Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

“Did your French gun control stop a single [expletive] person from dying at the Bataclan?”

“Did your French gun control stop a single [expletive] person from dying at the Bataclan?”

Leader of band performing during Paris terror attack speaks out on gun control.

Jesse Hughes is the front man for Eagles of Death Metal, the band which was performing in the Bataclan theater during the Paris terror attack.

The band is returning to finish their show and Hughes gave an interview to a French TV show. When guns came up, things got interesting and emotional.

Eric Scheiner of CNS News reports:

Eagles of Death Metal Frontman: ‘Did Your French Gun Control’ Stop Anyone From Being Killed at Bataclan in Paris?

In a recent interview with French iTélé, Hughes said that French gun laws did nothing to help the victims.

“Did your French gun control stop a single [expletive] person from dying at the Bataclan?” Hughes said to the interviewer…

“I know people will disagree with me, but it just seems like God made men and women, and that night guns made them equal,” he added. “I hate it that it’s that way. I think the only way that my mind has been changed is that maybe that until nobody has guns everybody has to have them.”

Here’s the video:

Jim Treacher of the Daily Caller adds this:

You don’t have to agree with Jesse Hughes, but I hope you don’t dismiss him. Unless you’ve survived a terror attack, you don’t know what he’s going through. I know I don’t. And I don’t know if I’d ever be able to get back up on a stage where I was almost butchered by Muslim terrorist bastards. He insists he’s not being brave, but I respectfully disagree.

I’ve been a fan of EODM since Peace, Love, Death Metal. I’m glad we’ve got people like Jesse Hughes in the world. I hate the malignant filth who killed all those people and tried to kill him, and I’m glad he’s standing up for the freedom to rock. The freedom to fight back.

Amen.

Featured image via CNS News video.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Until nobody has them, everybody has to have them.

Good thinking.

    And the bad guys will ALWAYS have guns.

    Therefore, everyone else should always have access to guns, too.

    Milhouse in reply to irv. | February 18, 2016 at 1:32 am

    No, it isn’t. It’s actually the exact opposite of the message carried by the slogan he mangled, “Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal”. The point of that slogan is that if nobody has guns then the weak are at the mercy of the strong. The availability of affordable and reliable guns is what changes that, and makes men equal. Even if no bad guys had guns, good guys would still need them. In fact the ideal world would be one in which all good guys have access to guns, and no bad guys do.

    DaveGinOly in reply to irv. | February 18, 2016 at 8:56 pm

    “…until nobody has guns everybody has to have them.”

    Although I appreciate the sentiment, taken literally this is still not a good idea. If nobody has guns (really and truly), then criminals will just run in packs and use other weapons. Potential victims, without guns, will be comparatively defenseless. Potential crime victims (all of us) are still better off with guns, even if that means bad guys will have them too.

    In a post-personal firearms world, the last thought of an employee leaving an office late at night and encountering five thugs armed with knives and baseball bats will probably be “I wish I had a gun” and not “I’m glad they don’t have guns.”

I think the only way that my mind has been changed is that maybe that until nobody has guns everybody has to have them.

I’m sure the literalists will jump all over the use of the word ‘everybody’, but not literally ‘everybody’ needs to have a gun.

Just don’t take them away from the good people, who provide balance to the bad people.

    MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to rinardman. | February 17, 2016 at 12:29 pm

    I think probably what he meant to say is that “maybe until nobody has guns everybody has a RIGHT to have them”.

    It’s the Lockean philosophical argument that we all have the right to self defense. It rests on the idea that not all men are good. Some choose evil.

“Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal.” – a Post-Civil War slogan

Nothing focuses the mind quite like being shot at by someone with real intent.

    Radegunda in reply to xdevildog. | February 17, 2016 at 12:49 pm

    On top of that, he has the burden of knowing that many were killed in the act of listening to his band. Not that he bears any responsibility for that whatsoever, but the thought probably goes through his mind.

Humphrey's Executor | February 17, 2016 at 10:41 am

Remember the Coffeyville Kansas Raid. It’s an example of what happens when a gang of armed thugs tries to victimize a well armed community — ventilated thugs.

One can live in that starry eyed promise of perfection in that unattainable utopia or one can prepare for reality. There is no such thing are a world devoid of violence. And their in lies the rub. It isn’t the gun or any weapon which is the problem. Violence is. The desire to control others against their will is.

I hope people realize that the right to possess and bear arms is not given to us by the Second Amendment. We had it before the Constitution was ratified. It’s a natural right coming out of the natural right of self defense bestowed by the Creator. The Second Amendment assured us that our government was restrained from abolishing that right. Europe, with all its bluster about being civilized has been violating the natural human right to defend one’s self since it enacted its gun control laws. How can you call yourself civilized when you prohibit the means of protecting life.

    Radegunda in reply to faboutlaws. | February 17, 2016 at 1:02 pm

    In Europe, a young woman who used pepper spray to defend herself from attack could be legally prosecuted for it.

    Some years ago in Britain, a singer got a lecture by law enforcement (but, luckily, no prosecution) because she “brandished” a kitchen knife inside her kitchen. Problem was, she wanted to make it visible to an intruder in her yard, and in British law it was wrong for her to use a knife in self-defense in that manner.

    People in Europe are now being arrested for posting comments in social media disapproving of the havoc that the “refugee” flood is causing in their lives — such as on the Scottish island where the 6,500 residents have been forced to welcome 1,000 newcomers who do not share their values and who have a high propensity to criminality and violence.

    In Europe today, even speaking out in your own defense may be treated like a crime.

      …she wanted to make it visible to an intruder in her yard, and in British law it was wrong for her to use a knife in self-defense in that manner.

      She’s lucky she didn’t come in, or she’d be in a world of bigger trouble, regardless of how the intrusion ended. Either she doesn’t defend herself, and [use your imagination], or she does, and spends a long time in prison for the trouble.

      In Europe today, even speaking out in your own defense may be treated like a crime.

      Who ever said the Orwellian concept of “thoughtcrime” couldn’t happen in the real world? Time past, you could freely act in your own defense. Then, you couldn’t legally act, but you could still speak out about it. Now, you (almost) can’t legally speak out, but you can still think it. How much longer for the next logical step: to make even thinking about your own defense illegal?

We should preemptively wear mini-skirts (for ladies), carry guns and own dogs. There will be jihad in this country, it’s just a matter how we defend our lifestyle.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend