Amy Swearer: We Can Protect Life While Respecting the 2nd

Interesting video.

The Violence Project that she mentions


I watched all 15 minutes and 3 seconds and learned a few things. The problem is that the liberals would not have made it past the first minute before they turned it off. They don’t listen to facts and logic. It’s all about emotions. Amy got emotional towards the end, but not one liberal would have listened that long.


Unfortunately, you are correct. Anti 2A arguments tend to be subjectively emotional, versus being objectively factual.


Interesting video…

IMO, any idea that suggests that government or related institutions could have ‘done their job better’ is going to be actively suppressed by law makers.


Wow – great video! Thanks for posting, @Zavier_D. I love how she couches this: we can protect innocent lives WHILE protecting constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.

I also understood her to be urging dialogue ACROSS the perceived L-R divide, and that’s what I find most compelling. In response to some of the other comments here, I think research shows that MOST people ignore data, when it conflicts with their pre-existing worldviews. It’s true of guns, but also climate, and vaccines, and a host of other issues. It happens just as much on the right as it does on the left.

Instead of villifying the other side, whichever side that is, I’d think the more useful approach would be to follow her lead by listening more, identifying shared goals and values, and developing strategies that recognize, in her words, that we’re all on the same side.

1 Like

I was curious to find out more about what she was actually advocating as solutions, and found more about her on the Heritage Foundation’s site. Basically, she’s suggesting modified Red Flag Laws, but with clear limitations and more protection of due process:

1 Like