So with Parkland persistent in our minds, YouTube has continued to shorten the leash, as it were. It’s really a simple formula, money=support. So now they’ve started taking down content that YouTube deems inappropriate, or otherwise de-monetizing channels, in this case, channels and videos that showcase automatic weapons and gun modification. It’s not a big leap, really, I mean the first thing that the police look into with a criminal like a mass shooter, or a bomber, or whatever, is the internet history, and how many times do they find instructional YouTube video searches?
So YouTube continues the crackdown, and creators are upset. “YouTube is taking my change…they’re kicking me out of the community…” now creators have to be =creative,= now they have to work harder, and for some, it really is a slap in the face. I know, on some level, how hard it is to make a YouTube video, and now to have to do more, well, for some, maybe there just aren’t enough hours in the day.
Well, the pro-gun creators and channels’ response has been everything from “F– YouTube” to “I’m taking my gun videos to an adult website.” Seriously. I suppose there’s something to be said for cross promotion, but that’s kind of out there. And then there’s Nasim Aghdam.
Officially, Aghdam was a disgruntled YouTube creator who believed she was being de-monetized because her views on veganism and animal rights opposed the corporations that buy YouTube ads. So YouTube took her money, as a result of some kind of conspiracy with big business, she felt she was being persecuted, and her response was to head on over to San Bruno, shoot as many people as she could, and then kill herself. I don’t know what to call this other than the volatile result of a mix of low self esteem, and maybe a hint of depression. I’m not a psychologist, but that’s what it sounds like (they’re all out to get me, I’ve got to hurt them before they hurt me further!)
Of course, it was only few hours later that the “good guy with a gun” advocates trotted out a response, saying things like “I would have helped.” (There’s a hashtag for that, but I’m not supporting it, and I’ll get into that a bit later) and “you should always pack your guns at all times, even in a gun free zone.” I’m not supporting this statement because it’s an oxymoron. I can’t imagine secure places (even places like schools) let you wander in with a gun if you’re not shooting it. At least, if I were a security guard, or a resource officer, I’d prefer to be the only armed person in the place. If a shooting does happen, I’d hate to get shot in the back by a well meaning good guy with a gun.
Then I remembered Easter Sunday, after our trip to the park, when the weather drove us indoors, we took a trip to Toys R Us for some window shopping and a bit of nostalgia for the adults. I don’t know if I was really all that surprised however, to see John Wayne living out his cowboy fantasy, what with his cowboy hat, western wear, boots, and SIDEARM. In Toys R Us. In a building full of families, children, and pregnant women, most likely the only person, openly carrying what I can only assume was a loaded firearm. I mean, why would you so prominently display an empty gun?
Maybe, in your action movie fueled delirium, some crazy could decide to stroll into a bankrupt toy store on Easter Sunday and blow everyone away. If you subscribe to the “good guy with a gun” fantasy you could possibly save the day by shooting back. Maybe you could even get lucky and get the bad guy before they shot up too much of the place.
But what if you miss?
What if, in the sudden chaos of an active shooting, you miss, or heaven forbid, some scared kid or expecting mom runs in front of your perfect shot at the last minute, and instead of shooting the bad guy, you kill a child? And that is why I don’t support “I would have helped.” No matter how good you are with a gun, you can’t account for random chance, and I can’t think of any police or military personnel who wouldn’t hesitate, even for a moment to return fire on an active shooter in a building full of terrified children and pregnant women.
I believe that responsible people should be allowed to own guns, collect guns, and use them. But I don’t want to have a gun pointed at me in Starbucks for cutting in the line. I sure as hell don’t want to be shot for cutting in the line. If I do get shot in that moment of caffeine deprived gun rage, is it my fault for cutting? Something tells me as long the shooter’s permits are in order, it’ll be cool.
Sadly, it’s becoming a scary world we live in.