Name: 多年來最精彩的槍支辯論 (The Best Gun Debate I've Had in Years)
Uploaded: 2025-09-11T03:58:14.000Z
Duration: 12 min 3 s

程度副詞

So I just had a question on your thoughts on if we need more gun control in the country or not.

所以我想問您一個問題，您認為我們國家是否需要加強槍支管制？

轉承詞

You know, I'm very pro-protecting America and the citizens that live in it, and so I think that we should have more gun control because there's a lot of school shootings that happen, as we mentioned, and, you know, I just think it would do a lot to protect the people, and I think the Second Amendment also qualifies that we should have regulations for guns.

你知道，我非常支持保護美國和生活在美國的公民，所以我認為我們應該加強槍支管制，因為正如我們提到的，校園槍擊案時有發生，你知道，我只是認為這對保護人民有很大幫助，我認為第二修正案也規定我們應該對槍支進行管制。

Do you think gun ownership is a right or a privilege?

您認為擁有槍支是一種權利還是一種特權？

I think it's a right, but it comes with responsibilities.

我認為這是一種權利，但也伴隨著責任。

Well, I think that there should be things in place, you know, things like red flag laws and things like that.

嗯，我認為應該制定一些措施，你知道的，比如紅旗法之類的。

You know, the AG just approved Mel Gibson to get his gun rights back, even though he had a domestic violence charge, so, you know, I don't think the people that commit these violent crimes should be able to buy guns and things like that, and I think we should have red flag laws in place to make sure that those violent criminals aren't getting guns.

你知道，總檢察長剛剛準許梅爾-吉布森（Mel Gibson）恢復持槍權，儘管他曾被指控犯有家庭暴力罪，所以，你知道，我不認為犯下這些暴力罪行的人應該能夠買到槍支之類的東西，我認為我們應該制定紅旗法，以確保那些暴力罪犯得不到槍支。

So, tell me, in your perfect world, what would constitute a red flag?

那麼，告訴我，在你的完美世界裡，什麼才是紅旗？

I mean, just things like, you know, we can look into any kind of medication and things like that that can affect someone's...

我的意思是，只是類似的事情，你知道，我們可以看看任何類型的藥物和類似的東西，可以影響一個人的...

I mean, that could be...  I mean, there's a lot of vets that come home from war and that are on a lot of medication.

我的意思是，這可能是...  我的意思是，有很多退伍軍人 從戰場上歸來， 他們服用了大量的藥物。

A lot of vets could have their weapons taken away.

很多退伍軍人的武器可能會被收繳。

I mean, I'm not necessarily saying, like, it's mainly to prevent, you know, future shootings and things like that, and also, you know, putting in place things like a federal registry so that we know, you know, the types of guns that people have, and, you know, it would just essentially be a federal registry that shows these are the guns that this person has, you know, in case a cop has to go on something like a domestic call, that's the most dangerous call they can go on, so...  I can see you're coming after this from a good perspective.

我的意思是，我不一定說，就像，它主要是為了防止，你知道，未來的槍擊和類似的事情，而且，你知道，把像聯邦登記冊這樣的東西，所以我們知道，你知道，人們擁有的槍支類型，而且，你知道，它只是本質上是一個聯邦登記冊，顯示這些都是槍支，這個人有，你知道，以防警察不得不去的東西，如家庭呼叫，這是最危險的呼叫，他們可以去，所以...  我知道你的出發點是好的

What would you say is the ultimate and final purpose of the Second Amendment?

您認為第二修正案的最終目的是什麼？

I think it's self-defense against a tyrannical government, which...

我認為這是對專制政府的自衛，這...

I think within the Second Amendment, it also implies that we have high regulations in the first four words...  Well, well-regulated militia actually meant well-armed, but that's a separate issue, but...

我認為，在第二修正案中，前四個字也暗示了我們有嚴格的管制......  嗯，"管理良好的民兵 "實際上指的是 "裝備精良"，但這是另外一個問題，但是......

You're interpreting what the Founding Fathers...

Well, they said it in the Federalist Papers, right?

他們在《聯邦黨人文集》中是這麼說的吧？

So it's not just me, but also in the Heller decision, in the 5-4 decision that said that gun ownership was a right, this was a hotly debated thing.

是以，不僅僅是我，在海勒案的判決中，在5比4的判決中，擁有槍支是一項權利，這是一個爭論激烈的問題。

對不起，我不是故意打斷你的。

Do you disagree with the idea of a federal registry like that?

你是否不同意建立這樣一個聯邦登記處？

The only reason you'd want to register the guns is if you want to confiscate them.

你想登記槍支的唯一原因就是你想沒收它們。

Or to make sure that people like officers of law are protected and know what they're going into.

或者確保像執法人員這樣的人受到保護，知道他們要做什麼。

Again, that's a good argument, to your credit.

同樣，這也是一個很好的論據，值得稱讚。

I will try to make a better argument where the problem of the government knowing where every gun is would then lead itself towards mass confiscation, and I would agree with you.

我將嘗試提出一個更好的論點，即政府知道每把槍在哪裡的問題會導致政府大規模沒收槍支，我同意你的觀點。

A well-armed citizenry is the greatest protectorate of liberty and freedom in this country.

在這個國家，裝備精良的公民是自由和自 由的最大保護者。

Even though the Army has things like drones and tanks and things like that, that out-arm citizens that have just a handgun?

即使軍隊擁有無人機、坦克等裝備，也比只有一把手槍的公民更強大嗎？

I mean, we've seen it in several instances where at least a citizen...

我的意思是，我們已經看到它在幾個實例中，至少有一個公民...

That's a good argument, but I would say a little flawed.

這是一個很好的論據，但我認為有點缺陷。

Where the citizens are able to protect themselves in some ways, it's a much harder population to control.

在公民能夠以某種方式保護自己的地方，控制人口的難度要大得多。

So you think a federal registry would infringe on the rights?

所以你認為聯邦登記處會侵犯權利？

I mean, I think there is no good argument, I think, other than potential...

我的意思是，我認為除了潛在的...

I ascribe to the government bad motives and bad intentions when it wants to infringe more on these types of freedoms and liberties.

當政府想要侵犯更多此類自由時，我認為政府動機不良、用心險惡。

I just personally don't see it as an infringement because, like we just said, and I think we agreed that owning a gun is a right, however, I think it's a responsibility.

我個人並不認為這是一種侵犯，因為就像我們剛才說的，我想我們都同意擁有槍支是一種權利，但我認為這是一種責任。

But also, I wanted to ask, is voting a right or is that a privilege?

但我還想問，投票是一種權利還是一種特權？

So felons can get their rights back, right?

所以重罪犯可以重新獲得他們的權利，對嗎？

But rights can be suspended or delayed, and we both agree with that.

但權利是可以中止或延遲的，我們都同意這一點。

So, for example, somebody in prison doesn't get guns.

是以，舉例來說，監獄裡的人得不到槍支。

Somebody in prison doesn't have the same free speech rights that you might have.

監獄裡的人可沒有你的言論自由權。

But what's the first thing that you have to do if you want to vote in this country?

但如果你想在這個國家投票，首先要做什麼？

So it's a federal registration to be able to vote in this country.

是以，在這個國家投票需要進行聯邦登記。

And we can agree that keeping safe and keeping our elections to where people who shouldn't vote aren't voting, that's keeping America safe because we don't want people who can't  That's a fair point.

我們可以同意，保證選舉安全，讓不應該投票的人不投票，就是保證美國安全，因為我們不希望有人不能投票。

That there's a technical difference between a voter registration roll and a gun registration roll.

選民登記冊和槍支登記冊在技術上是有區別的。

Well, also, but guns, in many different ways, they would go after the guns a lot more than, like, I don't know, the voter registration roll.

嗯，也是，但槍支，在許多不同的方面，他們會去後，槍支多了很多，像，我不知道，選民登記冊。

My worldview comes out of one in the 20th century where almost every totalitarian government went after the guns first, and the confiscation of guns then leads into the erosion of freedom and liberty.

我的世界觀源於 20 世紀，幾乎所有極權主義政府都會先奪取槍支，而沒收槍支則會導致自由和自 由受到侵蝕。

Right, but wouldn't you say in the 20th century, as you just said, that the disparity between the technology that citizens had to protect themselves compared to what the military had, wouldn't you say that there was a much smaller disparity as opposed to what we see nowadays?

沒錯，但在 20 世紀，正如你剛才所說，公民所擁有的保護自己的技術與軍隊所擁有的技術相比，差距要小得多，難道你不這麼認為嗎？

Also, it says, shall not be infringed, so we have to kind of wrestle with those two things simultaneously.

此外，它還說 "不得侵犯"，是以我們必須同時處理這兩件事。

Right, but so if it's just a semantics argument, then to that point...

沒錯，但如果這只是語義學上的爭論，那麼在這一點上......

That's really what the word means, but...

Right, but you're saying because it says, shall not be infringed, we can't do anything No, no, I'm saying though that...

是的，但你的意思是，因為上面寫著 "不得侵犯"，所以我們什麼都不能做 不，不，我的意思是......

Does that mean voting rights can be infringed?

這是否意味著可以侵犯投票權？

Because it doesn't say it cannot be infringed.

I'm saying I err on the side that more government regulation around guns means that they'll try to take good people's guns away, which then results in less global or let's just say national freedom and liberty.

我的意思是，政府對槍支的監管越多，就意味著他們會試圖奪走好人的槍支，從而導致全球或全國的自由和自 由減少。

What if getting the medicine you need didn't have to be so hard?

如果獲取所需的藥物並不那麼困難呢？

No waiting weeks to see a doctor, no fighting with insurance.

看病無需等待數週，無需與保險公司爭執。

字幕列表影片播放

多年來最精彩的槍支辯論 (The Best Gun Debate I've Had in Years)

perspective

absolutely

privilege

potentially