EDIT: The fact that I actually support the second amendment seems to be lost on some readers who didn't take the time to read a nuanced opinion. :)
Okay, I don't support the restrictions YouTube and Reddit are putting on free speech, but I think we need to keep things rational here:
> We need guns. Legally, in the U.S. it's our right - one of the first and most protected rights. The ability to defend yourself and country in the face of tyrany. Look at what happened in Ukraine, Syria, etc. A government doesn't fuck with a populace that has guns, so it increases stability. When you don't have the ability to defend your rights, you don't have rights anymore.
Guns as they are allowed now don't allow you to protect yourself from tyranny. Look at the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas. Whether or not you believe they had illegal guns, they had guns, and they died. Guns lose to tanks every time. When the second amendment was drafted, guns made sense as a way to defend your rights from the government, but in the modern day, it's been probably half a century since civilians lost the arms race. Civilian gun ownership has lost its relevance as a means of defending our rights in the face of increasingly militarized law enforcement.
> Further, violence isn't associated with guns - it's associated with people being suppressed or by mental issues. The weather is more associated with murder than guns...
There's a case to be made that the culture around guns increases violence, but that's ambiguous. What isn't ambiguous, is that a mentally ill person with a gun is more dangerous than a mentally ill person without a gun.
> I even understand trying to reduce ways to kill massive amounts of people easily. But again, I have a car, I know how to make chlorine gas, so on and so forth.
You can argue that a mentally ill person could build a fertilizer bomb or drive a car into a group of people, but I'll point out that we have laws restricting those things too--let's not assume that people who support restricting gun rights don't also support restricting fertilizer and car rights.
> Stop talking about mass murders and start talking about tragedies, do a black out on mass murders names. That'd probably fix the issue in time.
I think that this is part of the issue: that won't "fix" the issue. It might help, but people will still want more gun control, because the magnitude of the issue isn't relevant to how people feel about it.
More people die every year in car accidents than die from civilian-owned guns in 10. By all statistics, we should be much more worried about why we let drive than who we let own guns. But again, the magnitude of the problem isn't what people are reacting to. Guns are just much scarier to the average person than cars.
So people are always going to push for more and more gun control as long as gun violence exists at all, and gun violence will always exist, because it's impossible to control it completely. You aren't going to "fix" gun violence, so unfortunately we need to accept that that isn't an option on the table, even though everyone wants it to be. And once we accept that we can't "fix" gun violence, then it's easier to stomach that gun rights might have some validity worth weighing against restrictions of questionable efficacy.
> I'm telling you right now, by removing these videos you're arming people, and exhasborating the problem.
This is absolutely true, and I think it's one of the biggest problems with the left right now. Too many of us don't seem to understand that by restricting free speech we create martyrs.