, you're incorrect. Oh, okay. You're incorrect.

What year was the movie set to take place in? Do you know? It's going to be 1984. It was like 1886. 1890s, I believe. Okay. 1880s. Revolvers back then.

Could you just pull the trigger? Well, they're single action only, no. No. They were single action. My understanding is that it was a single action.45. Okay. The model that he used was a single action. no no they were single action single uh my understanding is that uh it was a single action 45 okay the model that he used was a single action that answers but think about what that means not only did he pull a gun and point it he had to pull the hammer back before pulling the trigger yeah so this is like a look i people might think it's nitpicking but this is

literally him making a very deliberate action to be like not only am i gonna because some might argue that he was just going like aha you know like thinking he had an empty you know cleared cold gun or whatever no no he pulled the hammer back he was intending for it to go off right yeah how that happens well that's why this stuff is really important as i was saying earlier about firearm terminology in particular uh people people on the other side think that we get too caught up in the details, but the details matter. I mean, if you're a gun owner, you almost have to be a paralegal in a sense, because you saw that in some of the jury instructions they were talking about with Rittenhouse, with the gun charge getting basically thrown out. The whole thing came down to,

was he in possession of a short barreled rifle or not? Well, if you ask your average person, what is a short barreled rifle? They probably wouldn't be able to tell you, but the difference is, you know, a 16th of an inch. If it's a 15.9 inches, you end up like Randy Weaver. If it's a 16 inches, you don't. So like these things matter, you know, we, this idea that like firearm laws are, are

fast and loose is just nonsense. They've, they've painted it to be that way, but you have to know, you know, is the forward grip, uh, to, you know, just a little bit too long. Well, now you've got a, an, an AOW. There's a, there's so, so much detail involved there. So this is really important. I want to talk about, uh, Kyle rightittenhouse basically winning on this gun charge, but the judge was not, I guess, strong enough to just say, get it out. Because I think as a question of law, the judge literally said, there is an exemption for Kyle Rittenhouse.

It exists, and I can see it. And then he goes, I'll just give the jury the instructions on that one. And it's like, you're the judge. So here's the way I put it. Imagine the law says if you are standing on the street and you cross the street in the middle of the road without using the crosswalk, you are guilty of jaywalking. And then you're sleeping on a bench and a cop walks over and says you're under arrest for jaywalking. As a matter of law, you did not jaywalk. Correct. There's no giving that to a jury.

Yeah. Right? So in this instance, they're going with the affirmative defense of self-defense. And when it comes to the gun charge, there is no affirmative defense of self-defense. True. But there is a, you can't charge someone with a crime when they're not subject to that law, when they're specifically carved out. So that being said, there's a provision. First, the law, was it like 9 948.60 or whatever states, uh, it's titled a person under the age of 18, carrying a deadly weapon. It says section two, a no person under the age of 18 shall carry a deadly weapon. Of course, an AR-15 is a deadly weapon. And then it says in section

three C basically they must also not be in compliance with these two laws. These two, you know, it's like 29504 or something like that. Long story short, it's very easy to understand. They drafted a law that said if you're under the age of 18, you can't have a deadly weapon. Unless, here are the exceptions. If you are in violation of two different provisions, that you are, one of the provisions is you're hunting and the other is you're under 16. You have to violate both. Why? It's actually really simple. If you are 12 years old and with your dad and he gives you a rifle to go hunting and you are hunting with him, you are not violating

the law. If you are 16 and you take your rifle by yourself and carrying it, you are not in violation of the law. If you are under the age of 16, you're now in violation of one of the statutes and you're not hunting. You're now in violation of both statutes. Now the law applies to you. That's specifically what it says. And the judge said, I agree with you, the defense. I'm just going to instruct the jury to that regard. And it's just like then if you agree, it specifically says this law does not apply to you if you are 16 or 17, then why would the jury even have to answer the question? Which goes back to my earlier point on the judge trusts in the system. Like he wants to see the system work out. He's coming with good faith. He's believing that the jurors are going to come not under duress, that they're going to understand what he's saying.

They are going to be able to understand what he's speaking about the law, and then they will be able to follow through with it. with the entire Kyle Rittenhouse case, is you have a judge who is coming in good faith, being played against by both a media apparatus and an overtly malicious prosecutor. Oh, yeah. And the question then is, what is the recourse? Like, what do you do about that? Did you see there was a point where I can't remember which charge it was. I think it was like second degree reckless homicide. The judge looked at this prosecutor and said, if the jury comes back with a verdict on that

charge and the defense objects, it'll get overturned. It'll get reversed. And the prosecutor was like, what? And the judge was like, I'm telling you, that will get reversed. Like, you will lose if the jury rules on that. It was crazy to hear because the judge was basically saying the jury might actually convict Kyle wrongly, which could happen. And then it made me realize he'd have been way better off with a bench trial. But I guess they didn't know.

You never know if you're going to get a good judge or an ideologue. Sure. In this instance, they actually got a good judge. He's just like you were saying, like the decorum, the regalia, he really wants to prove America works,

which he can't do. I think we can actually go down another layer in philosophy here. So I'm going to go put on my be a philosopher hat and talk about

how we think about cultures. And so a false, what the judge is thinking is that both, both the prosecution and the defense have the same goal in mind, that justice be sought out, right? That both parties, both the defense and the prosecution are coming to the court. Both of them are looking at something that they believe is called justice, and they want to see justice enacted. The problem is that's not the case.

They don't both have the same objective. The defense and the judge want to see justice completed. The defense believes that, or justice enacted, the defense believes that it would be just for Kyle to be acquitted on a self-defense charge, which is a very important thing if you think that you're a human being. Because what the prosecution wants and what the media attached to it, whatever, what the prosecution wants is that if you use force even in self-defense against our ideologues, we have the right to prosecute you. That it is not a combination of this is not a court case. This is a movie script.

When Steven Crowder said that this is a landmark moment when Kyle Rittenhouse was breaking down on the screen, which, yeah, that was an emotional scenario for a lot of people. Do I like emotional arguments? No. I'm supposed to be the philosopher, deceiving, cheating, playing dirty at the game, we now see that, no, the prosecutor and the people who are against Kyle Rittenhouse do not want to see justice. They want to see power. They just want a victory.

No, they won't want a victory. That will be a symbolic victory for them, which says, ha, at any given point where we decide that anything that you do is arbitrarily racist, we can light your city on fire, we can terrorize your civilians, we can go after your people, we can colonize your city with our neo-fascist ideology, and then if you fight back, we see ourselves as morally justified at stringing you out in as much pain as possible. I was talking to a leftist friend of mine today who said he was hoping that the state would align on this one

and basically stop the reactionaries. And I was like, what do you mean reactionary? And he's like, you know, the people that are trying to rewind civil rights. And then I was like, oh, you're talking about Antifa and Black Lives Matter. And he was like, no, I'm talking about Kyle Rittenhouse. And I was like, but Kyle Rittenhouse was there helping the protesters. And he was like, that's not

true. And I was like, there's videos of him giving medical assistance to protesters. So he's literally helping them achieve their goal when they're out there protesting. That's a fact. Rittenhouse was helping the rioters. That's true. And I don't think it has a bearing on a self-defense case

or him as a kid. I think he was a good kid trying to do good. It's like when you look at the, I'll throw it to Vosh, who makes the Marvel movie comparison about the good guy puts their gun down. Well, the good guy helps even the bad guys. And Kyle Rittenhouse was there just to help people, be it stop fires,

protect businesses, and make sure people who got hurt regardless of who they were, were being cared for. Sure. All right. So I'm going to go put some people in a cattle car. Do you want to help make sure none of them get away? Or if I sprain my ankle, you help me out too? Look, the point I'm trying to make is that Kyle Rittenhouse didn't go there as a reactionary.

He didn't go there as someone who says, I have to stop Black Lives Matter. He went there as, I want to make sure people are safe. So that could be seen as being revolutionary if he's helping revolutionaries, right? The idea that the leftists perceive this the way they perceive Kyle

is it's insane. They didn't watch the trial. They didn't watch any of the videos. They just think that he's far right and hates social justice or whatever. Well, there's also an element

of the quote boogaloo boys or people who are part of armed groups social justice or whatever yeah well there's also an element of the the quote boogaloo boys or or you know people who are part of um armed groups who are supporters of black lives matter who came out and said that they're here with the protesters that they don't like the police they don't like the government and they want to stand with the protesters uh but guard some private businesses so there is an element of this that that there before that was something that is worth considering and not denying. Yeah. So I'm from Minneapolis, right?

And I live in Minneapolis while Minneapolis is going through the great riots of 2020. So it was a wonderful experience. And what did we see happen? Yes, everyone took to the streets during the day. Was there massive protests? Yes. Were they very large orchestrated pomp and circumstance events perhaps you can make your criticism whatever but when it got dark at night

people did look out they did they wanted to look out for each other to at least some extent and suddenly this very broad blending of people where some people were out in the streets literally to cause chaos and mayhem their whole purpose was just to find damage burn destroy loot and you know that is still going on in case people keep forgetting but the issue that happened then is you had an entire other support element of people that basically said here's our solidarity because we think your motive is correct stay Stay off my lawn. You don't burn down my house. Don't attack my business.

And it got very muddy very quickly. However, there were differences in people who were there to help and there to hurt. I actually had an idea earlier, like somewhat in a similar vein, San Francisco and the crime, and they're not prosecuting if you like steal under a certain amount. And I was like, I'm going to open a bodega, like a little corner store. Every item costs $2,000. But you get $1,995 off when purchasing with a credit or debit card. That's a good idea. So now when they come in and start shoveling everything in their bag, it's like that's $50,000 worth of beans, bro.

And he's going to be like, it's just like, you know, a couple cans of beans. Yeah, 10, well, that would be like 25 cans of beans. That's going to happen anyway. That'll happen anyway, and then they'll arrest you for price gouging, right? They do that in Venezuela.

But imagine a guy, like, he grabs one can of beans and runs out, and I'm like, that's $2,000. It says on it, $2,000. There and I'm like, that's $2,000. It says on it, two grand. There was something. Just the words, two grand. I'm going to go on a bit of an anti-police. I'm going to put my Michael Malice hat on for him, even though he's still blocked me on Twitter. Oh, he did?

Yeah. That's a long story. Anyway, I'm going to put my anti-police hat on for a minute. And I have to say, I've become much more disenfranchised over the last two years than probably ever before. So there was something kind of sick about seeing those cops testifying for the prosecution, sitting on the prosecution's side, knowing full well that those guys sat on their hands and didn't do a thing while Kenosha was on fire. And whether you think he should have been there or not, I would argue a 17-year-old kid shouldn't have put himself in that situation.

He put himself there because he saw that the supposed adults in the room weren't doing anything. And, you know, as time has gone on, we've seen through the covid lockdowns that this you know people have always argued well the cops will be on our side when you know whatever the big igloo happens and society collapses uh they're all going to rally around us and i used to think that i mean i was maybe like 80 in that camp and and I think I'm basically 0% in that camp at this point in time. I mean, they will put you in jail. They will arrest you for carrying a concealed weapon,

even though, you know, like there is no such thing as a police officer making, you know, you get pulled over for being 10 miles over the speed limit, and they can let you off with a warning. If they pull you over in New Jersey for having a loaded handgun, You get pulled over for being 10 miles over the speed limit, and they can let you off with a warning. If they pull you over in New Jersey for having a loaded handgun, you're not getting let go under any circumstances. It's just never going to happen. At some point, we have to look at this and say, you guys are willing to overlook the guy who had a joint in his ashtray, but you're not willing to overlook something that is a constitutionally protected right, who do we need to start holding responsible for this? I'm sorry.

I'm not going to donate to your benevolent police fund. I'm not going to answer the call from the Fraternal Order of Police anymore. Sorry, but guess what? We supply to the citizenry, to the American people. And just because you're a police officer doesn't mean that I should go out of my way to make sure that I cater to your whims because you guys certainly aren't doing us any favors. I'll tell you why I've been much more on the abolish the police train. In a grander scale, I understand the federal law enforcement is very different from local law enforcement. But, wow, watching what happened to James O'Keefe should be – that is a red flag that you can see from space. It's so big.

But let's get real and talk about local police. We have Kenosha. What did they say? They screamed at Kyle Rittenhouse when he tried turning himself in. Pepper sprayed him. Pepper sprayed him. They pepper sprayed him. Did they stop the riding? No. Could they have? Yes. They didn't do it in Chicago,

in New York, in all these places. They don't actually stop these criminals for the most part. But hold on. So what do we end up seeing? The story out of New Jersey that I'd love to tell. A woman who lived in Philadelphia where she's legally allowed to carry a weapon was driving to go gambling in Atlantic City, and she made the mistake of not realizing New Jersey is probably the strictest gun control state. She crosses the bridge on the straight highway that goes straight from the bridge from Philadelphia to Atlantic City. It's like a 45 minute drive.

It's very close. And she gets pulled over and politely and respectfully says, officer, I am. I do have my weapon and my permit with me. And he goes, okay, you're under arrest. Felony charge. This cop was like, yes, I got a middle-aged woman and she's going to prison

even though she was complying, she was informing me, she was being nice. He could have just said, ma'am, in New Jersey, you're not allowed to have this weapon. I'm going to escort you back to the bridge and send you home.

No, this cop was gleefully willing to bash her face in and send her to prison. and she only ended up getting cleared on this one. I don't know the full story, but I was told this at a gun shop. The NRA intervened and went ballistic with lawsuit threats in the city, and the state was just like, get her out of here. It actually happens all the time. I've heard of situations where people got their flights rerouted and they had to land in New York, for example. It's like, well, I have to stay here overnight. I've got firearms in my checked luggage.

I'm not going to leave it here at the airport. I had Delta leave a bag of mine with four firearms in it unattended for about four hours in san antonio last weekend so but if i leave if i leave the airport in new york with these firearms and i go check in my hotel now i'm a felon did you or am i me too i was flying from minnesota to to to arizona and they lost my box did you hear what the prosecutor said to rittenhouse not their problem i'm gonna have he said why didn't you leave your gun why didn't you take it he wanted to leave it at the gas stationhouse? Not their problem. He said, why didn't you leave your gun? Why didn't you take it off? He wanted to leave it at the gas station. Just put it on the ground

and let someone come in. Are you nuts? Yeah, just a complete idiot. I knew a guy who was from California and he was moving to New York and he had two long guns and like two handguns

in his trunk and he drove through Illinois and you've got a federal protection when you're driving, when you're moving. Firearm Owners Protection Act. Didn't matter.

He became a permanent resident of Illinois because he got pulled over. He said, you know, I'm moving. I've got my weapons in the trunk. And they said, I don't care what you're doing. I don't believe you. What you say is irrelevant to the fact that I've caught you with illegal firearms in Illinois. And then they arrested him. He went straight to prison.

No bail. He went straight to jail. He went to jail. No bail. And this is not a guy of means. He was not a guy who had the money to file the claims and get the right lawyers. And he basically got four years. He ended up doing like one year in prison with like three years of probation, which meant you are now a permanent resident of Illinois. His whole life was destroyed. Yeah. I had lawyers tell me if you are carrying firearms in your car, store it correctly. And if you get pulled over,

even if you're in a state where you have to tell them you have a firearm, if you have it stored correctly, I had lawyers tell me you don't have to say anything. You don't have to tell them anything. I had other lawyers tell me if I'm flying, I get redirected to New York, which has happened to some people. Just leave the gun there.

Don't pick it up because there's police officers literally waiting there, looking, waiting for you to touch the bag. And as soon as you do, that's you getting possession of the firearm. And that's some serious charges in New York. So just real quick, how am I, and shout out to Michael Malice for making this argument initially and then having me just more and more go off on this one seed. He planted his anarchist seed in my mind in New York City, where they ban you from legally having your constitutional rights have been subverted in the state, in New Jersey, in Maryland, where they do it over and over again.

And I can tolerate to a certain degree legal arguments where we're going through this. What I can't tolerate is that they have evidence that Gage Grosskreutz was committing crimes. And I'm not talking about the gun. I'm just saying that they know this guy is a violent rioter. They know what he's doing, and he won't get charged. So let me just hold on a minute. I don't want him to get arrested and charged for concealing and carrying a weapon. I believe Wisconsin should have constitutional care. I believe constitutional care should be nationwide. But you can see who is exempt from the law. Yeah, it's selective prosecution. You can see that a middle-aged – there was another story out of Illinois.

A woman from Tennessee, she was in her 60s. She had a snub-nosed revolver of some type, probably, I don't know, a.38 or something. .38, right. She goes to Chicago for vacation, and she has it in her purse concealed because she has a concealed carry. And she went to what is now known as Willis Tower, but we call it the Sears Tower. And when she was going up to the observation deck, she said, I do have my weapon with me. Should I leave it here? And they said, oh, no problem, man.

Turn around, chance behind your back. And she ended up getting, going to prison. She ended up getting, this was a, like, I guess it was like a decently high profile gun case in Illinois. She got, she got like four years, I think. So when you see Gage Grosskreutz violating gun laws and they say, we're not going to execute a search warrant against you and you go on this one. We're not even going to check his phone when we have a warrant to check your phone. But no, don't even look.

But the old lady? The old lady? You're getting locked up. He was just on Good Morning America. His first interview was literally on one of America's morning news channels. And of course he didn't get questioned. Of course there wasn't any kind of legitimate cross-examining or even just conversations about another side. Wait, wait, wait.

Strahan actually said, you can say whatever you want to say here. And then he just was like okay i'll lie if if kyle is acquitted he's going to become very wealthy very fast i sure hope so i mean the selective prosecution you know i i made a speech about this a couple months ago at a two-way rally up in michigan i said you know unfortunately uh it was in front of a crowd of you know a lot of the sort of boomer types, and I said, you know, you guys probably aren't in the same line of thinking as the people who want to legalize marijuana across the country federally, and you may make fun of them as a bunch of stoners and losers and what have you. But those guys have done more in the last 20 years for the legalization of marijuana than any of you guys have done for the proliferation of gun rights. And do you know why they did it? Because they were willing to go to jail. These guys back in the 80s and 90s that

were growing their own pot and doing it brazenly, a lot of them went to jail and as a result uh now it's legal in how many 25 something states how many states is it legal to own your own suppressor without having to uh get a tax stamp from the nfa texas temporarily right at what point are we going to go through the same nullification process that right now marijuana owned kyle rittenhouse's defense should already be filing a civil rights suit saying his right to keep in bare arms has been infringed correct he's 17 where's the where's the nra on this where's the fpc where's uh i love the fpc nra well right obviously i mean you know i i say that jokingly because you know i i know that better than probably anybody the nra is nowhere to be found but you know gun I say that jokingly because, you know, I know that better than probably anybody.

The NRA is nowhere to be found. But, you know, gun owners of America, none of them took a prominent stand in this. Nobody did. I believe if he I think the jury is going to acquit on the gun charge because the judge said he's going to give the defense's instructions as they wanted them to the jury, which means they will read the portion where it says this law does not apply to you. And the judge actually even said the state has not met its burden of proving that Kyle Rittenhouse was under the age of 16. So I'll give that to the jury. He's passing the buck a little bit.

I can respect it because he wants the jury to do it, to prove it. However, if he does get convicted on it, they immediately need to file a civil rights suit and say convicting him on his keeping and bearing arms violates Second Amendment. Second Amendment does not have an age limit on it. I agree. And that'll be really interesting because imagine what happens

if that goes to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court says, you know, the Second Amendment doesn't say how old you have to be and then all of a sudden seven-year-olds can possess firearms. Isn't the Supreme Court hearing a case right now regarding new york state versus regarding new york state pistol and rifle yeah it's a it's where it's the may issue it's a yeah the

comically not issue but shall it may issue issue they're they're dealing with that can you explain that what that means that people might not understand may issues versus shallish yeah so what the lawsuit is basically the lawsuit is about in in some states so i'm a resident of michigan so in michigan if you apply for a concealed pistol license so long as you do the required training uh which is a you know eight hour class you you which costs about a hundred dollars you pay the hundred dollar application fee unless you are you know a convicted felon uh they have to give you that concealed pistol license. You don't have to give them a reason to have one.

In New York and in California and a couple of Maryland, New Jersey, you have to give them a specific reason why you want to carry a firearm. And in all of those states, it says specifically on the application that self-defense is not a reason to have a concealed pistol license. So you either have to be somebody who's dealing with cash in transit, you own a jewelry store, or most of the time, you're just a famous politician. Nepotism. You know who to pay, and that's how people end up getting concealed pistol licenses in

those areas. And so why have it at all at that point in time? It's pointless. New Jersey is laughably known as – if you go to Wikipedia and look at concealed carry states, you'll see the shall issue and the may issue. And then New Jersey is red. It says may issue, parentheses, in practice no issue. Effectively no issue. Yeah, it says in practice no issue.

Yeah. Yeah. May issue, parentheses, in practice Effectively no issue Yeah, I mean, that's a very important Distinction, because at the beginning In a shall issue state, unless you have Something that has been by due Process, considered You not allowed to own A firearm, not allowed to carry a

Firearm, then you can carry it In other words, as long as you have nothing As long as you do not have Specific items, mental health issues which are, they have to be pretty far down to be that clear. But then unless you have something, sorry, unless you have something that removes your ability, negates your ability to own a firearm, the state is required to give it to you. The other opportunity is effectively you have to go to your overlords and say, I'm a good little boy. Yeah, please. I want you guys to look up at the screen.

I want everyone to see this because this is awesome. Yeah. What this map shows is that there, as of 2021, the green states are called the constitutional carry. What does that mean? What is constitutional carry? Don't need anything. No permit. Don't need anything.

The constitution is your permit. The second amendment is my permit. And that has been growing within the last few years. This wasn't the case. That's why I want everyone to look at this map of 2021. And now I want you to look at this map from 1986. In 1986, you can see it's unrestricted only New Hampshire. Is that Vermont or New Hampshire?

That's Vermont and green. Look at this. Look at this. May issue states are disappearing. No-issue states were everywhere. As time goes on, gun rights have been winning. So again, look at

how it changes over time. How in 1986, I don't know where this map is going to end, look at it. Unrestricted is popping up. This is constitutional carry. Look at all of these states saying as per the Constitution, you can keep and bear arms, no questions asked. What was that state that did it and then changed three years? Look at that.

Boom. Look at 2016 again. There was a state that became constitutional carry and then switched. 1986. Look at all this no issue. They would not give you a weapon. And now, right here. Look at that.

It's a lot of states, still major urban centers. I love this. This is what you got to see. Yeah, where all the crime is. Look at Hawaii. It says may issue, parentheses, no issue in practice. And there's New Jersey and New York City. In New York City, parts of California and parts of New York State, it is no issue in practice.

That is unconstitutional. 100%. Yeah. The criminals have guns, and of course people are left defenseless. As women who have crazy spouses who go through spousal abuse can't defend themselves. Victims are just told to not defend themselves and call the police and wait maybe five minutes, maybe 10, maybe 15, maybe even 30. Who knows how long. Look at Texas. That's new. Yeah. wait maybe five minutes maybe 10 maybe 15 maybe even 30 who knows how long look at texas that's

new yeah yeah and i mean you know if we compared this to a map that showed legalization of marijuana of course all of them would be read at the federal level but you know so then in parentheses we would we would say legalization allowed in practice because no police officer in his right mind is going to enforce federal law in a state where it's allowed. So I go right back to gun control is losing, but for it to continue to lose, at some point police are going to have to be complicit in that. Absolutely. They're going to have to turn a blind eye.

And we have to start expecting them to do that and not begging them to do that. So here's the issue. There are many two-way sanctuaries that have popped up all over the place, particularly where we are right now. So we do the show out of Maryland, which has strict and crazy gun laws. Get a cop, a state trooper or a local deputy and sheriff and ask them about it. And they're going to be like, not in my town. And it's kind of I don't look with all due respect. I actually think we've got some pretty decent cops in these areas because, you know, Western Maryland is is it's MAGA country, whatever you want to call it. Sure. And the cops are all pretty good.

I'm not going to trust a state with political issues to actually uphold their Second Amendment sanctuary. But they have affirmed that. That being said, our workspace is here in Maryland, but I actually live in West Virginia, and so I keep everything out of this state. And the feds play by a different set of rules. But to kind of add to your point, throughout human history, soldiers, police, 99.9% of the time follow orders.

The problem is a lot of the people giving out orders right now are corrupt. They're rotten to the core. And if you look at just a few months ago, the police were told, break down grandma's door of her small business, shut her down. They did it. Police officers were told, stand down when people are rioting, destroying grandma's business. They did it. The police were told, hey, go after this journalist because he's reporting on stuff that we don't like. They just did that with James O'Keefe. So we are seeing things get out of hand. I know there's this concept of a rotten apple.

But again, when we look at the larger kind of policing around the United States, it has failed the American people. Yeah, I wouldn't even say it's a rotten apple. It's just more, it's honestly people, cowards. it's people who are they're just going to comply from from a from a position of virtue do you do is that is the second amendment something so cheap that you would rely on something you would expect somebody else to uphold it for you never that's the problem i wouldn't i don't leave it in the hands of the cops i trust that this the police will honor my Second Amendment, but at the end of the day, I do not leave them with that ultimate decision. Take a look at this story. I pulled this up.

It's from 2018. It's a very famous story. Maryland's red flag law turns deadly. Officer kills man who refused to turn in gun. Happened in Colorado, too. A 61-year-old man is dead after he was shot by an officer trying to enforce Maryland's new red flag law in Ferndale Monday morning. Ann Arundale County Police confirmed the police-involved shooting happened on the 100 block of Linwood Avenue at 5.17 a.m. According to police, two officers serving a new extreme risk protective order, a Maryland protective order to remove guns from a household, shot and killed the man listed on the order. The man was identified as Gary J. Willis. Officials said Willis answered the door while holding a handgun, which is legally allowed to do.

Willis then placed the gun next to the door. When officers began to serve him the order, Willis became irate and grabbed his gun. One of the officers tried to take the gun from Willis, but instead Willis fired the gun. The second officer fired the gun, striking Willis. He died at the scene. So why were they trying to, by what due process standard, were they seizing his weapons? Was he given notice? Was he allowed to then challenge in court the seizure of his weapons? That is not due process. They showed up to a guy's house claiming, we get your guns. And he's like, what? And this is what you get. I don't know how a person should act and what, but I'll tell you this. This is what happens when people coming to your house say they're seizing your weapons and you don't know how a person should act and what but i'll tell you this this is what happens

when people coming to your house say they're seizing your weapons and you don't know what's going on because you are not served in advance this also happened with duncan lempton in maryland in maryland as well uh i don't know you guys probably know more about that story than a lot of other people my understanding is that i don't know if it was this story it may have been this one that like a sister-in-law falsely accused him of mental defect so that the police would come and seize his weapons i i this is one of them where i've heard a lot about the story but unfortunately from a position of where i'm at i can't verify any of it it's all for me at this point here say from from for where i'm at not yeah i don't i from what I'm looking at, I can say – I can tell you ethically what the problems are.

You would not make a good CNN reporter. No. Based on those actions. I mean my application, I guess, is still on their desk, but – You've got to make it up. Come on. If you want to be like CNN, just make it up. No.

I'm sorry. If you want to be like CNN, you've got to crank it on a Zoom meeting with a bunch of your coworkers. Yeah, exactly. Because they kept that guy on staff. Yeah, him saying that Kyle Rittenhouse is an idiot and he's uh yeah cnn they also just reported that the judge made inappropriate asian food jokes oh my god so the judge in the rittenhouse case said i hope our asian food isn't done in long beach port he was making a joke about food coming from as, not about something being wrong with the food.

But a Columbia professor just came out and said that it was racist stereotypes. Of course. Right? Because he was joking about the supply chains? Yeah. That professor, what are they a professor of? If it's anything important, she should be- Sociology, probably.

Probably should be fired. I mean- Feminist dance? Yeah, feminist dance theory. Art of dance, yeah. What is it? Anti-cis, heteronormative, patriarchal dance theory. Asian American studies. Of course.

I use big words. I don't use big words like that. Is the professor Asian? I'm trying to find out her name. It's cultural appropriation, if not. I'm going to mispronounce it, and then people are going to attack me. I don't want that. Well, here's how it works.

If the professor is more Asian than I am, I can't comment. But if it turns out I'm more Asian than her, because I'm only a part of it, then I'm allowed to drop. I don't know. You guys could be related. No, she's more Asian. Tim, are we doing it by blood quantum, or are we doing it by heritage that's right we need a 23 and me immediately i'm pretty sure i think it's college humor they did a really funny bit where there's a panel of a full asian a half asian and a quarter asian and then people of varying asian like uh

mixed race are asking if they're allowed to engage in certain behaviors and so, my God. It was actually really, really funny. It was a really good bit. And I think we need more stuff like this because we're allowed to make jokes about race. It's not racist for CollegeHumor to have Asian people talking about what is offensive or not and joking about it. And a guy walks in and he's like, I'm one-sixteenth Asian and I'm a big fan of anime. And they're like, no! Get out! 18th Asian, and I'm a big fan of anime. And they're like, no! But then it ends with a panel of black people the same way, full black, half black, quarter black. And a guy walks in and he goes, I'm pretty sure my great-great-grandfather was black.

And they're like, you're good. All good. All good. But I think it's cool that they did a bit where they're making a point about the weird behaviors when it comes to offense culture and race and all that stuff. That's why I'm making this joke. It literally works that way for the woke people. If a white person makes a comment about Asian people, I can say, well, listen here, I'm Asian

therefore, but if someone who's more Asian than me says it, they're like, well, you're too white. You know, if they put all that effort into going into mathematics to even determine what is the possible measurement, maybe we could have a colony on the moon. Specifically for them them on the dark side where it gets really cold and nothing else that's one of the things i really like about the gun community in particular is that it uh you know what whatever the left portrays about it it's it's one of the more diverse places that i've

actually been in in the last you know 10 or years. And usually the stories I hear from people who aren't from the U.S. are the most powerful. So like three quick examples. A good friend of mine, Ming, his family's from China. They came over here. He works in the firearms industry. One of the best competitive shooters that I personally know. And he talks all the time about how, yeah, you know,

like I literally couldn't do what I do here in China. Like this right does not exist. A couple of people I met down in Miami, they've got a podcast called Locked and Loaded Latinos, Rolo and his wife. I want to say either he is from Cubaa or she is from cuba their parents were same thing you know we came here like we're so happy to have this right like we truly understand it and we're willing to fight for it to the death i trained with uh uh uk special forces operator

the last couple of weekends and he left his, he left his career in the UK Special Forces to move to this country, and he said, you know, in the UK, you can't even walk around with a pocket knife. Like, you can be arrested for spitting on the sidewalk. You can be arrested for carrying a screwdriver. Like, this is crazy. I mean, we ripped on him the whole weekend. It's like, yeah, bro, you know, we beat your ass back in 1776. We're happy to have you back. And he's like like i'm happy to be back there was a great there was like i think he was a construction worker and he had tools and one of the tools was a knife and he got

criminally charged yeah and he was like he like tried explaining the officer but like i'm working it's my tool bag and they're like doesn't matter doesn't matter law says you got a license for that knife and he was like a licensed construction worker. That's one of the main arrests for people in Times Square because a lot of people go there as tourists. A lot of people have pocket knives, don't even know it from middle America. They use it for tools. They use it for construction. Times Square, that's the number one arrest that happens in that region is people with class whatever weapons on them.

And it's random people not knowing that they're violating their law. I carry a pocket knife. I don't have one today because I was on an airplane, but I have one in my pocket literally everywhere I go. And the funny thing is every time I fly with firearms, Delta puts a zip tie around my locked firearms case for whatever reason. And that's the most annoying thing is I get to the hotel and it's like, I got to cut the zip tie off here, but my knife is in the pelican case because i can't carry it on the

plane i'm like the last guy that you'd ever need to worry about but you can't carry you can't carry nail clippers into the airport nail clippers but you can carry a uh set of knitting needles that are this instant that you could like literally stab through somebody's chest if you wanted it's ridiculous you can carry a green metal straw you can carry a metal straw for your save the world aspirate something

there was a guy there was a guy did a mini doc over at Vice with he did a project I forgot what he called it but he went into the airport to see what was inside the airport that could be weaponized oh yeah and uh i'm not going to go into the great details about it but he was able to basically go above and beyond

in terms of uh i did a class with ed calderon he did the he's done the exact same thing with tsa what you can purchase past the TSA check. Let me just tell you. They sell lithium inside of airports. Sure. Lithium is an alkaline metal, I believe, right? It's alkaline. When water touches it, it is an exothermic reaction, which is – I'm not going to go into great detail about what he did.

You can actually watch the videos on YouTube. But when you have lithium in water, which is easily available in airports, dangerous things can happen. Basically, he did this project to explain that a lot of what they're saying, you can't have in airports, you can buy worse things inside of them. And that's what

people need to be aware about if they want to take the security stuff seriously. Well, it's not serious. I mean, it's just theater. What they let through and what they don't. I think they banned liquid so they can sell more soda. Sure. Probably. I'm being somewhat facetious, but that's the end result.

You get there and you go, I got to throw my water away. You walk 10 feet and you buy a new water. For $5. Right. Lithium is an alkali metal. Not to be confused with alkaline earth metals. I stand corrected. I knew I was getting that wrong.

Interesting stuff. Close enough. Yeah, but it's that wrong. Interesting stuff. Close enough. Yeah, but it's like sodium. You splash water on it. And I think what it does is it instantly bonds with hydrogen, which heat. Sodium, potassium. Didn't like every high school kid do that, didn't they? Right.

That's what our chemistry teacher did. That was the first day. Yeah, they take like – Put a piece of sodium in the fish tank and blow it up. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's fun science fair stuff. But all the security stuff yeah it's fun science science fair stuff but you know all the security stuff that it's it's it's it's theater and i i take a look at a lot of these you know the red

flag stuff and a lot of these cities and everything and it's all theater as well democrats come out and say guns are scary that's why they specifically say an assault weapon and then they show you like a ruger 1022 with like a pistol grip and they make it make everyone think it's different from like you know rifle grip or whatever and that's an exact gun i mean that's a very important point too because you're coming from i when the first time you brought me on the show i gave the story of the kids in college where the the summary of their knowledge and experience on firearms firearms ownership buying a gun anything like that was a seven minute box video that was factually false and also inferred inferred false things it. They watched seven minutes of lies and then suddenly thought that they deserved to have an opinion on guns.

Right. Right. Okay. So that's where we have a cultural problem because we were talking just a minute ago about how the Second Amendment is actually winning the culture war some ways through objective means like more states are becoming constitutional carry or firearm sales going up these are good things but then there are other things that are quite that some people would say questionable like well more uh ideologically led people but the far left are into guns now because they want to have their communist revolution you know maybe you could say something like insurgency. It's dangerous.

But at the end of the day, too, what we have to do is we have to start coming back down to relying on what winning looks like. This is the problem. By the way, look for an article on this in the upcoming edition of Concealment. But we're starting to, I think, a good sign in our world right now, in the United States,

is that we're reconsidering with Kyle Rittenhouse what winning looks like. Because if you had asked 10 years ago, an intellectual would have said you defended your life and you didn't go to prison and you didn't get broke. That's not good enough for me. That's not good enough. In other words, what I want to have – what I think is right is that when you're in – when you get attacked, defend yourself, you're recognized as doing the right thing. Well, I mean I was reading – there was an article that said 99 out of 100 prosecutors wouldn't bring charges against Rittenhouse because it's so – it's a question of law. So the correct outcome is that if Kyle Rittenhouse gets acquitted, Binger gets debarred. He gets disbarred and banned from practicing law because what he has shown is that not only does he not either either a

doesn't know the law that he's supposed to be practicing or b worse he's got malicious intent doesn't care yeah and so when you can i want to because and that's and this goes back to the argument of bad actors because the gun control the gun rights people keep taught we keep talking about oh how little do they know how little did alec baldwin know how little do these people know i understand that there's a vast majority of people out there who have no idea what they're talking about in firearms i know it it doesn't make what it doesn't do is it doesn't turn it into this like well i'm the i'm the technocracy I get to tell you what to do with guns now. However, it should be considered culturally unacceptable to receive that kind of information from an activist who knows nothing

that they're talking about. Right. I want to stress this point too. We need to have some optimism. And I think we're explaining it right here. When you look at that map of constitutional carry across the country, expanding, not just constitutional carry, the shall issue states

because in the 80s it's mostly may issue and over the past couple of decades gun rights has been winning why state level elections people you gotta get also at your state level reps your state state senators all that stuff because then in your state look at how many how many like the constitutional care just happens in Texas. And the joke was always Texas was gun country, but they actually – it's fairly – They're actually kind of behind a lot of other states. For Texas, you need to take a training course to get a handgun. You've got to get a license and everything. And people – the joke on Family Guy was that you buy whiskey, you get a free gun, and he hands it to Brian.

Like, no, no, no. That actually is just not – Texas is actually a bit more strict until now at the state level where they passed constitutional carry. Do you want to know who was a group that actually tried to oppose constitutional carry? And this is where, like, I'm a big advocate of, you know, the gun community. Like, what is a community? And we can talk about that. But a group that came out against constitutional carry were firearms instructors in Texas. Why? Because they knew that if people weren't going to be forced to pay money to take their classes anymore, they weren't going to be able to sell their classes. terrible instruction that nobody would take it unless forced than it does that you think it should be required. And so there is some policing that we have to do within our own community,

our own, again, community. Like what is that? A community is a people with a shared sense of purpose or ideals. And so we have to look at that and say, you know, you guys are not on the same page as we are. And if you really aren't supporting gun rights, then you're not part of the community just because you own a gun. And because you're a NRA trained firearms instructor doesn't mean that you get the bigger picture and we have to be willing to call them out. And they did. I mean, those guys were lambasted on Twitter. We, we, uh, I posted a whole list of all the names of all these guys that came out against it. And I hope that they never teach another class again. I did two different firearms training courses for fun.

I didn't get a certificate or anything. I wasn't doing it for concealed carry. I did it because I had a guy say, hey, we're doing a police firearms training. We're going to step through all these different calibers of handguns. Do you want to come? And I was like, that sounds awesome. Yeah. And then they basically was like, here's the guns.

Here's this caliber, this caliber. I think like a like a 22 and like a nine millimeter went up to like i think like a 45 or something and they explained what to expect what the gun is called and then you get to shoot right and hit the targets you've got instructors around you i watched a guy pull out uh i think he was he had an ar-15 556 or whatever and he's shooting it's really loud and we're like we, we're, we're up very close to the targets because we're in like a training facility. And then he pulls out a shotgun and it's just fun. It was fun to do. You want to get better at your craft. I mean, I know I, I shoot a lot. I shoot pretty much every weekend. I probably shoot 50 to 60,000

rounds a year. I take all, I I've, I've been training with Haley Strategic for the last three, four weeks, almost every other weekend. I do a lot of competitive shooting and a lot of tactical training as well because, you know, I take it seriously. I want, God forbid I ever have to use that thing. I want to make sure that I am in the best possible. I want to be confident enough to know that I can make the decision when I want to. And you won't hurt anyone else in the process. And I want to stress something, too. That's the most important aspect of it.

I want to stress a very important point as to why so many people who have never owned a firearm, you want to go get training. Because I went to a range with a friend, and you want to know what they did right when they grabbed the gun for the first time? Point it right at you. No, no, no, no. They went like that. For those that are listening. Put their hand behind the slide. You've got, right.

So right hand holding the gun. They put their left hand over their right. What's going to happen? The slide's going to go back and it's going to slice through your hand or worse, break bones. At least just jam the firearm at best. Yeah.

I mean, that's going to, I've seen nasty videos. Sure. So what happens is we're at a range and fortunately me and a few other people knew enough, but we're not experts. So when this person made the mistake of putting their left hand over the slide, we went, no, no, no, no, no, no. Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop.

And they're like, why? And they were like, you have to hold it this way. And then, you know, I'm not going to be an expert, but they were fine. It's a self-correcting problem. It's unfortunate. Unfortunately. Yeah. I'm not saying, I'm not saying it's a gentle one. And I mean, fine. It's a self-correcting problem. It's unfortunate. Unfortunately. Yeah, I'm not saying it's a gentle one. And I mean that's the dark humor that we run into.

You don't – if you've never driven a car before, you don't just go and sit in a car and go drive it. Granted, the difference between a car and a gun is that a gun is a right and a car is a privilege. Sure. That being said, a reasonable person says – It's a dangerous object. I mean it's the way it is. You're responsible for what comes out of that weapon. and so we were talking about this earlier about having a range in west virginia and the laws are fairly lax and and i was like i'm pretty sure the law is basically like you're allowed to shoot on your property and if you hit someone you go to jail you know so like

understand the responsibilities that you have so up on the, there's a mountain nearby, a small community. People shoot all the time. No one cares. I explain to people like this. You've lived in New, have any of you lived in New York or you live in a big city? I've been there. You've been in big cities before

and people drive cars. Cars are dangerous. Cars can kill. But you've never expected anybody to just like ram their car at you. Same thing as like when I'm in West Virginia and I see a guy walking around with a rifle or a handgun, I'm like, why am I worried about this guy at all? So we hear gunshots all the time out here and like a lot.

And I just sip my coffee and I'm like, eh. The only way for this to continue to move forward is to continue to normalize gun ownership you know again uh 10 15 years ago if you were walking down the sidewalk and you were like man oh somebody's smoking weed like oh geez well you know you're like waiting for somebody to you know some crackhead to like pop out of the corner or something now it's just like oh man you know somebody's smoking weed like it's no big deal and same thing if you walk into the store and all of a sudden, like, man, everybody's carrying a gun. It's just, you know, 20 years ago, if you saw somebody walking down the street with a cell phone in their hand, staring down at it as they walked, you'd think, like, God, that guy's a little weird.

Nowadays, it doesn't even register in your brain because it's been normalized as a part of our human social interaction. Real quick, I got a story that's basically that. Up on the mountain, there's a public range where it's basically for hunting training, they call. That's what they say for whatever reason. I think they have to. But there's like, it's just a space on the mountain where you can shoot.

And I'm walking through the woods. I hear the gunshots. And I'm like, huh, I walk towards them. And then eventually I see the range and I see two guys and he's zeroing in, you know, mini 14 something and i walk over i'm like hey what's going on i was like i heard i heard the shots and i came over to see what was happening and they explained what he was doing so it's like you hear you hear it happening in your area and you walk over and you're like oh cool i wasn't like oh oh i better hit the deck preconditioned right look if if uh but you got

to understand the area you're in. During hunting season, they're like, yeah, don't walk towards the sound. Don't go through the forest. But it wasn't hunting season, which means I knew people were at the range, and I'm like, oh, I'm going to go walk towards the range and see what's up. There's a couple of really good lessons we can take from even how this conversation has paid off. And one of them is that when we're looking at the firearms, like firearms training as a whole, one thing that a lot of us millennials grew up with is we grew up with firearms in the home. Our parents taught us, or it was a long-term process.

And so the first thing that we know is that learning how to be effective, well, learning how to be safe with a firearm doesn't take a lot of time. Knowing even the modicum more than your average leftist does not take a modicum amount of time to be sarcastic but what we're reckoning but we even with these training classes right we're recognizing that it takes time it is a time investment that's difficult to learn it's a you you do not pick it up and become decent in a week it takes time practice i i i spent i spent time in the army rangers after that it took i learned a lot there after that i learned more and after that it keeps going right and we know the whole perpetual student thing it sounds nice i agree with it

it's good but i don't need to make a point on that one what we have a lesson to learn is on what is that one of the things that the past generation brought into the gun industry, which they should not have, is infinite, endless suspicion. If I go to a range, I've got tattoos. You know, I've got some tattoos. I'm not as tattooed as other people are. I think I'm getting that solved soon. Just kidding. But, you know, there are ranges in my home state that you can show up

to outdoor ranges where there's nobody there if you show up with a plate carrier and ar-15 and targets that you set up and you start moving and shooting an old man will come out and yell at you for one of those i don't see why you need one of those for hunting people yeah and the problem of the response is nine times out of well i'm I'm sorry. Every single time in probably since I've been alive, I can outshoot this person. He's carrying – he's probably – and so we can argue against this cultural difference. And there's this thing, the joke, the FUDs. It's a gun culture. Elmer Fudd.

Elmer Fudd. In gun culture, the term FUD means an outdated kind of past time. Past his prime. You know, I'm a two world wars yeah uh sometimes sometimes we you know there's a certain friend of mine that refers to them as a non-threat because you've got a great attitude but you're not dangerous dude you're the kind of guy who you like and our objective is not to be predators in the sense even though we'll use that language our objective is not so much to be predators but in the words of a wiser man than me jordan peterson a good man is not a harmless man

but a man who is dangerous and has it under control and i think that that sounds really good and i really that needs to be explored a lot because a free people are not a harmless people because you don't own a gun because you don't know how to shoot somebody does not mean you're not capable of genocide yeah the the the fact of the matter that we live in our country with people like binger is that there is something whether it's the grace of god this is the first time i've been on we didn't get into a theological conversation um we'll see if the super chat fixes that but this is the but it is by the grace of god and or something else that the petty tyrants that have constituted this country have been held at bay and it's the actions of people like binger it is the attempt to go

after somebody for if if he's acquitted uh the attempt of people to go after kyle for acting in self-defense the only thing that people are accusing kyle of being is effective right right it because like in all those other instances where people were brutalized by writers their stories were completely ignored that there was there's a meme about this where uh the trump supporters post it where it's like didn't fight back didn't fight back fought back and it's people brutally there was the guy in portland who got the full the full punt he was running and then they tripped him and then ran up and then full force

kicked him in the head. There was the guy who, I think he had a sword and they just stomped him out and he's all twisted and lying on the ground. And those stories weren't relevant to people.

Nothing, right. Well, we got to go to Super Chats. We got to go to Super Chats and I will say one thing just to start. I tweeted this out. All of the leftists who are now saying

they realized they were wrong about Kyle Rittenhouse, and I mean this with all sincerity, should chip into his legal defense yes absolutely uh i mean it's mike lindell was the one guy that stepped up and did it and you can say a lot of things about mike lindell uh i prefer a different brand pillow that's fine but uh he's i mean it's not a bad i just you know i have different preference but he stepped up right away and, uh, you know, he was a man of his word. Let's read some super chats. We got Jeremiah.

No blurry says it's one blurry frame of 30 shot in that second. If I was a juror, I would consider that this, the prosecution throwing a Hail Mary to confuse the jury. You never know how juries are going to go though. So hopefully they realize what that is. And they, I, I, I'm wondering if the defense let it slide because they were like, this will offend the jury. Because you might have jurors being like, how dare you try and call me stupid. Jurors might just be like, uh-uh.

But we will see, man. We will see. All right. Let's see what we have here in the old Super Chats. Axel Thunderpaw says Kavanaugh's trial was an attack on due process. Rittenhouse's trial is an attack on the right of self-defense. Correct. And they keep doing it.

They keep doing it. They want to take away your right of self-defense. So long as it's against their ideology. This is why we have the mistake. We make the mistake all the time. Is it ignorance or is it malice? Well, in the case of Alec Baldwinwin it doesn't matter he killed somebody right but in the case of what we're dealing with here you can also look at it the their malice is what informs their ignorance right

when people want to disarm your guns they see you as their property it's it's just so and you know what one of the really annoying things to me is how even out here people just are ignorant and terrified of guns. Like they look at it like kryptonite or radioactive. It's like, listen, everything here is kept safely, stored properly. Don't touch it if you don't want to touch it. But the problem is there are people who get scared and then think they have to do something with a firearm that's stored properly because they don't like the fact that it exists in a space it's like yo that's a gun safe you don't need to cover it or move it or hide it you can't open it it's bolted there calm down yep but it's really annoying it also becomes a cyclical problem so

you institute gun control in your city and what what happens? Crime goes down. Oh, look, it works. More gun control. You institute gun control in your city. Crime goes up. Obviously, we didn't do enough gun control. And that's why it is like putting a microphone up to the speaker and cranking it up. It's just a positive feedback loop. I'm not going to say that it is the most egregious thing, but it needs to be addressed as supporting gun control in this sort of cyclical fashion is mental yeah you gotta teach kids how to handle the weapons so that they have control of the gun well they used to do that in the 50s and 60s there are

uh there are public schools in detroit that had shooting ranges in the basements you think you can't hold someone accountable if they don't know? That's the most foolish idea that you can have. If they're stupid, then they can't be held accountable. This is a lie that people will ingrain. They will say, I will make myself weak so I don't have to deal with the responsibility of strength. And what do they do? Oh, I don't know. Genocide.

I want to read a super chat, but I'm going to read a YouTube rule first, just so that we're all clear. This is important. YouTube says that if you're posting content, don't post content that sells firearms or certain firearm accessories through direct sales, or post links to sites that sell these items, which include accessories that enable a firearm to simulate

automatic fire, accessories that convert a firearm to automatic fire, high-capacity magazines or belts carrying more than 30 rounds, and don't provide instructions on manufacturing firearms, ammo, high-capacity magazines, homemade silencers, accessories that enable a firearm to simulate automated fire, accessories that convert a firearm to automatic fire, don't provide instructions on how to convert them, don't provide instructions on how to install the above-mentioned accessory modifications.

That's going to be a great question. The reason... No, no, no, no. It's because of you. Sure. Because I want to make sure that we state the rule very clearly because I believe it states we're allowed to mention Phoenix Ammunition. Jeff says, I have shot a few thousand rounds of Phoenix ammo. Not a single misfire yet. Good job. Free Kyle. James O'Keefe is here. Let's go, Brandon. The reason I read the rules, I want to make sure it's very, very clear. I think we all read it, and it says nothing about websites that sell ammunition. Sure. That being said, someone

complimented your ammunition, so I just wanted to make sure that was clear so that I don't know, someone at YouTube might be like, don't care, and hit the X button or whatever. Actually, I'm pretty sure those rules just said don't break the law because they made bump stocks illegal anyway, right?

There are other such devices available. And we won't explain those. I would love to. No, no, no. That's going to be a great – theoretically could be a great lawsuit coming up. They actually – interestingly, they have a special live stream rule where you can't do any kind of video at all live with firearms. Yeah. I think that has more to do with the potential for an accident in which YouTube panics.

I think they don't want somebody dying live on TV. Right, right. Exactly, exactly. So they're just like, well, just not allow any of it. But their rule is that you can brandish and bear arms in the appropriate location. So if you're in a gun store, you can actually pick up a weapon, film it. If you're in a range, you can do it. But what they don't want is people playing with weapons in their bedrooms.

I actually— Sounds like we need to repurpose the studio here into a gun range. Into a full range. I don't think that's a bad rule for YouTube. You don't want kids acting stupid. You've seen those videos where people will point the weapon at the camera and do really dumb stuff. So not allowing kids to do things like that.

I shouldn't say kids. Anyone. You mean all the rap videos on YouTube? To be fair, hold on. This is America with Donald Glover. He legit picks up a weapon and fires at people. And they're like, that's okay. You know what, man? I was going to go to the music video question

right away because it's accepted in music videos. The problem is that they're not going to be able to stray between art and reality. Yeah. I mean, imagine being a camera guy for that thing. I mean, I would poop my pants. Like, stop pointing the guns at me. Well, I mean, they have robotic cameras. I highly doubt they're using robotic cameras.

Well, maybe not those people. I've seen the production quality. They do not have robotic cameras. I gotta read this. Well, actually, here's another one. I gotta read this. Dragon Lady says that artwork of Tim's is better than what Hunter Biden is selling for half a mil. Ladies and gentlemen, what you have right here, listen, listen.

Kyle Rittenhouse. This is a single piece of paper. It is a picture that depicts Kyle Rittenhouse right there, pointing that is a, not a boomerang, that is a handgun at two individuals. And it is a picture. You can Rittenhouse right there pointing. That is not a boomerang. That is a handgun at two individuals. And it is a picture you can see. And on the other side, there is a timestamp note from one of our episodes where we produce a segment. But you can see here, this is an angry ADA binger pointing a gun at Kyle Rittenhouse.

Now, this double-sided picture will be available both as an NFT and an auction starting at $500,000. Now, when you tell someone that Tim Pool has a picture of Kyle Rittenhouse pointing a weapon at somebody, maybe they'll spend $500,000 on this crudely drawn stick figure that I've made on a piece of notebook paper. I will confirm that your drawing is a type of picture. Movement to dismisses. I really, really want to clarify for the sake of people who aren't seeing the video, it is a torn piece of notebook paper

with stick figures on it. It is not a photograph or anything like that. Clearly nothing. But we could, we'll actually, I'll put it up on the website for an auction. It is from a legal pad. It is from a legal pad. It's the original. Alright, this one's good. Alex Elkin says, Baldwin, married man, accidentally kills woman who he is just friends with and goes to dinner with occasionally.

Really weird. I've seen enough true crime episodes. I got to be honest. Sounds like a Kennedy. What I've been saying since the past week or so, the Alec Baldwin story, the first news we got was that it was a blank. It misfired. Shrapnel hit the woman.

And now we know the actual story is Alec Baldwin drew a single-action revolver, pulled the hammer, pointed it at the camera where the woman was working, pulled the trigger, hitting her in the chest and killing her. So when you start from that point, you have to start asking questions about potential motive. You don't just go, it's an accident. Case dismissed. Nice. I mean, we all know it won't go anywhere. He is an actor. Maybe he's acting the part of being an accident.

I think so. That's what I came up with. I think that right now, with all the data in front of us, there was another witness who came out and said the scene did not call for him to fire the gun. That means to pull the hammer back and pull the trigger in a scene that didn't call for it, according to a witness, we have to start not with an assumption of an accident. That makes no sense. Right. None whatsoever. Gross negligence makes no sense either.

If we're approaching this objectively with the information presented before us, we have a homicide. And we approach it from the position of Alec baldwin pulled the gun and shot a woman did he have motive how did the where do you get the gun what happened and then if we go through the information it's determined the gun was accidentally loaded and not checked then we can get to that conclusion but for the time being you got to make a lot of assumptions to believe it was an accident the armorer screwed up this is a director screwed up and alec baldwin with decades of firearms training, just overlooked all of his training in a scene that didn't call for shooting someone and shot someone. I know I keep – we say it too much. We bring it up – like we brought it up like five times in the past few episodes.

So let's read more Super Chats. Cleggie says – actually, no, no, no. We'll read that one next. Alan says, as a cop, this trial scares me more than anything. I think when you see cops go on the stand and side against the kid that they were cheering for, when Kyle Renes showed up, the police thanked him. Yeah. Now those same police are trying to put him in prison forever.

So, yeah. Cleggie says, Starbucks recently sent a memo to their employees stating they fully intend to comply with Biden's OSHA mandate effective on Januaryuary 4th and on a related note you guys taking applications uh jobs at timcast.com but i'll be honest there's like 20 000 emails in there yeah i mean i've three positions i posted the day that they said that they were going to try to enforce that on small businesses i said if you guys want this place to look like Ruby Ridge, go right ahead. But there's no way. I mean, I know that maybe three of my guys have been vaccinated. I am not.

And I don't care one way or the other. But there's just no way that you can force a small business to do it. And I'll just say this. It's unconstitutional. Yep. It will be found unconstitutional. And the reason it keeps getting pushed back is because they know they can't actually enforce it. So I think for the most part, they're just trying to trick people. It's just noise.

They're trying to trick you into being – businesses to be like, I guess you have to do it, but eventually this won't end up happening. We'll see, though. We'll see, though. I don't trust the government. So let's read some more. Nick Neal says the only argument offered by the prosecution is to tell the judge not to believe his eyes and disregard the evidence. Agenda over law. Yep.

William Knoll says the Zeminskis are not even in the altered picture. So even if Kyle was aiming his rifle, who knows who or what he would be aiming at. And the prosecution said this. He was like, who's pointing the gun at? And he goes, Zeminski. And where is he? Well, he's not in the picture. They literally said that.

Maybe the defense is like the jury will be offended by that attempt. And they might, because they're offended, just be like, get out of here. See through it so blindly. All right. What is it? Itachi revived. Oh, interesting. It says, prosecution goes first.

Burden of proof. Two and a half hours each argument. Don't make me waste five bucks again, Tim. Thank you for your $5. It's Canadian $5, though, so let's be real. Yeah, it's like $2.50 maybe. All right.

Locked and Loaded Latino says, Justin's great. At Maj Toure's Solutionary Summit, my wife and I interviewed him, Eric July,

Kim Klasick, Olivia Rondau, and Larry Sharp for our channel. Felt like a TimCast IRL alumni series. You, Lids, Ian, and Luke are always welcome.

On. Yeah. Right on. Those were, they're a great couple there was just a unbelievable amount of people it was kind of funny like talking to eric july i was like man i listen to your stuff all the time i don't literally nothing about comic books so i skip all of those and i just go right to the political ones yes this is an important one andrew goodman says are you guys aware of the steve bannon indictment yes here's the thing with the Bannon indictment. You know, we actually considered talking about it. We have the story. We have Mark Meadows as well. But it's actually not that big of a political scandal for the most part. It is. It definitely is. And it's an abuse of power. But the story is very simple. Steve Bannon said, I'm not going to comply with the subpoena. And so they're

indicting him over it. And for now, that's it. We'll see if he actually, we'll see what actually happens with it. We'll see what he does. We'll see what happens with Mark Meadows. For the time being, we expected this. It happened. That's the big, you know, takeaway from it. It's an abuse of power. We'll probably end up talking about it in the next week or so as we get more details on what's happening. Charles Balyozian. It's a shame Rittenhouse will be railroaded by the jury. Seeing the panel of lawyers beg the defense to object to anything makes me feel like Kyle's representation lacks ability to stand in spotlight. Don't blame Barnes for leaving team.

I think the defense did a fairly good job, but fairly good is not great. Yeah, and you can only do so much with the gravity of the case, I think the defense did a fairly good job, but fairly good is not great. Yeah, and you can only do so much with the gravity of the case, I think. It's not to cut him off hook, but you're still playing an unfair game. If Binger's allowed to do what he's doing, if the culture is allowed to do what they're doing, if Binger's allowed to act the way he is with impunity, no one's – he's not – I give it politically people are lambasting him. But the fact is that he's – you said it earlier this week, which was the worst black pill morning of my week, was Binger is going to be a judge in 10 years. Yeah. Right?

So like – and if you want to go back to the question of what winning looks like, it's, okay, let us actually start a fund to have him fired completely. Sue him, challenge, all that stuff. But it'll never happen. Even if he committed constitutional violations, they slap on the wrist. I don't agree with – I don't think it can never happen. I don't think nihilism – I do not think nihilism is a good worldview. The firearms community has given in to nihilism for so long saying well there's nothing we can Do about them kind of do the

Right so this is why in certain measures We've seen things encroaching like the Bum stock right the bum stocks and the Braces and all this other kind of stuff like Look in our generation Our generation we could see Not we probably would not be able to see the ATF of completely abolished but

We could see in our generation We could very well see large Elements see the ATF completely abolished. But we could see, in our generation, we could very well see large elements of the NFA completely removed. I'll hear that. I'd like to think so. I'm not saying that it's going to happen, but it is a reality. I'll echo your sentiment on nihilism, man. And if you can make your enemy become nihilistic, you can smear them out.

They're done. That's true. Do not become nihilistic. Let me read this one. This is good. From K. Brian419 says, my employer, Ohio Health, just issued an email stating if we are not fully vaccinated by January 12th, we will be considered

resigned from our position, not fired. Here's what I would say. There was a viral TikTok video where this guy said, if you are required to do something for work, they have to cover the cost of whatever that requirement may be or compensate you, for instance, if you're required for overtime, they have to give you time and a half, for instance, in most instances, or they're required to at least pay you.

A vaccine is a permanent change to your life. So if they want to have, if they issue a workplace requirement that is vaccination, that means you are required to be vaccinated 24 seven. It means outside of work, which means they got to pay you 24-7. I think there's actually, it's a funny argument. They'll argue against it. It's a permanent risk. It's a bit of an ontological argument. Yeah. So I would actually argue this. If your workplace instructs you that you have to be vaccinated, it's very simple. Get a very simple contract drafted and say, thank you so much for doing the vaccine mandates. And then say, just please sign this medical form, which states, if any injury or negative

or adverse event arises due to the vaccine at any point in my life due to the permanent medical procedure, company assumes all risk. In the event company dissolves, is sold, the name changes or otherwise, the new owners or the prior members of the corporation assume all liability for a medical procedure. And then when they refuse to sign it, you can say, hey, hey, hey, I said I'll get vaccinated, but they are refusing. I'm not kidding about doing that. There was originally, I believe the CDC or OSHA actually said, employers who require medical treatments as a workplace condition assume all liability for that for that condition.

Make sure your employer signs off on that form. And if they say no, say, do you think vaccines are unsafe? And then if they refuse to sign it, call them an anti-vaxxer. And then and then I'm not. I think I'm joking. No, it's great because it right back on them. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, they have to assume the liability for forcing a medical procedure on you.

And then why wouldn't they sign it? You, you, then, then, man, if it were me. By you not signing it, you tell me that you don't. Believe in the science. In the science. Right. You don't believe Dr. Fauci. And then at that point, if they refuse to sign it, I would file a lawsuit and say, if

they believe it's unsafe and they're mandating employees to do it, like that is them creating a workplace risk. They must be held liable. OSHA should be coming after them. Well, there's a lot of lawsuits like that currently underway, and there's a lot of people not complying with these vaccine mandates, and they get to keep their jobs. So it depends on the situation. It depends on the person. But there's a lot of different interesting cases happening right now. All right.

Let's read some more. Ardwick says the root of the problem is the judge said this is not a political trial. He is wrong. To the mainstream, everything is political and they act accordingly. We need to stop thinking like this. And the problem is the judge with his God bless the USA. I said this the other day, his ringtone. That shows he will be biased in favor of the left.

The judge in this case, based on loving America, is biased in favor of the left. That's a fact. Because he will give them grace for their malpractice. He literally stated, I don't believe you are acting in good faith, the prosecutor, and then said, but I'm going to allow you to admit evidence I don't understand. I'm going to allow you to continue a trial after you've committed grave constitutional violations. Why?

Because he believes in the, as you said, the regalia and decorum of the court. Instead of saying, you have violated the constitution, you have violated the good graces of this court, you have violated my rul rulings i hereby rule a mistrial with prejudice yeah that's what he would say if he really believed in america you do not come into my court and subvert our legal and judicial system which has been crafted and precedence has been set and laws have been written and you sought to destroy this no because you cannot have a fair trial for cal rittenhouse there will not be one he is free to go yep because this is not an issue of plate neoplatonism or if they knew the right things they would do the right things this is old testament amos they what you call good

they call evil yep this is the the i was listening to the show a little bit last night and this is kind of that conversation on the idea unfortunately some people's first discovery of evil is when it's causing grave bodily harm to them. The first time, the idea that I understand that we want to give grace, this cultural concept that we have in America, that we want to give grace to other people saying, oh, he just doesn't know something. I understand that. There is genuine evil in the world. And at some point, negligence, when you seize its position of power and you accept that responsibility and then you prove negligent, you need to be held responsible regardless

of intention. Take the example of the generals who led over Afghanistan, right? It takes a certain amount of gall to go before the American people and say, see that cratering death that's going on over there? It worked out great. It's a success. I understand there's a thing called finding a silver lining. But there's a difference between finding a silver lining in something and then calling something that is catastrophic as good.

Right? If I make an error in publishing, you know what? I need to be censored, addressed for it. Right? If I publish an error in publishing, you know what? I need to be censured, addressed for it. If I publish false information. I know that we give some grace to that subject, right? But if I literally go online, if I go publish in our publication and say, this firearm is a safe firearm when I know the fact that it will cause grave bodily harm for the person intending to use it. I know it's a defective problem.

We don't say that that's just okay. So when Binger, when you have somebody, we have to go back to understanding that there's a difference. Some people just are ignorant, right? They think that Django Unchained is an accurate description of firearms. That scene where he points the woman and pulls the trigger and then she flies sideways. Yep. You know Quentin Tarantino did that on purpose. It was hilarious.

It's silly. It's so good. I got a really good super chat here. This is really important. Brighton Grow says, the judge may be coloring the water with the gun charge. Rittenhouse being convicted for the gun charge show the jury's tainted. Then he'd interject. I think that's pie in the sky thinking. That's like 40 chess to me. I just don't think that he's going to be playing around with something this important. But for those that

are familiar with coloring the water, I love this concept. Imagine there are four glasses of water on a table and there is a pool of water beneath them, meaning there is a leak coming from one of these glasses or more, and you don't know which one. So you put red, green, blue, and orange in each glass. And then whatever color the water on the table turns to, you know where the leak is coming from. So basically what they're arguing is the judge puts a poison pill into the jury, the gun charge, which is clearly, as a matter of law, not applicable to Kyle Rittenhouse. If the jury is politically biased or biased or just doesn't want to take the time to actually go through the law and they come back. This reminds me of that band, and I always forget the one, where they demanded brown

M&Ms in their dressing room. Van Halen, wasn't it? Was it Van Halen? Yeah. Yeah, they had a horrible accent. It was just a matter of making sure that they read the entire contract. Exactly. Everyone thought it was divas being like, I only read M&Ms.

But actually, they said, we'll put something seemingly innocuous right in the middle, and if we don't get it, we know they didn't read the contract. Yes, because they'd had a huge accident at one of their events where they had talked to the stage manager, and they'd let the stage collapse or something, and people ended up being seriously hurt or dying. So this was incredibly important to them. They said, we need.

Oh, yeah. No, no, no. They said like the stage needs to hold a certain amount of weight. And then it didn't. So they were like, let's make sure they do the stupidest, most innocuous thing imaginable. I don't think the judge is doing that. But I do think the judge is holding in his back pocket a directed verdict and a mistrial with prejudice. Because he said, I will take it under advisement.

He really wants the jury to rule on this one. I also think he is in his 70s. He might be like, no, as a matter of law, I'm issuing a directed verdict and throwing that out. Oh, boy. Yeah. I lose their minds if that happens. But, I mean, this is a good strategy too though so like if we're looking at it this way if if the if the judge if the if the verdict comes out one way or another that the um that that kyle rittenhouse is acquitted the that we need to make sure that we we play a smart

game here is you need to let the bad actors act yeah right you let the bad actors act it's kind of like you know kind of the whole antifa strategy We create a little bit of – I provoke a reaction from you, and I get him to film it, and they only see your reaction. Right? So I'm not saying that we need to play the devil by his own game. We need to make sure that their game is visible. Sure. Right? Be smart to it.

Yeah, be smart. I'm not letting anybody come and burn down my house, but I'm not going to go throw on my kit and protect the shopping mall down the street at this time. My business, yes. But it's... You know, there might be something to be said. Is that it... You know, let's just say the people, the malicious actors who have studied it online, and you can find them if you want to,

have already stated that they are trying to dox the jurors. It's a crime. Some of them should be charged and pursued as domestic terrorists, understandably. However, one of the things that we can see now is, all right, if the state is not going to protect the jurors, the people better. Sure. Because the people better. They're threatening the jury. Yeah.

And they're threatening the judge. Hopefully their neighbors are willing to step up. I mean, there are good men in this world that you can talk to. There are good men out there who are – you're a juror and you're being threatened. This is a very important moment to consider. If come Monday, they do the closing arguments, if we get a speedy verdict and they say guilty on all counts, you know it's broken, and then we're in trouble.

That's the worst possible outcome because you'll just have cultural nihilism. I think that would precipitate the collapse of this country. That's when you need to start rating industrial society and its future and taking it seriously. I think the states would this country. That's when you need to start raiding industrial society in its future and taking it seriously. I think the states would rip apart. I think Texas and Florida

is like, you know, stand your ground. We will not allow that culture to persist here. I think the people that looked at this case saying,

I hope there's at least a semblance of law and order or justice in this world will become masked vigilantes enacting violence. And you look at the crime in San Francisco, you look in Connecticut. Oh, boy.

I want to get this next super chat from Frankie Sherritt. Tim, I love the show in Cast Castle. Is the show hosted at the Cast Castle? Also, I'm always curious when watching how many people live at the Cast Castle. I'm so intrigued by it all. In fact, only like three people actually live here. Four, actually. Yes, most people just drive to work.

It's a big office building. The room behind us is all covered in plastic for construction. There's office chairs and computers for editing. There's a reception area. It's a business. Careful in there. There might be splinters on the floor. I stepped on one. We've got a lot of construction because we're

putting in more office space and stuff like that. And yes, this is the Cast Castle. This is where we do the show. But we are setting up Freedomistan, which has got much bigger acreage. We're going to build a new building. And we might actually – I'm not completely sure, but I believe we'll relocate everything. The core functions of the business as we expand and do new shows is going to be based at Freedomistan. So with, like, Tales from the Inverted World and we're doing a

new pop culture show that hasn't been announced yet, but it's actually all put together and functioning and we have like test runs going. Those will probably be recorded at a different location. And we're going to start expanding at Free Domestan, you know, recording areas and sports and, you know, video games and all that stuff because there's more acreage. So this place is great. It's big, but we don't have that much land, so we got more land. So that's coming soon. Let's just grab a couple more Super Chats here because it's getting late. I got to get up at 5 a.m.

We're flying to Austin. All right. Let's see. Ghost Crusader says, Tim, there are four lights. You guys get that one. Jack Posobiec tweeted that out too. Classic line from Star Trek. And let's see. We'll grab one more let's do a good one plants rock says i am terrified that

the jury will feel pressured to convict kyle even if the prosecution's case is weak af i'm hesitant to fully trust them and i agree with with reports of emails coming in and threats coming in someone was filming the jury and the judge just was like, oh, we'll make sure it doesn't happen again. And it's like, oh, they deleted the footage. No, they didn't. You can't delete footage. If I delete a photo off my phone, I can download an app and get it right back in two seconds. So I hope people are, I hope you're prepared. You might not expect they could come back and say guilty on all counts. And we will all be surprised.

Even these progressives who are like, I was wrong. Considering their change of heart, we'll see. With that being said, my friends, make sure you smash the like button. Because you should. Subscribe to this channel. Subscribe. Become a member over at timcast.com. We're flying to Austin next week.

And it's going to be so much fun. Because there are many people in and around Austin that we're going to be hanging out with. And we're doing our show for the first time for the week in the mobile production studio. Literally just an RV. It's a fifth wheel RV that we set up cameras and got everything going. Actually, it looks pretty nice. I'm actually impressed. We should put some like, you know, art up on it.

But it looks pretty good. And this is a trial run because we're planning on doing trips once a month for about a week. So I think we're going to Florida in March. We're going to New Hampshire in June. We're going to Nashville in January. We've got to figure out what's going on for February. But then for a week out of every month, we're going to do a show on location in various cities with specific guests from those locations for events

like the Bitcoin Conference or Porkfest. It's going to be a lot of fun. So follow the show everywhere. Follow TimCastIRL on Instagram because we put up clips. You can follow me personally at TimCast basically everywhere. Do you guys want to shout out anything? Yeah, sure. So I'm, again, Forrest Cooper with Recoil Magazine. Like I said at the beginning,

if you go to recoilweb.com slash Tim Pool, you get 25% off an annual subscription for our magazine. You can see a lot of these cool things that we get to put our time in. And that is a news information magazine, not a... Not a what?

Not a magazine for a firearm. No, no, no, no, no. It is a firearms culture magazine, actually. We are cultured. You can follow me at Instagram. My Instagram handle is at foxrow underscore actual. No, I changed it. Or did it? I did not change it.

It's fox row underscore official yeah how do you spell that fox f-o-x-r-o-e underscore official that is my my um instagram and then that's kind of it for now fall at recoil recoil magazine is on um instagram as well yeah again i'm justin with uh phoenix, our website phoenixammo.com. You can follow me on Twitter at phoenixammunition. F-E-N-I-X. F-E-N-I-X, that's right. You had that famous moment where you said, did you vote for Joe Biden?

Yeah, now it says, is Kyle Rittenhouse innocent? And what happens if you say he's not? It sends you to Joe Biden's gun control. That's great. Remember to get training, guys. As Travis Haley said a couple weeks ago to me, however you practice dying is exactly how you'll die. Wow. We were just practicing earlier, and I thought what you guys had to say was important so I shut up more than I usually did.

Thanks so much for coming. I think I'm going to start a night vision fund on wearechanged.org forward slash donate. I'm very jealous of everything but seriously, one of the best things you could do for me is go on enoughofcensorship.com and sign up on my free email list.

It doesn't cost you anything but it's one way to get rid of the middleman, the big tech technocrats. No one stands in the way of us being able to email together. Enoughofcensorship.com is the website. Just put it in there, and it means the world to me. Oh, gosh. Happy to be here, too, Ian Crossland.

You can follow me at iancrossland.net. Hit me up. Subscribe to my channel on YouTube. Hit me up on Twitter, Facebook, and Mines, Instagram, all that. Great to have you guys here. I hope that you guys all learned something interesting about guns tonight. And I was wrong about the M&Ms. It is brown M&Ms, not red M&Ms.

I said brown. I know. I am corrected. Tim was correct. I fact-checked myself because I wasn't sure, but it was Van Halen. And they didn't have that accident. So you guys can follow me on Twitter at Sarah Patch Litz. Make sure you check out YouTube.com slash Cast Castle because I'm fairly certain they're filming their road trip.

So what's happening is we have an advanced crew bringing the mobile production center to Austin because we have to work and it's like a 24-hour drive. Now that they're just arriving, we can then fly in and be right there and ready. Otherwise, we wouldn't have been able to make a trip like that so the crew for the show has to fly so we can get there quickly enough but we i think i think they vlogged the trip which is probably just driving straight through so i don't know check it out anyway the vlog will be fun and then we're gonna have the vlog from austin and i think you guys know who live who lives in austin there's a handful of people some you know some conspiracy theorists perhaps who believe that thomas jefferson was a part of the Illuminati. There's Elon Musk also there.

Yeah, we'll hang out with him. You can hit us up, Elon. Elon, what's going on, man? I'd love to hang out with you. So that being said, thanks for hanging out this Friday night with all of us. And we're going to be back officially Monday

in our mobile production studio in Austin. We'll see you there. Thanks for hanging out. Bye, guys.