Univ. of California biology professor uses class time to demand students destroy the Second Amendment
02/17/2016 / By JD Heyes / Comments
Univ. of California biology professor uses class time to demand students destroy the Second Amendment

Like mindless drones who repeat what they’re told, Left-wing Marxists who have infested most of our nation’s college campuses and who call themselves “professors” continue to tell vile, insane lies about an organization with which they disagree, ideologically.

As reported by Campus Reform, in the immediate aftermath of the San Bernardino terrorist attack, biology Prof. Richard Symanski, of the University of California, Irvine, subjected his students to an off-topic endorsement of gun control.

In a video provided to the website by a student in the class, Peter Van Voorhis, Symanski tells his introductory-level Biological Sciences 1A course – targeting many of the freshmen he knew would be in the classroom – that, if they are seeking a cause with which they want to become involved, they should “probably jump on this gun issue,” claiming further that it “just boggles my mind every time I think about it.”

Following that pitch at the end of his discourse, he said, “If you want a cause – want to get on a bandwagon – then get these guns outlawed, and do something about the Second Amendment.”

Like what, exactly, professor? Get it repealed, perhaps? And how will you then protect your right to speak freely? To a trial by jury? To ensure you’re served with a warrant before police search your home? To be free from torture?

Van Voorhis told Campus Reform that he didn’t have a problem with “people expressing their opinions,” but when they are expressed by professors, “they have a captive audience.”


He added: “If I could debate him, I would win.”

The Australian lie

While Symanski’s pitch was tied to an act of terrorism – which is, in and of itself, loony, considering that a terrorist will never obey gun laws (or gun bans for that matter), he went further, attempting to tie the killings to the National Rifle Association, saying the pro-Second Amendment organization is responsible for the attack because of its opposition to gun control. He further contended that “automatic weapons” should be a common-sense exception to the Second Amendment, though he probably doesn’t know that the San Bernardino jihadis weren’t using automatic weapons.

“We are in a situation where Australia had a situation like ours a number of years ago, and Australia said, ‘look we’re just losing too many people’ … [and they] went out and bought guns from everybody; now, it is extremely difficult to buy a gun in Australia and very few people get killed,” Symanski said, obliviously.

Yes, well, when President Obama, the Kool-Aid-dispenser-in-chief, voices the same lie, it’s to be expected that loyal rank-and-file Marxists will repeat it – like good little drones.

But Symanski wasn’t through. He went on to inform his class that he read “an article in the paper that said, literally, and I’m not exaggerating,” that a mass shooting happens in the U.S. “every single day,” on average.

“Who’s the big culprit of this?” he asked in a manner that did not require any hand-raising. “It’s the NRA – the National Rifle Association – which is enormously powerful in this country, in a way that you and I can’t imagine.”

‘I just pretend to be liberal’

He then went on to lampoon a central NRA argument against gun control (besides it being unconstitutional) – that people, not guns, are responsible for violence – which has never made sense to him because he doesn’t believe that people are capable of consciously deciding not to pull a trigger when guns are in their hands.

“Look,we’re all sort of off the edge at some point, right? We don’t know when we’re going to fly off edge. And what does the issue become? The issue becomes do we have access to a gun or an AK-47 or an automatic weapon? If we don’t have access to the damn thing we can’t kill anybody,” he said.

Which is, of course, absurd. As for Van Voorhis, he said he’s had to hide his conservative side and just “pretend to be liberal” because if not, he believes that Symanski – who he says is very liberal – would penalize him with poor grades.

“There’s no point in me sacrificing my GPA and my future just to prove them wrong,” he told Campus Reform.

Oh, and that “less guns have meant less crime in Australia” argument? That’s debunked rather soundly in this video news report.


Submit a correction >>

, ,

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
Get Our Free Email Newsletter
Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.
Your privacy is protected. Subscription confirmation required.

Get the world's best independent media newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.

By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.