‘Harvard, come get your boy’: David Hogg educated over absurd inquiry about a license ‘to kill humans’

In a spectacular display of what an Ivy League education produces these days, gun control activist David Hogg took to social media in an exercise of the absurd when he posed the question, “If you need a license to kill deer why don’t you need one to kill humans?”

The internet was more than willing to help him with this puzzle.

The Harvard University student, best known for his press tours following the tragic 2017 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, seems hell bent on building a reputation as being out of touch with reality.

Having already failed miserably at starting his own pillow company to compete with conservative entrepreneur Mike Lindell’s MyPillow and asserting it was because hard work does not build success, Hogg continued the advocacy for his gun control group, March For Our Lives, with this doozy: “If you need a license to kill deer,” Hogg asked, “why don’t you need one to kill humans?”

As expected, the reactions to such a query ranged from sycophantic support without reason to sarcastic mockery.

In a surprising show of self-awareness, Hogg didn’t let the internet get too carried away before he interceded on his own behalf to acknowledge that his few would be considered dumb. He attempted to argue that he could speak his mind because he wasn’t a politician, essentially suggesting that they would share his “dumb” ideas if not for upcoming elections.

Of course, then he doubled down on “dumb” with a similarly inane follow-up tweet.

“If you need a license to drive car, cut hair or to hunt you ought to need one to buy a gun,” Hogg wrote. The fact that this young man is a student at Harvard astounded many.

“Harvard everyone. They must be so proud,” Aldous Huxley’s Ghost wrote. Others added, “This is the result of a Harvard education,” and “Again, Harvard, come get your boy.”

Perhaps if he had stopped to think instead of reflexively virtue signaling, he would have realized the fallacy of this bonus argument. You see, you don’t need a license to buy a car or a pair of scissors. However, in the states that lack Constitutional carry laws, you do in fact need a permit to buy a gun and, no matter what, a background check is still required.

Hogg’s argument was further shredded by those who pointed out that government regulation had overstepped in many aspects of day to day life and that he should be advocating for rolling back potentially unnecessary licensing like that needed to cut hair. On guns, someone summed up the argument rather succinctly with a reminder on the text in the Bill of Rights.

Perhaps the best argument of all came from @dwellerofwoods who made the case that a “license to kill” was a privilege afforded to a rare few, namely fictional characters.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Kevin Haggerty


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles