We bring you the transcript of
his speach which has gone viral across the country
“So over the last several days Mr. Speaker there has been a lot of discussion about an open and honest debate with respect to school shootings, gun violence, gun control etc.
And an open and honest debate as I understant it, is one that would rely on data, facts, evidenc, analysis, reason, logic etc.etc.
And I'm certainly willing to have that debate, I think if we were going to look seriously at school shootings and gun control we would analyze things like.... why do all mass shootings seem to take place in gun-free zones?
Wouldn't it be reasonable to test whether or not the efficacy of gun-free zones have actually achieved what their intended intent is.
We'd start to look at... most of these shooters come from broken homes, what sort of government policies have actually encouraged broken homes, you can look at left-leaning think tanks like the Brooking Institute, who will actually say that some of it can be attributed to various cultural changes that happened in the sixties to include the abortion industry.
You could look at more conservative-leaning organizations that will say the welfare states contributes significantly to dismantling the family as families became more and more dependent on the government, then they were.... mothers and fathers in the home raising children.
We could look at various status with those areas in the United States and around the world that have strict gun-control measures and what their crime rates look like, weather at Chicago, New York City, Washington DC and others, that have incredibly strict gun laws and yet for some reason hasn't seemed to stop the gun violence in those particular areas.
We can look at the analysis of 538, which is considered more of a left of center data analysis Think Tank, we have several analyst now confirm that data they were looking at not just in United States but in Canada, Great Britain and Australia, that they were shocked that the data did not support what they thought gun control measures would actually achieve. We can look at the number of cases within the United States where a gun has been used for self-defense, estimates range everywhere from one hundred thousand uses too close to a million uses within the United States. Now, some organizations and some reporters only report on the ones where a gun was used and it actually resulted in the death or maiming of the perpetrator, but if you look at the ones where the gun was used where the mere presence of the firearm actually dissuaded the criminal from committing an act of violence, an act of rape, an act of murder, the number shoots up, it skyrockets.
So when people on this side talk about the importance of the Second Amendment please understand it's not just some base philosophical conviction we all have, it is rooted in the idea, that while we may be a post-enlightenment society, the vast majority of horrible atrocities that we've seen have happened in those post enlightenment societies, it's happened as a result of government systematically disarming citizens and claiming themselves to be the sole responsible party for their security, and then turning on those same citizens and punishing them.
That's the most egregious cases but in the individual cases of self-defense, that's why people on this side of the aisle hold the 2nd Amendment in such high esteem because we honestly believe that you have an inherent right to defend yourself, and your ability to defend yourself should not be excluded to your size. Firearms provide someone that is weaker and not as fast, the ability to actually defend themselves from a stronger attacker.
Some of the other things that we would look at and some of the things that I would hope we would have bipartisan support for... all of us agree that we need to make sure that our students are better protected when they go to school.
One of the things that we would look at is arming certain teachers, not every teacher but a teacher that is comfortable with it, is former law enforcement, is former military, that is now in the classroom, Deligate Plum said yesterday that that was ridiculous to consider... why? Is it because the other side of this debate will only accept one "solution" to this problem and that is tearing apart or gutting the Second Amendment.
And I understand we're going to mention just a couple of the bills that were done this year ... background checks getting rid of bump stocks.
If you’re wondering the other reason that we can't have an honest debate over this one, is quite frankly because I don't think any of us on this side of the aisle believe you when you say "that's all you want to do"
It will be bump stocks and be background checks then we'll be different kind of background checks at register the guns, then after that it'll be we need to ban assault weapons ... what's an assault weapon? Something that looks scary.
Then after that it'll be semi-automatic rifles, after that it'll be semi-automatic handguns, then it will be revolvers, shotguns...Because when the policies fail to produce the results you are promising to your constituents, you'll be back with more reasons why we have to infringe on Second Amendment rights.
The other reason why it's really difficult to have an honest and open debate about this, it's because of members of this body comparing members on this side of the aisle to Nazis.
Members on the other side of the aisle saying that when a 24 year old teacher gets up and says that the whole debate is between the Second Amendment or her life. That's a false dilemma. And quite frankly one of the ones that I've found most offensive, along with being compared to Nazis, was being compared to segregationists.
I just want to remind everyone of something very quickly, it was not our party that supported slavery, that fought women's suffrage, that rounded up tens of thousands of asian-americans and put them in concentration camps, that supported Jim Crow, that supported segregation, or supported Mass resistance... That wasn't our party... That was the Democrat Party!
Now I'm thrilled at the Democrats no longer believe that and I don't believe that a single current member of this body who is the Democrat, ever believe those things but I would really appreciate it if every time you want to make a powerful point you don't project the sins, the atrocities, and the injustices, the Democratic Party perpetrated on others ...onto us
So if we want to have an open and honest debate, I'm all for that, let's do that, but let's start with a certain degree of mutual respect. It starts with a certain degree of not assuming that the only reason why we believe in the 2nd Amendment is because the NRA paid us off? Well if that's the sort of logic you want to use, why don't you go take a look at how much money the NRA spends and how much money Planned Parenthood spends, because when I get up here and talk about abortion I don't assume that you're a bought and paid for by Planned Parenthood. I don't assume you're horrible people, because I disagree with you on a policy position. I assume that you have deep convictions that we can have argument and debate about it.
But if you're not willing to reciprocate that level of respect, well don't be surprised when it becomes more difficult to talk about these things. Because there is a lot that we can do and there is a lot that we need to do to ensure the security of our children, and our citizens.
But yes we are going to have a problem with so-called “Solutions” which infringe on people's liberty under the promise... the government will provide for the security, because ultimately in this last shooting we had the perfect example of government being engaged over 30 times and still failing to provide security for those students.
Thank you Mr. Speaker
Virginia Delegate Nick Freitas