Speaker 1: Welcome back to it could happen here, the only podcast
Speaker 1: you are legally allowed to listen to right now. Um,
Speaker 1: I'm Robert Evans. We talk about things falling apart, putting
Speaker 1: them back together, all that good stuff with me as
Speaker 1: it just like sevent of the time. Is my co
Speaker 1: host Garrison Davis. Garrison, how are you doing today? I'm
Speaker 1: doing great. It is early for you. Yeah, they have to.
Speaker 1: They have to drag me out of bed, but I
Speaker 1: I made it just about a hair after three. Okay,
Speaker 1: I have my second coffee already. So our topic is
Speaker 1: gun culture, uh, and to discuss gun culture with me
Speaker 1: and a number of aspects of it, including how to
Speaker 1: maybe make a better one. Uh. Is Carl cassarda from
Speaker 1: Enranged TV. Carl, Welcome to the program. Hey, thanks for
Speaker 1: having me. I'm really stoked to be here. And it's
Speaker 1: a topic, as you can imagine with my work on
Speaker 1: Enrainge TV, is a near and dear to my heart
Speaker 1: because it's a challenging one. We've got a lot of
Speaker 1: great things in this community and a lot of challenges too. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Gun YouTube has gotten some really interesting places in the
Speaker 1: last Um. Really, it feels like most of the growth
Speaker 1: happen like the last five six years, like there's been
Speaker 1: a real significant increase in Yeah, I feel like there's
Speaker 1: been like a wave. I feel like there's generations of
Speaker 1: gun too. There's like Gen one, Gen two, Gen three
Speaker 1: in thereps, Russian back in the day and stuff totally. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and so there's a whole thing there. There's there's generations
Speaker 1: of what was addressed in the conversation and the cultural
Speaker 1: significance as well as the geary impact. I think we've
Speaker 1: got different kind of generations of the Yeah, and I
Speaker 1: think this stuff obviously, when when aspects of gun YouTube
Speaker 1: go viral, it tends to be stuff that's like particularly problematic.
Speaker 1: But in my experience, most of it is just dudes
Speaker 1: shooting stuff to see what happens, or you know, trying
Speaker 1: out different guns and stuff like. It is mostly if
Speaker 1: you're someone who you know believes in the right to
Speaker 1: bear arms, it's mostly pretty much just like people drying
Speaker 1: out guns and stuff with guns. Yeah. Yeah, when things
Speaker 1: go viral, it's like my my experience with that, there's
Speaker 1: a number of reasons, or one is that it's particularly
Speaker 1: gross that someone does something or says something fucked up.
Speaker 1: Somebody's out there dressed as a rotation, all right, stuff
Speaker 1: like that, that kind that tends to push the buttons.
Speaker 1: But yeah, most of the time, the stuff that gets
Speaker 1: the largest volume of viewership are quite honestly more banal.
Speaker 1: It's things like a fifty caliber a exploding or shooting
Speaker 1: a gallon, you know, gallon, drum of gas. That kind
Speaker 1: of stuff. Is that that stuff appeals to people that
Speaker 1: aren't just gun people, so they're like, oh, I want
Speaker 1: to see shoots bload, so let me click on it. Well,
Speaker 1: one of my favorite things is to look at videos
Speaker 1: of people destroying safe life fests. One of my favorite
Speaker 1: ways to watch gun YouTube. But I guess this is
Speaker 1: probably what we're probably talking about this as the episode
Speaker 1: goes on. But once you watch enough of those from
Speaker 1: like one channel, you'll you'll get to a video when
Speaker 1: they fantasize about like shooting Antifa or something that they're like, okay,
Speaker 1: well yeah, that yeah, that's that's just the way it
Speaker 1: goes sometimes. And it is, you know, the thing that
Speaker 1: my first I guess the first time I became aware
Speaker 1: of like online gun culture UM was a site that's
Speaker 1: still really near and dear to my heart. I'm sure
Speaker 1: you're familiar with it, Carl the Box of Truth. And
Speaker 1: it was like, and I think this like fifteen years
Speaker 1: ago or something like that is when I started reading
Speaker 1: their stuff, and it's it's just like some kind of
Speaker 1: bubba e dudes in Texas who will take different who
Speaker 1: will try out like, hey, there's a myth that, um
Speaker 1: this specific round in Korea got stopped by people who
Speaker 1: were wearing multiple layers of like clothing in the cold.
Speaker 1: Can winter clothing stop this bullet? And they would they would,
Speaker 1: you know, mock up the clothing on like a target
Speaker 1: and they would shoot. Or like how many books does
Speaker 1: it take? Like if you have a full backpack, how
Speaker 1: many books would it take to stop a round of
Speaker 1: nine millimeter? If? I like, it's it's all very much
Speaker 1: like practical Hey, people you know say this works this
Speaker 1: way or this works that way. Well, let's go out
Speaker 1: and shoot some stuff and test how it works. And um,
Speaker 1: I think was like it is, as you said, the
Speaker 1: kind of thing I think, even if you don't own
Speaker 1: guns you might find interesting just because like a lot
Speaker 1: of it is dealing with here's things you've seen in Hollywood,
Speaker 1: what actually happens? Um, So I do think like, fundamentally
Speaker 1: there's always going to be a place for that kind
Speaker 1: of content because it's it's not just like stuff that
Speaker 1: people who like guns are interested in. It's just stuff
Speaker 1: that has kind of objective value. You know, you're trying
Speaker 1: to expand what people's understanding of things. Yeah, I call
Speaker 1: that G whiz content. It's like, G whiz, what happens
Speaker 1: if right? And so on? In range. The closest equivalent
Speaker 1: to that, which are the videos that the most views
Speaker 1: are are somewhat now infamous mud tests um and it
Speaker 1: started off six years ago and it was literally it
Speaker 1: was G whiz, let's go do this. And of course
Speaker 1: there's this long standing lore everywhere outside of the gun
Speaker 1: community and in it about the A K M being
Speaker 1: this undestructed, indestructible unicorn you write into combat that no
Speaker 1: matter what happens to it, it fires, and they are
Speaker 1: fifteen being this fragile piece of ship. And in our
Speaker 1: mud tests, of which we've now done multiple of it,
Speaker 1: while initially it was just G whiz, over time and aggregate,
Speaker 1: it turned out to actually have really interesting data points
Speaker 1: and that the A k doesn't do well in mud
Speaker 1: and they are excels in mud, which is completely against
Speaker 1: the lore about Vietnam, which is a different problem. But
Speaker 1: that kind of thing extends beyond the gun community because
Speaker 1: people are like guns and mud. What happened? Is this
Speaker 1: MythBusters kind of stuff? Yeah, and I think, but it's
Speaker 1: interesting how you can learn from it. Yeah, And I
Speaker 1: think one of the problems that is, uh, we could
Speaker 1: say like has is an issue on on gun YouTube
Speaker 1: and one of the things that has become an issue,
Speaker 1: and this isn't just within the gun culture, it's everywhere.
Speaker 1: Is that like if you're into that stuff, and if
Speaker 1: you're if you're coming into it, like I want to
Speaker 1: see people do this g with stuff or I just
Speaker 1: want to see reviews of different guns because I might
Speaker 1: be buying one. Um, Google's algorithm is going to feed
Speaker 1: you a lot of stuff, and some of that stuff
Speaker 1: is going to be people who, yeah, are preparing to
Speaker 1: like shoot folks at protests and our filming videos about
Speaker 1: that and stuff and that it has this um it
Speaker 1: has this radicalizing effect on a lot of people. And
Speaker 1: it also has this kind of can have this kind
Speaker 1: of radicalizing effect on content where you know, most political
Speaker 1: stuff you see isn't kind of that over it. But
Speaker 1: it does if somebody has a video where they're being
Speaker 1: more explicitly political outside of you know, you know, arguing
Speaker 1: in favor of gun rights, but if they're getting kind
Speaker 1: of political and a broader since, and that does really
Speaker 1: well the way that content works. As other people might
Speaker 1: be like, oh, well, folks want me to do a
Speaker 1: political video, folks want me to talk about I don't know,
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi or whatever, um And that that's you know,
Speaker 1: not just a problem with gun culture or gun YouTube,
Speaker 1: but it has increasingly become a thing. And in the
Speaker 1: n r A kind of very famously. There's a good
Speaker 1: podcast on the how that organization has kind of gone
Speaker 1: from where it started to where it is that talks
Speaker 1: about like n r A TV. But they their YouTube
Speaker 1: channel had some pretty outrageous ship for a while, and
Speaker 1: I think it left an impact even though it failed
Speaker 1: in this eventually. Well, the n r A is an tool.
Speaker 1: We can get into that later. The end has changed
Speaker 1: so much since its organs to what it is now.
Speaker 1: It's not even the people have found it. It It wouldn't
Speaker 1: recognize it, I don't think at all. But you're touching
Speaker 1: on a topic there that's also near and dear, And
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to promote in range here, that's just
Speaker 1: we're having a conversation. But years ago I decided to
Speaker 1: proactively demonetize. I turned off my AdSense and I take
Speaker 1: no money from any views, so it's not like advertising
Speaker 1: doesn't drive what I do. And I feel like the
Speaker 1: reason I did that was partially just fuck you YouTube.
Speaker 1: It was the hacker manifesto of you come watch my content,
Speaker 1: I cost you money versus make you money, which is
Speaker 1: kind of a statement on my part. But additionally, I
Speaker 1: do feel like, whether it's firearms or any other content
Speaker 1: that is completely advertised, I supported there is a dangerous
Speaker 1: thing there in that you have to pursue the clicks
Speaker 1: like a heroin addict, and the clicks make you the money,
Speaker 1: and therefore you're gonna make the stuff that's gonna make
Speaker 1: the clicks because that's how you make your income. And
Speaker 1: even if you don't want it to do, it can
Speaker 1: affect you. Yeah, And I'm curious, like, how do you
Speaker 1: kind of how do you um, how do you how
Speaker 1: do you approach sort of dealing in this space where
Speaker 1: it is so easy for things to become politicized, Like
Speaker 1: do you is that is that a kind of thing
Speaker 1: that you have to be consciously sort of picking your battles.
Speaker 1: I guess I'm just kind of interested in how you
Speaker 1: because you definitely have been more open about having kind
Speaker 1: of more on the left libertarian side of things politics
Speaker 1: than a lot of people talk about in that space.
Speaker 1: How do you decide kind of what is worth inserting
Speaker 1: and what is worth kind of just you know, no
Speaker 1: one needs to hear that within this context. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't think that that's an easy thing to answer, right,
Speaker 1: It's hard, Like there's a lot of landlines. But when
Speaker 1: um introspectively for me, the answer for me at least
Speaker 1: was I'm just going to come to this content as
Speaker 1: my honest self, Like, if I'm just going to produce
Speaker 1: what I want to produce, it's and since I don't
Speaker 1: have to worry about advertising dollars, I'm just gonna make
Speaker 1: this ship I want to make. And as a result,
Speaker 1: I guess it's sometimes considered an alternative voice, but I
Speaker 1: don't think it really is. I think that the loud
Speaker 1: loud mouths have made it sound like there's only one
Speaker 1: voice in this community. It there isn't. And so by
Speaker 1: just being legitimate and honest and being me, there has
Speaker 1: turned out to be a lot of ground swell if
Speaker 1: you want to use grassroots type people out there that
Speaker 1: want to hear something that's not just evangelical American Taliban
Speaker 1: so but but in terms of what where to where,
Speaker 1: what where to put your foot on? What land mine?
Speaker 1: I guess I did for me. My decision has been
Speaker 1: to do topics that have been intentionally ignored that shouldn't
Speaker 1: have been. Like I've done a bunch of videos about
Speaker 1: the confluence of civil rights and firearms ownership, which there's
Speaker 1: a lot of it, and it's it's really amazing how
Speaker 1: much there is and no one talks about it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean we Yeah, we've chatted about that a little
Speaker 1: bit in some of our episodes. It was like nineteen
Speaker 1: nineteen when there were all those like race riots around
Speaker 1: the country, or even if you're looking at like the
Speaker 1: post construction period, there's a history both of like gun
Speaker 1: control being used for racist purposes, but also just of
Speaker 1: community is arming themselves, Black communities arming themselves. That is
Speaker 1: is woefully undertold. Although it is people are starting to
Speaker 1: deal with it more thankfully. Um. I'm kind of interested
Speaker 1: in talking to you about sort of the culture jamming
Speaker 1: aspect of we have this huge gun culture, aspects of
Speaker 1: it are very toxic and becoming politicized in a way
Speaker 1: that is um aggressive. Um, how do we how do
Speaker 1: we have a positive influence and kind of hopefully pull
Speaker 1: things back, because I do think within kind of the
Speaker 1: issue of gun rights, there's more actually more possibility for
Speaker 1: people to sort of come together and reaching a chord
Speaker 1: than there is on something like abortion. Um. And I
Speaker 1: think a lot of that conversation is going to start
Speaker 1: in spaces like the one you inhabit. Yeah, no, I yeah,
Speaker 1: I like what you said culture jamming, because another term
Speaker 1: I've heard is subversibile. That's not the intent. But like
Speaker 1: you mentioned the Red Summer of nineteen nineteen and uh, yeah,
Speaker 1: I talked to when I talked to a lot of
Speaker 1: people that that are really huge historically interested in minded
Speaker 1: and I was astonished how many people have not even
Speaker 1: heard of it. Never mind you only like the explicit
Speaker 1: realities of it. And so when it comes to the
Speaker 1: culture jamming, there's one video I did about one or
Speaker 1: two of the events of Red Summer of nineteen nine,
Speaker 1: one of them here in Bisbee locally and it's an
Speaker 1: interesting problem to someone who normally would be considered as
Speaker 1: a very standard issue firearms content creator. In that particular
Speaker 1: Red Summer nineteen nineteen episode, it turned into the local
Speaker 1: police attempting to disarm the tenth Cavalry soldiers who are
Speaker 1: off you know, military soldiers in bis beyond recreation, And
Speaker 1: so you've got this interesting cognitive dissonance. Do I support
Speaker 1: the cops that a lot of firearms people are like
Speaker 1: just blindly support, or do I support the military, which
Speaker 1: a lot of fires people blindly support when both of
Speaker 1: them converge and the and it's a racist agenda in
Speaker 1: it that poses a question that I like to do
Speaker 1: with like this kind of content because it means that
Speaker 1: the viewer has to really, if they get through the video,
Speaker 1: have to introspectively go, Holy funk, which do I support
Speaker 1: or do I support either? Or is there a problem
Speaker 1: here I haven't been considering. I think asking questions like
Speaker 1: that really matters when you try to like start these
Speaker 1: conversations with people who are in the same space but
Speaker 1: but not you know, I haven't considered talking about this
Speaker 1: stuff before or on what would traditionally be seen as
Speaker 1: kind of very opposed political um wing, how do you
Speaker 1: kind of start these conversations in a way that makes
Speaker 1: it most likely that you're gonna be able to have
Speaker 1: a positive dialogue that actually moves forward as opposed to
Speaker 1: kind of getting bogged down in the and the things
Speaker 1: that caused people to just kind of lock horns generally
Speaker 1: when you we start getting into these areas, Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know, it's totally possible. You're gonna have that
Speaker 1: problem no matter what right you see that with your work.
Speaker 1: For surely, when you take an honest approach to history
Speaker 1: and just be like, here's the facts. Um, there's gonna
Speaker 1: be people that are just gonna be completely resistant to that.
Speaker 1: They're not going to take it. But um, I think
Speaker 1: the best way to do that is to just be
Speaker 1: that honest approach to it. Like one of the things
Speaker 1: that I've think we do with firearms content gears cool
Speaker 1: tech is cool. Guns are neat. They're fun. I enjoy
Speaker 1: shooting with guns. I like the foard of it. I
Speaker 1: like going to competitions. But one of the things that
Speaker 1: it gets left out of the conversation a lot is
Speaker 1: what are the implications of firearms and the sociological economic
Speaker 1: environments that we live in, and I think that's one
Speaker 1: of the things that didn't get talked about. And so
Speaker 1: if we talk about it fairly and also tend to
Speaker 1: I think it's hard to do, but have people from
Speaker 1: all sides of this perspective, as long as they're not
Speaker 1: completely dangerous and toxic, being part of the conversation, we
Speaker 1: can have a better middle ground. That's the hard part.
Speaker 1: Like so being inclusive, ironically, even of views that you
Speaker 1: aren't necessarily your own, as long as the person you're
Speaker 1: dealing with isn't. My line is, if you're actively supporting
Speaker 1: bigotry or the harm of other people, there's a no go.
Speaker 1: We're done. But if we have different views but we
Speaker 1: realize that that's not the intent, then then we should
Speaker 1: have a conversation. I think that that's a big difference now.
Speaker 1: I think one of the areas in which this can
Speaker 1: murkiest is when you are talking to people and I've
Speaker 1: had a few of these conversations who are convinced that
Speaker 1: there is uh that they're kind of on the precipice
Speaker 1: of of a violent conflict sparked by someone coming to
Speaker 1: take their guns right that and it and you know,
Speaker 1: there's the version of this that is like, I'm worried
Speaker 1: that the A t F Is going to do some
Speaker 1: fuckory in a bunch of my ship is going to
Speaker 1: be illegal, which is pretty reasonable. And then there's the
Speaker 1: I'm worried Antifa's going to come to my small town
Speaker 1: and and and take my you know, guns or do
Speaker 1: whatever like because that there are often people in that
Speaker 1: who are just kind of um tragically misinformed and radicalized
Speaker 1: in a way that they're not so much eager to
Speaker 1: harm people as they are just like broken and frightened
Speaker 1: because of the things that have been fed to them. Um,
Speaker 1: do you have any kind of best practices when it
Speaker 1: comes to sort of approaching those conversations and trying to
Speaker 1: improve the information those people are getting. I guess for
Speaker 1: me in that regardless of what I when I see
Speaker 1: people like that, and I think all of us have
Speaker 1: those people in our world, whether it's your your aunt
Speaker 1: or your uncle or a friend, right like we've seen
Speaker 1: that over the last couple of years for sure. Um,
Speaker 1: I think the best thing you can do there for me,
Speaker 1: And again I'm just talking to my approach is a
Speaker 1: break the echo chamber if you can. And so the
Speaker 1: echo chamber is the problem when we suck from the
Speaker 1: fire hose of only one source, like NonStop. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: gonna be dangerous. That's the kind of stuff that pollutes
Speaker 1: your mind to the point where you can't think outside
Speaker 1: of that box. So like being more inclusive and that
Speaker 1: word is kind of a trigger word, a catchphrase, but
Speaker 1: being legitimately more inclusive and presenting a lot of different
Speaker 1: diversity that really is part of the firearms community. Can
Speaker 1: I can in some circumstances break the echo chamber, Like
Speaker 1: I'm really happy with this one project on the channel
Speaker 1: where I'm working with the net Evans about specifically a
Speaker 1: female or woman's approach to self defense with firearms. And
Speaker 1: you don't really see that. You'll see like channels that
Speaker 1: are only for women, and you'll see like all the
Speaker 1: majority of gun channels that are only for gun fascinated dudes.
Speaker 1: But like throwing that into the mix, there's gonna be
Speaker 1: some subset of people that will clicking and watch it
Speaker 1: out of that g whiz Lowell and that kind of
Speaker 1: stuff can break a paradigm in terms of well, I
Speaker 1: never thought of that, I never looked at it from
Speaker 1: that perspective, and that's at least that's what I think
Speaker 1: is the great answer is do your best to make
Speaker 1: sure you're approachable and try to break the echo chamber. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that makes complete Yeah, I mean that makes a lot
Speaker 1: of sense. Um. I think on the other side of
Speaker 1: this is also worth talking about because we've kind of
Speaker 1: been focused on how do you break the echo chamber?
Speaker 1: How do you get people who are you know, in
Speaker 1: the gun culture on the right to be more open minded.
Speaker 1: The other side of this is you have a lot
Speaker 1: of people who are kind of liberals um or on
Speaker 1: the left who have a really reflexively negative opinion to
Speaker 1: the reaction to the very idea of gun ownership or
Speaker 1: gun rights and have these you know, you will generally
Speaker 1: see there's there's a mix of people who can come
Speaker 1: to it from a very reasonable and argued point in
Speaker 1: a mix of people who are just going to like
Speaker 1: in the same way that folks on the right to
Speaker 1: throw out a handful of quotes that they've seen on memes,
Speaker 1: um that they can is to kind of, you know,
Speaker 1: shut down debate. How do you do you have a
Speaker 1: lot of those conversations where you're kind of trying to
Speaker 1: make people at least more open to because this is
Speaker 1: something my work has dealt with a lot. Is kind
Speaker 1: of trying to sit down to, like, I get why
Speaker 1: you don't think these things should be legal. Um, obviously,
Speaker 1: I I see the same mass shooting news that you do.
Speaker 1: There's a problem, a deep problem with guns in this country.
Speaker 1: I don't deny that, but like, let's also talk about
Speaker 1: the idea that the state should have an absolute monopoly
Speaker 1: on on the ability to do violence. Let's talk about
Speaker 1: the ability of marginalized groups to defend themselves. Let's talk
Speaker 1: about the history of gun control and how it's like
Speaker 1: it is it is. There's a lot of conversations that
Speaker 1: kind of get wrapped up in that. Um, I'm wondering,
Speaker 1: do you have thoughts in terms of like how to
Speaker 1: kind of broach those and progressive avenues to go down
Speaker 1: to when you're having that side of the conversation. You know,
Speaker 1: it's totally interesting. I think I feel like I don't.
Speaker 1: I'm curious what you think about this from your work
Speaker 1: as well. I feel like over the last for good reasons,
Speaker 1: over the last couple of years, more than a couple
Speaker 1: of years, I think I've seen Maybe it's just my
Speaker 1: own echo chamber. I've seen a lot of people on
Speaker 1: that side of the political spectrum coming more and more
Speaker 1: around to being pro gun. Yeah, and then the statistics
Speaker 1: back that up. Supporting soil in the United States is
Speaker 1: the lowest it's been in quite a while. In so
Speaker 1: that like, if there's that joke on that side of
Speaker 1: the political fence about you go far enough left to
Speaker 1: get your guns back right, um so um. But I
Speaker 1: think there's been a real wake up call for a
Speaker 1: lot of people that used to be very much vehemently
Speaker 1: against the idea with some of the stuff they saw
Speaker 1: and went, whoa, Um, this isn't These aren't going away.
Speaker 1: And if you're reasonable, if you're willing to have a
Speaker 1: rational thought about, at least in this country, the reality
Speaker 1: of firearms ownership, whether you like it or not, it's
Speaker 1: not debatable. This is real. It's what it is. They're
Speaker 1: not like they could ban everything tomorrow and there's gonna
Speaker 1: be air fifteens in this country for the next hundred years. Um,
Speaker 1: so that ain't gonna change. So with that realization, maybe
Speaker 1: maybe the better idea with which I think is with
Speaker 1: all technology, is instead of being afraid of it, is
Speaker 1: to actually learn about it and understand it whether you
Speaker 1: want it or not. You but like learning and understanding
Speaker 1: it is at least a step further forward than just
Speaker 1: complete object fear. Yeah, that that is often kind of
Speaker 1: where I start the conversation with just like we have
Speaker 1: to deal with the reality as it is on the ground,
Speaker 1: which is that there's four million firearms in private hands here,
Speaker 1: which is not all that far from half of all
Speaker 1: of the guns in the world. Um, So any any
Speaker 1: sort of like plan you have, it's the kind of
Speaker 1: like one of the things that often comes up in
Speaker 1: those conversations is Australia and people they were like, well
Speaker 1: they were able to do it after Now Port Arthur
Speaker 1: was Scotland. Um, I forget the name of the massacre,
Speaker 1: but there was a massacre in in in in Australia
Speaker 1: that they banned most kinds of firearms after and confiscated them.
Speaker 1: And it gets brought up a lot where like, well
Speaker 1: they did this in the short frame of time, and
Speaker 1: there was this this impact on gun violence deaths. Why
Speaker 1: couldn't we do it? And the reason is that they
Speaker 1: had to confiscate a total of two hundred thousand arms
Speaker 1: and there's four hundred million guns in private hands in
Speaker 1: the United States, Um, it's it's a different scale of problem.
Speaker 1: And that that's before we get to sort of illegal
Speaker 1: barriers because Australia didn't have a Second Amendment. Obviously, like
Speaker 1: whether or not you like at firearms have a level
Speaker 1: of protection that is equivalent to the protection free speech
Speaker 1: enjoys in this country. And you can't just pretend that's
Speaker 1: not the case. There's a tremendous body of jurisprudence around it. Yeah, no, totally,
Speaker 1: and like so that that's that's part of it is
Speaker 1: the reality there Australia. Here is a completely different beast
Speaker 1: as well as culturally, like the people that were into
Speaker 1: guns there and I don't mean to offend any Australians listening,
Speaker 1: but it wasn't like here, like in a place of
Speaker 1: Arizona at pleast like Arizona, guns are just if you're
Speaker 1: in Arizonian they're just intrinsically part of life, whether like
Speaker 1: they're just constant. They're everywhere you go to, Like you
Speaker 1: see them open care you not always do she open
Speaker 1: care either. Sometimes it's like reasonable open carey. Sometimes you
Speaker 1: see the other side of it. But they're just everywhere.
Speaker 1: It's just part of the deal, and it's like a
Speaker 1: lot of that in a lot of the country, and
Speaker 1: so UM I actually think that that fear based ignorance
Speaker 1: of them is more dangerous because then we don't teach
Speaker 1: people what to do around them or how to be
Speaker 1: safe around them, kind like abstinence, like education in school,
Speaker 1: teach people not to have that's dumb, that ain't gonna work,
Speaker 1: and guns exist in this country. Does just be afraid
Speaker 1: of them that don't work either, So in the regard,
Speaker 1: I think that the reality is it's much better to
Speaker 1: UM to approach this. What I think. I guess the
Speaker 1: way I try to deal with that is if you
Speaker 1: don't fetishize them, people that are more afraid of them
Speaker 1: are less likely to just click away. If you talk
Speaker 1: about them like this is a thing, here's what they are.
Speaker 1: They're not a totem against evil. They're just a tool.
Speaker 1: And here's a historical story or narrative or sociological impact
Speaker 1: of this that's not fetishizing it as some religious item.
Speaker 1: I think that that helps break that barrier a little bit.
Speaker 1: And I think that that does bring me to something
Speaker 1: I think about a lot, which is the how you're
Speaker 1: in and it actually has I think gotten a bit
Speaker 1: better than it was prior to Sandy Hook, but the
Speaker 1: very sorry state in a lot of cases of advertising
Speaker 1: of gear and guns. Um. I think the most famous
Speaker 1: example was a I believe it was a Bushmaster ad
Speaker 1: that got pulled after Sandy Hook that was like an
Speaker 1: a R fifteen that came with a man card that
Speaker 1: you would get like with your gun. Yeah, get your
Speaker 1: man card back. Your man card has been reissued because
Speaker 1: you have this gun here and that I I you know,
Speaker 1: I've seen a lot of different gun cultures because it's
Speaker 1: actually like we've just talked about how unique US gun
Speaker 1: culture is, but a lot of people actually own firearms
Speaker 1: around the world. There's a lot of even like in Europe,
Speaker 1: like France has a very significant gun culture, UM and
Speaker 1: in Germany you'd be surprised, like people can own a
Speaker 1: lot of the same weapons you can hear. There's a
Speaker 1: lot more hoops to jump through to to get access
Speaker 1: to them. Um. But there's still like there's gun cultures
Speaker 1: all around and especially places like Iraq and Syria. It
Speaker 1: was really going to UM when I saw kind of
Speaker 1: the gun culture that I I most wanted to put
Speaker 1: some things over to hear from there. It was in
Speaker 1: northeast Syria in Rojava, where like damn near every not
Speaker 1: every individual, but every like family had an AK because
Speaker 1: in part, there was this understanding that you have a
Speaker 1: duty from time to time to like patrol and watch
Speaker 1: your neighborhood and not in sort of this like I'm
Speaker 1: gonna set up a checkpoint for Antifa, but in I like, hey,
Speaker 1: isis just carried out a big attack. Let's let's get
Speaker 1: some folks out into the streets to like watch our neighborhoods,
Speaker 1: because that's just the reality of the world, and we
Speaker 1: don't we don't do we don't just have like a
Speaker 1: group of militarized police rolling around every neighborhood. Like we
Speaker 1: also are responsible for protecting our communities, and so we
Speaker 1: train with weapons. And there was a lot of conversations
Speaker 1: I had with women about like, well, the fact that
Speaker 1: I have this and know how to use it now
Speaker 1: means that things can't be done to me that were
Speaker 1: before because I have an a K forty seven, And
Speaker 1: that means something I would like to port the kind
Speaker 1: of like what you were talking about not just seeing
Speaker 1: it as a tool, but seeing it as a tool
Speaker 1: with societal responsibilities. You don't just have a gun so
Speaker 1: you can hold up in your house in the zombie apocalypse.
Speaker 1: You have a gun because you're part of a community
Speaker 1: and because there's there's some value that we see in
Speaker 1: members of the community being armed and not just the state. Yeah, no, totally.
Speaker 1: So I mean that goes that kind of goes way
Speaker 1: back to the old like now sort of silly sounding thing,
Speaker 1: but like God made man, cult made them equal, right,
Speaker 1: So before that, like if you were a frail human
Speaker 1: being for whatever reasons, Um, you really were sort of defenseless,
Speaker 1: especially in the places like the frontier. But skill at
Speaker 1: arms could change that and um, and that it puts
Speaker 1: it can put a more balanced power infrastructure in place. UM.
Speaker 1: Not that I want to live in a world, but
Speaker 1: we're always like at this point of mutually assured destruction.
Speaker 1: But it is much better to have more power balanced
Speaker 1: than power imbalance. And firearms absolutely provide that in trained, responsible,
Speaker 1: educated hands. Um. And that's what I think the story
Speaker 1: should be, right, that's the emphasis. Like when when the
Speaker 1: whole thing happened went down in Iraq like you're describing,
Speaker 1: I think it was ironic. One of the things that
Speaker 1: the US military did was allowed every home to have
Speaker 1: an AK like because you get to keep one gun
Speaker 1: and it's one of these and uh, and you talked
Speaker 1: about gun ownership worldwide, like, um, once you jumped through
Speaker 1: some of the hurtles in some of these countries, it's
Speaker 1: actually easier to own certain things than you can't. Like, Yeah,
Speaker 1: like a machine gun in the US is highly regulated,
Speaker 1: its four and pretty difficult and highly expensive because of
Speaker 1: a specially closed market. But like Bloke on the Range,
Speaker 1: one of the guys I work with on on on YouTube,
Speaker 1: once he gets his permit, like he's like, I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna go buy a fully automatic stent and he just does.
Speaker 1: And it's not at an exorbitant price like it would
Speaker 1: be in the United States. So it's not apples to apples.
Speaker 1: Like these controls, whether we like them or not, some
Speaker 1: of them are actually more liberal than we have in
Speaker 1: the United States. Yeah, I think a good example of that,
Speaker 1: and an example of where like a lot of folks
Speaker 1: who might kind of reflexively think this is insane, but
Speaker 1: like it's silencers, you know, suppressors being the more accurate term,
Speaker 1: but silencer is what you call. It's the thing you
Speaker 1: see James Bond screw on the end of his gun
Speaker 1: to make it quiet. Um. And there's the like this
Speaker 1: attitude that they should be heavily restricted because there's this
Speaker 1: misnomer that for the most part they make things sound
Speaker 1: like stuff in James Bond. Now, there are some ways
Speaker 1: to it a firearm that is incredibly quiet, um, particularly
Speaker 1: using like a smaller around and sub sonic ammunition. There
Speaker 1: are some very some weapons you can effectively make quiet
Speaker 1: enough that people won't notice it. But when you're putting
Speaker 1: a silencer on an a R fifteen, it is not quiet.
Speaker 1: No one will miss it firing. But what it won't
Speaker 1: do if you have to defend yourself in your home
Speaker 1: is shatter your ear drums forever, right or this is
Speaker 1: honestly the bigger case for suppressors. If you are hunting
Speaker 1: with an animal, as a lot of people do with
Speaker 1: your dogs, you can have a suppressor on your shotgun
Speaker 1: as your bird hunting or whatever, and you will not
Speaker 1: destroy that dog's ears. Um. You know, it's the same
Speaker 1: thing like I'm hunting for deer. You know it's it's
Speaker 1: it's easier, Um, it's like less dangerous for you potentially,
Speaker 1: Like I know one thing you notice, if you've spent
Speaker 1: a lot of time around hunting dogs, they don't have
Speaker 1: good hearing by the time they get older because they're hunting.
Speaker 1: You know. It's funny suppressors, Like everything that's that's more
Speaker 1: controlled has gotta allure of magic around it, right, Like, oh,
Speaker 1: a suppressor, a silencer or or for that matter, or
Speaker 1: a machine gun, and like therefore it is the forbidden
Speaker 1: fruit and everyone wants it more than they ever would
Speaker 1: have once you own. I have one transferable machine guns
Speaker 1: with tax stamp the whole nine yards, and I shoot
Speaker 1: it like once a year because you shoot it and
Speaker 1: then you're like, wow, that was expensive and and it's like,
Speaker 1: oh we that was fun, and then you put it away.
Speaker 1: And the truth is the some automatic stuff is far
Speaker 1: more interesting and actually generally more effective. Once you use
Speaker 1: full auto fire, it's got very limited use. Um fully
Speaker 1: there there, I mean there is like, if we again
Speaker 1: are being complete, there's one mass shooting I can think
Speaker 1: of where a fully automatic weapon made the shooter more dangerous,
Speaker 1: and it was the Las Vegas shooting because he was
Speaker 1: in a set fixed position um. He was holed up
Speaker 1: um and he had he was not like moving and standing.
Speaker 1: He was like braced while firing into a crowd from
Speaker 1: a building. As a general rule, if you're talking about
Speaker 1: like what someone going to be more dangerous with, if
Speaker 1: they're somebody who decides to shoot up something, it's a
Speaker 1: semi automatic weapon. Because an automatic weapon number one going
Speaker 1: to jam more often quires a bit more understanding and
Speaker 1: know how on behalf of the user. And also it's
Speaker 1: a lot harder to hit with and we'll run out
Speaker 1: of ammunition very quickly as opposed to it and a
Speaker 1: semi automatic a R fifteen. The reason they are so
Speaker 1: often used in mass shootings is it's kind of the
Speaker 1: best weapon to use for that. If that's it's also prolific, right,
Speaker 1: there's like cordwood in this country. You can like they're
Speaker 1: literally everywhere. Um, the Las Vegas shooter, though I don't
Speaker 1: know that he had actually any truly select fire guns.
Speaker 1: Weren't they It was, Yeah, he was using a bump stock.
Speaker 1: I think it's close enough to Yeah, well no, it's
Speaker 1: a good analog. But it is interesting to note and
Speaker 1: that guy. What's interesting about that guy's um? Well, of
Speaker 1: course his act was horrific and evil. Obviously he used
Speaker 1: a bunch of air fifteens with like shitty bump stocks,
Speaker 1: and he had planned something like this for years apparently. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he had Tanner right in the set up too, which
Speaker 1: is yeah, no one knows, I mean as we know,
Speaker 1: no one currently I don't know anyone knows what his
Speaker 1: motivation was, at least it hasn't been released. But he
Speaker 1: had been planning something like this for a very long time.
Speaker 1: And what's ironic about that is that if he had
Speaker 1: bided his time, could have actually had a real select
Speaker 1: fire like belt fed machine gun. He just did a millionaire. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he could have done that, and uh, um, this could
Speaker 1: but he just went with this bump stock kind of garbage,
Speaker 1: which is weird. Um. That's a whole another topic, but
Speaker 1: it is and it it is like that is one
Speaker 1: of those cases when you talk to people in the
Speaker 1: right where it's like after that shooting, Um, Donald Trump
Speaker 1: and his administration banned bump stocks, um, which is more
Speaker 1: gun control than we got out of eight years of Obama.
Speaker 1: That's like, you know, oh boy, you point that out
Speaker 1: at least on the center in fact, um, Uh, there's
Speaker 1: always this narrative that you know, this political party will
Speaker 1: take your guns and this polargically party waved. But the
Speaker 1: truth is statistically and historically speaking, both tend to err
Speaker 1: on the side of trying to add more restrictions over time,
Speaker 1: Like if you do it over time like Obama didn't.
Speaker 1: In fact, Obama open things up. I think he liberalized
Speaker 1: concealed carry of pistol or firearms in national parks. Actually
Speaker 1: he actually made guns a little easier to deal with. UM.
Speaker 1: But then via essentially executive order edict, you've got Trump
Speaker 1: banning bump stocks, which, whether you like bump stocks or not,
Speaker 1: I think the way that went down is questionable legally speaking,
Speaker 1: but that's another topic it And and obviously bump stocks
Speaker 1: were also somewhat questionable. They were speaking right right, totally totally.
Speaker 1: But but that's that's an interesting precedent when what he
Speaker 1: did with just like fiat edict um. But that that said,
Speaker 1: like historically, over time, there's always been more restrictions, not less,
Speaker 1: from both sides. And when you point that out, the
Speaker 1: people that just kind of drink the kool aid from
Speaker 1: one side or the other, I want to just remediately
Speaker 1: knee jerk on you, and you're like, no, this is weird.
Speaker 1: This is coming from all directions really, Yeah, and I
Speaker 1: think it is it is a big part of it
Speaker 1: is just that like as a general rule, people who
Speaker 1: are rich and powerful do not want poor people to
Speaker 1: be armed. It doesn't tend to work out in their favor.
Speaker 1: The only time they want poor people armed is when
Speaker 1: they send them to a war they decided to have. Yeah,
Speaker 1: obviously the history of gun controls would have really tied
Speaker 1: to racism and the Black Panthers and ahtle just stuff
Speaker 1: around California's gun laws being started to curb black people
Speaker 1: from from owning fire arms, and so it would be
Speaker 1: we would be You could argue in some ways that
Speaker 1: Reagan had a big role in inventing our modern concepts
Speaker 1: of like what gun control means and what kind of
Speaker 1: gun control laws like liberal states tend to go after
Speaker 1: was on open carrying bands, on you know, concealed carrying
Speaker 1: of arms, that kind of stuff. Yeah, it's deeper than this,
Speaker 1: there's always nuanced It's really hard, right, But like um,
Speaker 1: like California, which is kind of one of the flagship
Speaker 1: states of gun control, um, and I think that their
Speaker 1: methods are bizarre to me and almost on not understandable.
Speaker 1: But like you talk about Reagan pretty much. They were like,
Speaker 1: guns are cool. And then the panthers walked around with
Speaker 1: some guns. Are like, whoa sucking? We better do something?
Speaker 1: And uh, of course that the image of the panthers
Speaker 1: with their guns out walking down the street, which was
Speaker 1: their legal right, um, and it was ad and it motivated, um,
Speaker 1: of course a lot of things in California, which now
Speaker 1: we see where where that has led in California gun
Speaker 1: control laws. UM has also changed the narrative for so
Speaker 1: many people that are unwilling to look at things from
Speaker 1: a truly broad historical perspective. That's only one tiny thing
Speaker 1: the Black Panthers did, and the rest of their actions
Speaker 1: are so lost to just the pictures of them standing
Speaker 1: around them on carbons. And that's another example of leaving out,
Speaker 1: like the sinnabal Mission, We'll talk about one thing, but
Speaker 1: not the rest, and therefore the historical narrative is only
Speaker 1: one thing, and it is also there's a lesson in
Speaker 1: that for people who are on the left and who
Speaker 1: are advocates of gun ownership, about what happens in terms
Speaker 1: of media and in terms of how your movement is
Speaker 1: thought about and remembered when guns are a part of
Speaker 1: it because that's always going to for a variety of reasons,
Speaker 1: and we can say a lot of those are very
Speaker 1: unreasonable reasons. But if you are a political group who
Speaker 1: is armed and makes that a visible part of your activism,
Speaker 1: that is going to really dominate a lot of conversations.
Speaker 1: It doesn't mean you shouldn't be, but it means you
Speaker 1: have to go into that understanding that like, that's just
Speaker 1: how it works in this country. Yeah, you will immediately
Speaker 1: get you will immediately from at least some part of
Speaker 1: the perspective, whatever whatever side you're on, you will immediately
Speaker 1: get someone slinging extremist militant at you. Yeah. But by
Speaker 1: the way, I mean, those are real things too. There
Speaker 1: are those. I'm not saying there aren't extremists. We'll talk
Speaker 1: about them all the time. Yeah, this country is full
Speaker 1: of them, as is the world. So that's not that's
Speaker 1: not an unreasonable thing that does exist. But the minute
Speaker 1: you go ahead and stand with that gun, you're going
Speaker 1: to get that label, whether it's truly something you earned
Speaker 1: or not. There's a very deep conversation that we've talked
Speaker 1: about that we've had in pieces on this program and
Speaker 1: other shows that we've done on Cool Zone about like
Speaker 1: when makes sense to be openly armed and when makes
Speaker 1: sense to be openly armed as part of a group,
Speaker 1: because that is a very fraught question, as like the
Speaker 1: what happened in the chas made abundantly clear, but in
Speaker 1: you know, a bunch of cases Kyle Rittenhouse and whatnot,
Speaker 1: there's a ton of different reasons why choosing to be
Speaker 1: openly armed. Um, there's a debate to be had about
Speaker 1: like how that influences everyone around you had that influences
Speaker 1: influences the demonstration, And I've seen and heard it used
Speaker 1: in in good ways in an irresponsible ways. I've seen
Speaker 1: people carrying guns at political events in order to intimidate others.
Speaker 1: I've also seen people carrying guns at political events to
Speaker 1: create essentially a buffer where it's like, Okay, there's going
Speaker 1: to be people fighting at this event. There's going to
Speaker 1: be clashes. If we're standing here as a group with guns,
Speaker 1: there's a place people can run back to and the
Speaker 1: fighting won't continue because nobody wants to push that. And
Speaker 1: that's yeah, without talking about specifics of intent to any
Speaker 1: of those situations you already talked about, because I can't,
Speaker 1: But yeah, I think I think it does like it
Speaker 1: always comes back to this thing of intent. Right. So
Speaker 1: to me, Um, you're right for the fireman, absolutely true, regardless,
Speaker 1: Like even if I agree with you, this is a right,
Speaker 1: like we said, it's protected like the first Amendment, it's
Speaker 1: the second. Um. But I think the problem starts to
Speaker 1: come when you've decided to bring the firearm solely for
Speaker 1: the intended purpose of intimidation. Like that's that's where I
Speaker 1: start getting like, this is this is troubling, right, But
Speaker 1: if you're bringing it for personal defense or community defense,
Speaker 1: or there's a need because your community is really at risk.
Speaker 1: I mean one of the examples of a civil rights
Speaker 1: one was this is some someday I'll do a video
Speaker 1: about this. A community knew that the clan was coming
Speaker 1: to intimidate them, and they armed up with surplus m
Speaker 1: one garren's and steel pot helmets, literally dug fighting positions
Speaker 1: and fought them off. The clan ran for their lives.
Speaker 1: No one was killed, but they literally used m one
Speaker 1: grands to uh to stop the clan from infiltrating their community. Um.
Speaker 1: That was not used as a weapon of intimidation, it
Speaker 1: was used as a weapon of community defense. I think
Speaker 1: that's intent goes everywhere. Yeah, that's dope too. Um and yeah,
Speaker 1: I U I think um one thing that that that
Speaker 1: kind of I think there's a conversation that needs to
Speaker 1: be had when we start talking about when is reasonable
Speaker 1: and what situations are reasonable to carry a gun opener
Speaker 1: concealed about also what should be carried. Um. I've certainly
Speaker 1: seen because I don't I think that the most harmful
Speaker 1: thing is certainly people carrying gun to intimidate. I've also
Speaker 1: seen people carry guns as a fashion statement, which is
Speaker 1: not the same thing but is bad. For example, people
Speaker 1: on the left people at a protests bringing a loaded
Speaker 1: mosen um too, because it was the gun the communists used,
Speaker 1: which is like, you don't you don't want to be
Speaker 1: in a firefight in a dense urban environment with a
Speaker 1: motion negat did you bring? It? Is a gun that
Speaker 1: doesn't function without a sizeable hammer, you know. And of
Speaker 1: course people on like I remember outside of this anti
Speaker 1: mask rally, these two guys who are up and carrying
Speaker 1: a r is, one of whom had an a r
Speaker 1: tin with with a hundred round drum was talking about it.
Speaker 1: We had like four hundreds something rounds on him and
Speaker 1: it was like, and in case stuff pops off, and
Speaker 1: it's like, what are you? Number one? Like, if you're
Speaker 1: talking like that, you've spent no time thinking about what
Speaker 1: actually happens in the situations in public areas in which
Speaker 1: gunfights occur, because none of them that have happened in
Speaker 1: any time in the recent future have involved people needing
Speaker 1: to four hundred rounds of ammunition or or drum magazines
Speaker 1: or whatever. Like you are. You are not in Fallujah,
Speaker 1: you are in Salem, Oregon. Um. The extent to which
Speaker 1: a firearm can be useful for uh self defense and
Speaker 1: that does not like bragging about the number of bullets
Speaker 1: you have is just like weird and gross. You know
Speaker 1: this is gonna come off maybe a little strange or
Speaker 1: even counterintuitive. But when I hear someone like that at
Speaker 1: what you just described in that particular person, First of all,
Speaker 1: that guns barrel would burst in four and of rounds,
Speaker 1: But that's a whole another topic probably, But that said, Um,
Speaker 1: when I hear that, I almost have like, Um, it's
Speaker 1: kind of sad because the reason that's sad is that
Speaker 1: person is doing that one because they've been sold the
Speaker 1: idea of the firearms and talisman like that to me,
Speaker 1: that person is acting like that's a talisman. Secondarily, the
Speaker 1: reason they have four in a round is because they've
Speaker 1: been sold a pretty big bill of fear. And that's
Speaker 1: that's sad for anyone to live a life based on fear. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I would agree with that entirely. UM, do you have
Speaker 1: anything else you wanted to get into and this, uh,
Speaker 1: this conversation, Well, I don't know. I mean, we're just
Speaker 1: here to talk about like community. I just I think
Speaker 1: one thing that's really important and it's something that UM
Speaker 1: is a positive and I'm happy to see this is
Speaker 1: that it was kind of a happy accident with my work.
Speaker 1: I didn't even think about it. It It is hard to happen.
Speaker 1: But this is a much the people people that love,
Speaker 1: first of all, just the sport. There's a lot of us.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of us of all spectrums across the board. UM.
Speaker 1: People that believe in the right from the person purposes
Speaker 1: of personal defense and community defense there across the board.
Speaker 1: And I think that one of the things that we
Speaker 1: need to do is not let the narrative be only one,
Speaker 1: which is we see so much of UM very much
Speaker 1: just like right wing I'm gonna usually say Christian white
Speaker 1: males need like completely dominating this conversation as though, and
Speaker 1: they think they owe as a result own the space.
Speaker 1: Now it would be in their interest too, from the
Speaker 1: perspective of preserving firearms rights, to be inclusive and have
Speaker 1: everyone that believes in that a particular thing work together
Speaker 1: to make sure we don't lose a right, because the
Speaker 1: right unexercised is lost. Right. So even if I disagree
Speaker 1: with you on economic policy, but we agree on firearms right,
Speaker 1: we have an agreement there, and that makes us somehow
Speaker 1: interestingly in the same space. We have something in common
Speaker 1: versus something diversive, and I think that part of the conversation,
Speaker 1: at least within reason. I mean, there are people that
Speaker 1: are legitimately dangerous, you don't negotiate with them, but within reason,
Speaker 1: like agreeing on that topic means well, we've got something
Speaker 1: in common here. There's probably other things too, and maybe
Speaker 1: that could be a place where we kind of try
Speaker 1: to make that conversation that or not worse. And so
Speaker 1: by being more open inclusive and saying, hey, there's people
Speaker 1: here and people there and here we are all together
Speaker 1: doing this together. Um, perhaps conversation can be had. That's
Speaker 1: better than what we've been having. Maybe it can be
Speaker 1: actually a community builder versus a community destroyer. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I would like to see that. Um well, I think
Speaker 1: that's as good a note as any to uh to
Speaker 1: close out on Carl. You wanna you want to throw
Speaker 1: your plug ables up before we we write out of here? Yeah? Sure,
Speaker 1: I mean so I run in range TV. You can
Speaker 1: find me an in range dot TV. Um completely viewer supported.
Speaker 1: Like I said, I don't want to sponsors or anything
Speaker 1: I like. I like the idea of the people liking
Speaker 1: watching it, support it. So if you like it cool,
Speaker 1: come check it out all over the place. YouTube bit
Speaker 1: shoot decentralized video contrat distributions another thing I believe in
Speaker 1: strong would the corporate oligarchy. But yeah, come out. If
Speaker 1: you want to have a little bit different take on
Speaker 1: fire and stuff, or you're justted in the confluence of
Speaker 1: civil rights and guns and stuff, come check out in
Speaker 1: Range TV. I'd appreciate I always appreciate new viewers, and
Speaker 1: thanks for checking it out. Awesome all right, um yeah,
Speaker 1: check out in Range TV, and uh check us out somewhere.
Speaker 1: We won't tell you where, but you can find us
Speaker 1: if you keep us in your hearts. It Could Happen
Speaker 1: Here as a production of cool Zone Media. For more
Speaker 1: podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website cool zone
Speaker 1: media dot com or check us out on the I
Speaker 1: Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Speaker 1: You can find sources for It could Happen Here, updated
Speaker 1: monthly at cool zone Media dot com slash sources. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening.