Piers Morgan Crushed by Dana Loesch & Scottie Hughes on Gun Control Debate!

[ExomatrixTV]

p9Bx_h00KSY

kh_PUuiY_iY

[BrianEn]

If Piers doesn't like the American constitution he should very much consider going back to England. I consider a tank an assault vehicle.




I like watching yet again him getting his ass handed back to him on a hat. His answer this one question tactic is getting old.

[ExomatrixTV]

~think wider, he is trying to create a straw-man argument collecting ALL kinds of weird views in the eyes of the majority (the sheeple) to build a "case" against the "gun nuts" ... Zionist Crimes & 911Truth Denier Piers does NOT give a crap about a real debate based on real issues focusing on the content!

He is just a NWO Puppet sales-man, selling Global Enslavement by Banksters Crime Syndicate ... blindly trusting "Government Authorities" having the " best interest" for the people.

~Zionist Crimes Denier Piers have been exposed being a 9/11 Government Propaganda mouth-peace big time! Piers playing dumb about Corporatism actually hijacking governments around the world. Piers defends Banksters Giant Ponzi-Looting-Scheme.

Piers does not "believe" in conspiracies but DOES SO if it concerns him in England about the Hacking Scandal & him being accused of spreading fake news which made him leaving (fleeing) his own country.

Piers willful ignores all signs of Government-Tyranny!

cheers,
John

~side note: is Piers Morgan some how (genetically) related to JP Morgan? who attacked Nikola Tesla!

[andrewgreen]

To make your way to the top an editor of a national paper you have to be corrupt or at the very least void of morality. I think Piers isn't genuine.

[ExomatrixTV]

~Ben Shapiro vs Bully Piers Morgan Live on CNN: http://youtu.be/qvX2HhNLoVw

~The Most Violent Country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and USA: http://goo.gl/EibVD

~Crime Stats Piers Morgan & MSM Won't Discuss: http://youtu.be/CpVHg5pHyzI

~Ben Swann EATS Piers Morgan - Crime Stats Reality Check!: http://youtu.be/H4PMdUOe0FU

~Hypocrite Celebs4Untruth 'Demand a Plan' against Right to Defend Ourselves Against Any (future) Tyranny: http://youtu.be/4VyQzH-85Sk

~Jesse Ventura PWNED Piers Morgan CNN: http://youtu.be/1_FJSqYBLVE

~Alex Jones PWNED Piers Morgan CNN: http://youtu.be/j-1F1hTliKA

~Piers Morgan & Guests Call for Shooting Alex Jones - Hypocrite MSM Hyping Violence!: http://youtu.be/HYM-9ukKe9E

[kaon]

Morgan is a very difficult guy to watch and listen to. CNN really needs to find a new spokes boy. His constant interruptions and talking over the people he interviews shows just how pompous he is. People wonder why Alex Jones shouted him down. It's the only way to get your sentences out.

I think I'll go visit ebay and check out the going prices on tanks :rolleyes:

[DeDukshyn]

~think wider, he is trying to create a straw-man argument collecting ALL kinds of weird views in the eyes of the majority (the sheeple) to build a "case" against the "gun nuts" ... Zionist Crimes & 911Truth Denier Piers does NOT give a crap about a real debate based on real issues focusing on the content!

He is just a NWO Puppet sales-man, selling Global Enslavement by Banksters Crime Syndicate ... blindly trusting "Government Authorities" having the " best interest" for the people.

~Zionist Crimes Denier Piers have been exposed being a 9/11 Government Propaganda mouth-peace big time! Piers playing dumb about Corporatism actually hijacking governments around the world. Piers defends Banksters Giant Ponzi-Looting-Scheme.

Piers does not "believe" in conspiracies but DOES SO if it concerns him in England about the Hacking Scandal & him being accused of spreading fake news which made him leaving (fleeing) his own country.

Piers willful ignores all signs of Government-Tyranny!

cheers,
John

~side note: is Piers Morgan some how (genetically) related to JP Morgan? who attacked Nikola Tesla!


Interesting side note to consider ... Never thought of that before. And he did more than attack Tesla, he sunk the titanic to help make sure his alternate financiers were dead, then proceeded to destroy his life and attempted to erase him from history. The fact that he almost succeeded show how far his evil tentacles went.

[RMorgan]

Oh man...These girls DESTROYED Piers Morgan so bad, that I was ashamed for him.

Really, the black haired girl couldn´t stop laughing of Piers's catastrophic attempts to enforce his arguments!

This was EPIC! lol

[Precog]

One thing that tic's me off about this guy is he has the nerve to ask his audience how they feel. It's his audience, they agree with him, that's why they are there. Duh!

Deduk, It's even worce than that, the ship that went down was not the Titanic. It was an insurance job on the Olympic which has been proven by a French film crew. It's a fact.

[Elandiel BernElve]

Precog: Your source?

[Hypothetical]

Oh man...These girls DESTROYED Piers Morgan so bad, that I was ashamed for him.

Really, the black haired girl couldn´t stop laughing of Piers's catastrophic attempts to enforce his arguments!

This was EPIC! lol

I guess it depends on your point of view. I felt ashamed for the women that they were arguing to have the use of assault weapons. The problem I have with the whole debate is that no one should need guns. But instead of working towards a more peaceful society we respond with the need for more weapons. An eye for an eye.... The real problem is we're being played by a group of powerful people that need to keep us constantly at war with one another to maintain their control.

[humanalien]

I think piers morgan was brought to CNN to boost
their ratings. Alex jones was saying a while back that
cnn was loosing ratings, left and right and were sinking
fast.

What a better way to boost ratings than to bring in a
man, not from america, and try to sell everyone on the
idea of surrendering their freedoms for safety.

Cnn's ratings have been going up and up, every since
alex jones had his interview with piers and they continue
to go up by interviewing other people with the same mind set
as alex.

Piers is not an american and he doesn't pledge his allegiance
to this country, so his only purpose here is to help destroy
america, from with-in.

Piers needs to be sent back to his homeland and let him answer
to his own crimes before he comes over here, stirring up trouble...

[Snookie]

I think the best thing we can do is just not listen to this A hole. Turn him off. That will end his career quicker than anything else. Also interesting question about him being related to JP Morgan.

It's beginning to look like this was preplanned, as he seems to now be a one trick pony only yapping about gun control.

[Elandiel BernElve]

I think this whole gun debate is quite fascinating.
After all it is an essential question within our current society. And even after taking leaps forward and projecting humankind into the future, maybe not every human but at least mankind will always need to arm itself for self defence.
As long as the universe is an unknown place to us we should be cautious. If on planet earth people can turn into armies and tools of destruction then elsewhere on other planets the same is possible.

Of course the utopian dream would be no necessity for arms and guns, yet in this world of duality it is not only a possibilty but a guarantee that situations will occur where the positive will meet the negative and vice versa.
Furthermore, the existence of arms/weapons/guns as a means of defence for humans is purely natural. Even nature has the most sophisticated forms of self defence mechanisms to prolongue the survivability of life.

As a European I have been raised with the idea that less guns is more safety..
Yet I can only conclude after having had a more in depth look into the matter, that it's an illusion of safety.
The metropolitan areas are getting more harsh and it is obious the guns are in the hand of the wrong people, the police is never at time to prevent or catch someone, prisons are filled and the police uses its weapons on people trying to demonstrate and march peacefully for a better world.

Things have goon crazy indeed:)

Going to raise my frequency now... it is a heavy subject indeed.

[bogeyman]

The right to bare arms, and to protect individual citizens rights against a tyrannical government, is certainly a interesting view that the 2nd amendment states. The US military has more firepower, than any American citizen, so this statement is certainly invalid to some degree. It is not the gun that is the problem, but the people that use these weapons. In the UK we are the second biggest arms dealer in the world, but our gun crime is a fraction of the gun crime in the US, most of which is gang related. So I can only assume the reason why gun crime is so high is the factor that American citizens have easy access to weapons than here in the UK.

[Snookie]

The right to bare arms, and to protect individual citizens rights against a tyrannical government, is certainly a interesting view that the 2nd amendment states. The US military has more firepower, than any American citizen, so this statement is certainly invalid to some degree. It is not the gun that is the problem, but the people that use these weapons. In the UK we are the second biggest arms dealer in the world, but our gun crime is a fraction of the gun crime in the US, most of which is gang related. So I can only assume the reason why gun crime is so high is the factor that American citizens have easy access to weapons than here in the UK.

You really need to watch this video which compares the US and UK crime rates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmKenGxxlB0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Snookie]

Maybe it's just me, but I thought that Piers looked very uncomfortable & nervous at the end of the first video. He sort of regrouped after the commercial ... He must have had some coaching during the break. What a shill. I predicted his ratings would increase after AJ's appearance, and that he would beat this subject to death. Has he talked about anything else since? Not sure as I refuse to help his ratings.

[Bill Ryan]

So I can only assume the reason why gun crime is so high is the factor that American citizens have easy access to weapons than here in the UK.

Gun crime statistics, yes. But that's only part of the story. Scroll towards the bottom of this article for more on the UK.

http://infowars.com/statistics-prove-more-guns-less-crime

Statistics Prove: More Guns, Less Crime

Despite the onslaught of media propaganda in support of the Obama administration’s anti-second amendment agenda in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook school shooting, the statistics clearly illustrate that gun control does not reduce violent crime and in fact has the opposite effect.

http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/january2013/070113graph1.JPG
Source: FBI Uniform Crime Reports.


As the graph above highlights, according to the latest figures obtained by the FBI (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime), violent crime offenses in the United States have been falling since 2007. The five year trend clearly shows that, despite there being an ongoing national debate about gun violence in America, violent crime itself is actually becoming less of a problem.



The graph below from the Department of Justice also highlights the fact that over the last 40 years, the amount of guns in America per 1000 people has increased, whereas serious violent crimes have decreased.

http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/january2013/070113graph2.gif

In addition, despite the media drumbeat that murders involving guns represent the number one safety threat to American citizens, the reality is completely the opposite.


Amongst the “top ten killers” in the United States, homicide by firearms is at the bottom of the list, according to figures from the CDC and the FBI. Almost 20 times more people die in the United States from medical errors than they do from firearm homicides, but there is no outcry to slap draconian regulations on the medical industry.

http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/january2013/070113graph4.JPG


In addition, the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs in the United States routinely outpaces the number of homicides committed using a rifle (http://www.infowars.com/more-people-killed-with-hammers-and-clubs-than-rifles/). Should US lawmakers introduce urgent legislation to outlaw hammers and baseball bats?



The figures clearly illustrate that rising gun ownership does not cause a rise in violent crime.


Look at Chicago, which in 1982 passed a ban on all handguns except for those registered with the city before the ban was enacted.


http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/january2013/030113graph.jpg


Since the handgun ban took effect, the number of murders in Chicago committed using handguns has been 40% higher than before the ban (http://www.justfacts.com/images/guncontrol/chicago_handguns.png), and has spiked even higher in recent years, proving that the gun ban actually served to cause an increase in violent crime.



In comparison, let’s take a look at Britain, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world. Given that one of the most vocal advocates for gun control in the aftermath of Sandy Hook has been a British citizen – Piers Morgan – who has used his platform on CNN to attack the second amendment, the contrast is illuminating.



Despite the fact that it is virtually impossible for an average citizen to obtain a gun through legal channels in Britain, the rate of violent crime in the UK is higher per capita than the US (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-25671/Violent-crime-worse-Britain-US.html) and the highest in the world amongst “rich” countries aside from Australia, which also instituted a draconian gun ban in the 1990′s.



Preventing law-abiding people from owning guns clearly has no impact on violent crime, and if anything causes it to rise because the criminals know their victims will not be able to defend themselves.



In addition, you are more than twice as likely to be a victim of knife crime in the UK (http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=1323) than you are a victim of gun crime in the United States, but there is no media debate about banning kitchen knives.



Despite virtually all handguns being outlawed in 1996 following the Dunblane school massacre in Scotland, with law-abiding people people rushing to turn in their firearms, over the next decade gun crime in the UK more than doubled (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1450338/Firearms-offences-more-than-double-since-Dunblane.html). This proves that while law-abiding citizens willingly disarmed themselves, criminals were unfazed by the new laws and continued to use guns illegally. Therefore gun control only disarms innocent people since criminals do not follow the law.



As the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html) recently noted, “Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven’t made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres.”



In summary, despite a widespread ban on gun ownership in the United Kingdom, it is the most dangerous place to live in terms of violent crime in the entire western world.


Another country where violent crime and rapes are soaring is India, recently in the news because of the tragic death of a woman who was gang raped and savagely beaten in New Delhi.



India has a gun control policy just as draconian as the United Kingdom, and despite Indian women begging the police to allow them to own firearms for personal protection, the vast majority of license applications have been rejected (http://www.prisonplanet.com/indian-women-turn-to-guns-after-gang-rape-outcry.html), leaving women defenseless against rapists and murderers.



Now let’s take a look at a country which is geographically-speaking a stone’s throw away from the United Kingdom – Switzerland.



With a population of just six million, Switzerland has 2 million publicly-owned firearms. Despite the fact that guns are everywhere in Switzerland and are a deeply-ingrained part of Swiss culture, the gun crime rate “is so low that statistics are not even kept,” reports the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1566715.stm).



Indeed, with its population of law-abiding armed citizens, Switzerland is one of the safest countries to live (http://travelsplendid.com/read-me/top-10-safest-countries-in-the-world/) in the entire world, with homicide rates at just 2.2 people per 100,000.



So the UK is one of the most dangerous places to live in the developed world, while Switzerland is one of the safest, and yet Switzerland is a nation of gun owners. How then can we possibly conclude that gun control reduces violent crime when in virtually every instance it has proven to have the opposite effect?



The figures clearly show that gun control does not reduce violent crime, and in fact only emboldens criminals to use guns illegally – safe in the knowledge that their victims have been disarmed courtesy of government legislation.



Recent cases involving law abiding citizens in America, largely ignored by the mass media, who have exercised their second amendment right to prevent a crime and save lives, emphasize this reality, including an incident (http://www.infowars.com/media-ignores-shooting-stopped-by-law-abiding-gun-owner/) just two days after the Connecticut massacre during which a gunman entered a theater in San Antonio after killing his ex-girlfriend but was shot dead by an off duty policewoman.



In addition, last month’s mall shooting in Oregon (http://www.prisonplanet.com/armed-citizen-not-police-prevented-massacre-in-oregon.html)was brought to an end when 22-year-old Nick Meli, who has a concealed carry permit, pulled a gun on the killer, prompting masked shooter Jacob Tyler Roberts to use his final bullet on himself.



In both cases, the media virtually ignored the fact that potential massacres were stopped by responsible Americans using firearms. Similar cases emerge on a weekly basis, including another incident on Friday (http://www.infowars.com/another-gun-story-you-wont-be-hearing-about-on-tv-news/) where a woman in Atlanta defended herself and her young children against an intruder by using a legally owned firearm.



The National Safety Council notes (http://www.nsc.org/Pages/Home.aspx) that guns are used some 2.5 million times a year in self defense against criminals, meaning that firearms are utilized to protect innocent lives in 80 times more cases than they are used to end lives.



These figures, not just from America but from other countries around the world, send a clear and consistent message - gun control actually increases violent crime, more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens equals less crime, and only by allowing responsible, law-abiding people to be armed and not by disarming the victims can we hope to prevent or lessen the scale of future tragedies like the Sandy Hook massacre.

[white wizard]

Nothing like a hot brunette telling off a NWO puppet, I think I just fell in love

hahahha ;)

[Alan]

I believe it's pointless to compare crime rates between countries/cultures; there's too many variables in play. The are cultures with lots of guns and little crime (Switzerland), and no guns and little crime (Japan).

IMO, for purposes of this debate the only statistics worth discussing are, when we can examine a single country/state/city, and look how changing laws in that region affect crime. Examples are Australia and Chicago.

[RMorgan]

I believe it's pointless to compare crime rates between countries/cultures; there's too many variables in play. The are cultures with lots of guns and little crime (Switzerland), and no guns and little crime (Japan).

IMO, for purposes of this debate the only statistics worth discussing are, when we can examine a single country/state/city, and look how changing laws in that region affect crime. Examples are Australia and Chicago.

An there are countries like my beloved Brazil, where no guns are allowed and has one of the biggest rates of gun deaths in the world, if not the biggest.

How come people aren´t allowed to have guns, but so many people die from bullet wounds?

Well, I suspect the criminals, by nature, don´t care much about breaking the law and buying guns from black markets...

Since Brazil has a a 16.000 Km land border and a 10.000 Km maritime border, I guess it´s impossible for the authorities to effectively control what comes in and goes out, including guns, lots of guns.

So, independently from the cultural difference, which is abysmal, I believe the same thing would happen in the US if they prohibit guns.

The bad guys will buy them anyway and the good guys will be turned into prisoners in their own homes. That´s pretty much what happens here. I´m not joking.

My house is inside a 560 square meters lot, surrounded by 7 meters high walls with electric fence on top of it, with two trained Dogo Argentino dogs,with steel bars on every window and reinforced locks on every door. Basically, I live in a prison.

I find it to be surreal whenever I watch a Hollywood movie and see those amazing suburban houses, no walls...just green grassed front yards and kids playing in the street...The American Dream...

PS: I don´t want to make Brazil look like a bad country. It isn´t. We have no snow, no hurricanes or tornadoes, no earthquakes, no volcanoes, no FEMA camps, no CIA, NSA,TSA, NRA, DHL or George W Bush... Oh, and our Central Bank is still public, not private. :)

[modwiz]

The right to bare arms,

I think anyone has the right to bare arms. weather permitting, in any country. The right to bear arms is another discussion entirely. I had a choice to pick on your logic or English. I chose the latter. :jester:

[andrewgreen]

Interestingly a linguistic expert analysed the constitution. Her findings were fairly interesting and sheds a more objective light on the situation. It was based on America's military which has evolved in a way completely different to the times of the Founding Fathers.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?54464-Piers-Morgan-Crushed-by-Dana-Loesch-Scottie-Hughes-on-Gun-Control-Debate-

Expert opinion: Does the US amendment really give citizens the right to bear arms?

The right to bear arms is frequently cited by adversaries of gun control laws
Why is personal gun ownership so vigorously defended by so many people?
Dr Liz Morrish
The second amendment was not drafted with a view to providing untrained civilians with unfettered access to the assault weapon of their choice.
Dr Liz Morrish
I spent the recent Winter Break in the USA, arriving in New York on the day of the appalling mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. It seemed from the voices of outrage that this incident might open the way to reform of the permissive laws on gun ownership in the US. Indeed, a whole week passed before any sign of 'pushback' from the politically powerful National Rifle Association.

I listened to the Vice President of America's National Rifle Association, Wayne Lapierre, defending what he assumed is his constitutional right to bear arms. To this speaker, it is a Right which is hardly necessary to justify, and brazenly, in the certainty of his analysis, he proclaimed, "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

This may seem an absurdity to most people in Europe where gun ownership is restricted by law, but in the USA it is well received by a large proportion of the population whose gun ownership rates are 88.8 per 100 people. Indeed CNN were claiming that there are more gun sale outlets in the US than all supermarkets and McDonalds burger restaurants combined. How did guns become so essential to American culture? Why is personal gun ownership so vigorously defended by so many people?

The NRA is fond of pointing to the US Constitution's Second Amendment which is said to guarantee the citizen's right to bear arms, but rarely is the full text of the amendment quoted. What the statute actually says is: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The right to bear arms is frequently cited by proponents and adversaries of gun control laws, but in the weeks after the Newtown tragedy, I did not hear any mention of the important first clause.

I am not writing as an expert on constitutional law, rather, I write as a linguist versed in English grammar. There are three things to note about the construction of this statute: firstly, the initial clause ("A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state…") is a reason-type subordinate clause - it provides the justification for the provision of the main clause. Secondly, we note that this clause is non-finite - it contains no tensed verb - and this usually gives the proposition a general applicability. Thirdly, and most importantly, the clause is placed first, and so fulfils the grammatical role of theme and focus of the sentence. In layman's terms, this first clause is the most important bit of the sentence.

For the founding fathers of the US constitution to have laid so heavy an emphasis on a "well-regulated militia" suggests that this was considered the necessary and appropriate context for the keeping and bearing of arms. They might have envisaged a situation similar to that found in Switzerland where young adult males are expected to serve in a people's militia, and to keep their weapons at home as part of their military obligations, in a state which has no standing army. We can be sure that the second amendment was not drafted with a view to providing untrained civilians with unfettered access to the assault weapon of their choice. At some point, the US state decided to entrust its defence to a national professional military arm, not a civilian militia.

It is unfathomable that Members of Congress could attempt to justify the routine arming of teachers. It is already common to find US college campuses employing their own armed police force. We can only hope that they are "well regulated", but the consequences of both police and students having guns is a prospect I'm glad we do not face in the UK generally.

The US quite rightly defends its Constitution vigorously, but the language of the statute ensures that there need be no undermining of its wisdom in order to bring about serious restriction on gun ownership.

Dr Liz Morrish
Principal lecturer
School of Arts and Humanities

[TargeT]

The right to bare arms,

I think anyone has the right to bare arms. weather permitting, in any country. The right to bear arms is another discussion entirely. I had a choice to pick on your logic or English. I chose the latter. :jester:

http://makemelaugh.com/pics/The-Right-To-Bear-Arms.jpg

anyone who actually looks into this topic will find that the more able a population is to protect itself the better off they are.

the less restrictions a population has the better, it is propaganda driven stories that say other wise.


We are responsible individuals when allowed to be, when not allowed to be we (humans) have a small tendency to act like spoiled children or wild primates.

[Lettherebelight]

Interesting how, in this interview, Piers Morgan seems to have taken a feather from the cap of Alex Jones regarding debating etiquette (or the lack thereof?)...

He did his best to talk over the girls and corner them into traps of semantics, but I agree, the ladies handled it very well indeed.

In the end, Piers lost his temper with his little tantrum and overall, he came out looking all the more like, well,

...'a hatchet man for the New World Order'!!

Touché!

[Hervé]

From: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/03/FBI-More-People-Killed-With-Hammers-and-Clubs-Each-Year-Than-With-Rifles

According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.

This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats' feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.

However, it appears the zeal of Sens. like Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) is misdirected. For in looking at the FBI numbers from 2005 to 2011, the number of murders by hammers and clubs consistently exceeds the number of murders committed with a rifle.

Think about it: In 2005 (http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_08.html), the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.

And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.

For example, in 2011 (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11), there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs.

While the FBI makes is clear that some of the "murder by rifle" numbers could be adjusted up slightly, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it does not change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein's dreaded rifle.

Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists (http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_08.html) each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.

The bottom line: A rifle ban is as illogical as it is unconstitutional. We face far greater danger from individuals armed with carpenters' tools and a caveman's stick.

And it seems fairly obvious that if more people had a gun, less people would be inclined to try to hit them in the head with a hammer.
***************************************************************


PS: for some reasons, frying pans and rolling pins haven't been included in that picture.

[Hervé]

Although the following is coming from "Before It's News," the study seems to be legit:

Essential Gun Charts And Facts No Matter Which Side Of Firearms Control You Support (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)
Sunday, December 16, 2012 11:12

(Before It's News) (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)
The guiding gun control legislation in the United States is the Gun Control Act 1968 (this is Federal legislation only: each US state and territory enacts its own gun law) The estimated total number of guns held by civilians in the United States is 270,000,000. The rate of private gun ownership in the United States is 88.8 firearms per 100 people
The defense forces of the United States are reported to have 3,054,553(3 (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)) firearms. Police in the United States are reported to have 897,400(4) (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html) firearms.

World’s Highest 25: Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population
http://www.gunpolicy.org//images/gpo/charts/1306297968FC_World_s_Highest_25___Rate_of_Civilian_Firearm_Possession_per_100_Population.PNG
Credit: GunPolicy.org

World’s Highest 25: Rate of Gun Homicide per 100,000 People
http://www.gunpolicy.org//images/gpo/charts/1306297044FC_World___s_Highest_25___Rate_of_Gun_Homicide_per_100_000_People.PNG
Credit: GunPolicy.org

High Income Countries: Rate of Unintentional Gun Death per 100,000 People

http://www.gunpolicy.org//images/gpo/charts/1306300275FC_High_Income_Countries___Rate_of_Unintentional_Gun_Death_per_100_000_People.PNG
Credit: GunPolicy.org

High Income Countries: Rate of Gun Suicide per 100,000 People

http://www.gunpolicy.org//images/gpo/charts/1306300275FC_High_Income_Countries___Rate_of_Unintentional_Gun_Death_per_100_000_People.PNG
Credit: GunPolicy.org

In the United States, annual firearm homicides total

2009: 9,146 7 (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6078389722268452220)
2008: 9,484 10 (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6078389722268452220) 7 (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6078389722268452220)
2007: 10,129
2006: 10,225
2005: 10,158
2004: 9,385
2003: 9,659 7 (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6078389722268452220)
2002: 9,369 11 (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6078389722268452220)
2001: 8,890
1999: 8,259 6 (http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6078389722268452220)
1998: 9,257

Credit: GunPolicy.org

In the United States, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is
2009: 2.98 5 (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html) 7 (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)
2008: 3.12
2007: 3.36
2006: 3.42
2005: 3.43
2004: 3.20
2003: 3.3 7 (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)
2002: 3.25 11 (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)
2001: 3.12
1999: 2.97 6 (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)
1998: 3.37
1993: 7.07 12 (http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/12/essential-gun-charts-and-facts-no-matter-which-side-of-firearms-control-you-support-2476996.html)

Credit: GunPolicy.org

Table 1.3: Ranking of world’s small arms producers [by sales]

1) Major producers: China, Russia, United States;

2) Medium producers: Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Egypt, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, United Kingdom;

3) Small producers: Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Indonesia, Japan, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Thailand, Ukraine, Venezuela, Yugoslavia;

4) Unassessed producers (Inadequate information currently available to permit ranking): Albania, Algeria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cuba, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Guinea, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Morocco, Myanmar, Nigeria, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Vietnam, Zimbabwe.

Source cited: Appendix 1.1



The Small Arms Survey 2012: Moving Targets looks at what is changing, and not changing, in relation to armed violence and small arms proliferation. Chapters on firearm homicide in Latin America and the Caribbean, drug violence in selected Latin American countries, and non-lethal violence worldwide illustrate that security is a moving target; armed violence continues to undermine security and well-being around the world. The goal of curbing small arms proliferation, embodied in the UN Programme of Action, appears similarly elusive. Chapters on illicit small arms in war zones, trade transparency, Somali piracy, and the 2011 UN Meeting of Governmental Experts highlight some of the successes and challenges in this area. Country studies examine Kazakhstan and Somaliland. The final installment of the authorized transfers project looks at the total value of exports and imports globally, including small arms and light weapons, ammunition, and parts and accessories.
http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/publications/by-type/yearbook/small-arms-survey-2012.html

[Fred Steeves]

A question I've yet seen discussed anywhere, is who gives governments, supposedly serving their people, permission to shop with an unlimited credit card at "Weapons Unlimited"?

[mosquito]

Please note well - Despite being in exile myself, I think I can speak for the majority of my fellow countrymen when I say ....

We DO NOT want him back !! Keep him, or export hime somewhere else, Mars springs to mind.

[Ol' Roy]

To voice my esteemed colleues from Great Britain, they don't want him back. ( from another tread).

[jagman]

Unfortunately it looks like were stuck with him. Thanks Great Britain. lol We need to send one of our meatheads over to Geat Britain, To see how they like it.

[Lazlo]

Piers Morgan will be forever remembered as the rabid anti gunner and when this blows over so will his career. He hitched his wagon to this pony.

Anybody remember Geraldo Rivera? Piers Morgan is in the same category. Can you imagine Walter Cronkite behaving like that on air?

It is actually tragically comic. The more he rants and raves, the longer the lines get at the gun dealers. We could pull together some statistics, put them in a professional format, stick a name on the bottom of it like Americans for Sensible Gun Debate and "prove" that Piers Morgan is responsible for firearms proliferation in the American suburbs.

If I can find some free time it would be worth the laugh.

Mark Twain: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

People are going to believe what they like when it comes to an emotionally charged topic like the second amendment.

One more point I'd like to make:

Both sides of the debate like to talk about what the founding fathers intended. If the far left interpreted the second amendment in the same way that they interpret the other nine amendments in the Bill Of Rights, they would conclude that every able bodied person in America was REQUIRED to own a firearm.

[WhiteFeather]

They made an Ass-Clown out of him. Photo Enclosed. Piers got schooled nicely by the ladies. Wow....The brunette didn't come up for air. Nice Job!

Ladies 1 Piers 0.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1JNgwCKStTk/UPWk6YTFFeI/AAAAAAAAFFk/zJiUwTsA3SQ/s1600/piers_morgan.jpg

[ExomatrixTV]

I post this SPECIALLY for people who claim that "The People" can do "nothing" against Government Tyranny:

Paul R. Howe quote:

~I have quietly watched and evaluated the in pouring of e-mails reference the liberal’s intent to seize guns and crush the second amendment. I want to add a few of my own thoughts on this issue as

I have worked in and around all the people who could be tasked to seize your guns.



WHO’S COMING TO GET THEM?




United Nations (UN)?

We are the UN. Other countries mostly join the U.N. to secure money, funding and training and few have any offensive combat capability. Most serve as guards at static locations and have no will to fight. America is the enforcement arm of the U.N. We have the money, equipment, personnel and lift platforms to get the job done.
If the president ever let the U.N. in this country, it would be a foreign invasion and armed Americans would stand up and crush them in a day. Our government would break down and the president would be ousted for letting foreign militaries invade our country.



Federal Government Military?

Having served over 20 years in our military, I know that most soldiers would refuse the order to take part in the confiscation of weapons. First, the president would have to give the order, which is an “Illegal Order” in violation of the constitution. I don’t believe that service members would go back into the communities that raised them and conduct raids on good Americans in violation of the constitution.
Remember, these forces would have to come from a military base that is surrounded and supported by American communities. Civilians would simply cease to support the bases and they would fold in a short time. Cut of the fuel, food, electricity on bases and this would stop the silliness. Also, many, many service members live in the communities and they would have to travel from their houses to base unless they were locked down. In that case, their families would still be in the community and people would not be too friendly to those supporting these actions.



Federal Government DHS or TSA?

The Federal government is not large enough or talented enough to seize guns. If they were to do 5-8 raids a day seizing guns, they would be physically and mentally exhausted and need a break. Physically conducting raids is exhausting. After the first few raids, the word would get out and Americans would start to fight back. It would take one good ambush from a house or along a travel route to decimate a tactical force or make it combat ineffective
Next, most Federal Agencies work out of a fixed location centrally located in a community. Also, their personnel live in those communities along with their families. Once the word got out that they were doing raids in violation to the constitution, they and their families would be at risk. If they were to start raiding houses, kicking in doors and breaking in windows looking for legally owned guns, their homes would be subject to the same treatment by Americans rising up to defend themselves. They would shortly find themselves without a place to live.


State Law Enforcement?

The Governor would have to order State and Local Law Enforcement to either:


Seize guns
Ignore the Federal Orders


If they ignore the Federal Orders, things would be tense, but people would be civil. If they started to seize guns, they only have limited people and assets to do this. Much the same consequences would take place as with the Federal Government.



Local Law Enforcement?

Local Police and Sheriff Departments are the backbone of who protects American Citizens. A Sheriff or Chief of Police would have to give the order for his people to begin to seize weapons. Their people would either comply or see it as an illegal order and refuse.
Remember, Chiefs and Sheriff’s also have to live and work in the same communities they serve. As I described with the Federal Government, local Tactical Teams could probably only do 8-10 hits in a day and then need a break. So they hit ten houses and seize their guns, the word would get out and now they are subject to living in the same community as those they are attacking. It would not go well. Also, after one or two determined Americans or combat vets fought back, the team would lose many to death or injury and they would have made a decision whether to continue to push the fight. Remember also, they have to sleep sometime. Their homes and families would be at risk. It is an ugly scenario at best.
Nation of Combat Veterans and Patriots
Having been at war for over 10 years, we have a nation of combat vets and contractors that have seen more action than many of our WWII vets. It has been said that only a small percentage of Americans stood up to the British War machine in the Revolutionary War. Americans are better armed and trained today than at any time in our nation’s history. Think about what would happen if just our nation’s veterans stood up. People have been buying more guns and ammunition in the past five years than any time in my life. The guns and ammunition are out there along with the talent to use them.



Kool-Aid Drinkers?

Kool-Aid Drinkers is the term I use to describe the Jonestown voluntarily massacre where the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project, a dedicated community western Guyana by the Peoples Temple led by cult leader Jim Jones intentionally drank poison Kool-Aid. Over 900 people died.


In every law enforcement, government and military agency or branch, there are a small number of Kool-Aid drinkers who would blindly follow orders. They would either be purged internally by their co-workers or people they attacked would stop their gene pool.
Also, at the police tactical team level, all members “volunteer” for the job and they can have the individual integrity to terminate their team service at any time if their profession becomes corrupt or misguided. I know many a good officer that has done that in the past.
Finally, there would be a certain number of American Kool-Aid drinkers that would turn in their weapons if asked. I believe it would be a small percentage as there are always those that do not have the will to resist or fight and they are not needed should thing get tough.


History of “Gun-Free Zones”?

Our nation’s history is filled with examples of “gun-free” zones failed.
The Aurora Colorado movie massacre and the recent Connecticut shooting are two that come to mind. Also, remember the Fort Hood massacre where an Islamic extremist Major Nidal Malik Hasan killed 13 soldiers because our military bases are gun free zones. Combat trained soldiers had to be rescued by a security guard. That is embarrassing.

Evil came to all of these places and everyone was disarmed and not ready to fight back because they were gun free zones.
Think what would happen at a national level if the American people were disarmed. Another evil would come along either from inside our country or outside of it and resulting in our downfall.



How about others in recent history:

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

Solutions

Write your state representatives and let them know how you feel about this issue. I would like to think that most states would refuse the order.


Next, at the local level, talk to your Sheriff or Chief of Police and ask them if they would allow or support the federal government in their confiscation of firearms. Put them on the spot now and hold them accountable. I like to think that most states would refuse the order.
Should firearm confiscation begin, solutions are simple. If they cannot live in a community, they cannot work in a community. If their house goes away while they are at work confiscating guns, so be it. Allow them to leave with their family and what possessions they can pack in their car. Point them to California and let them know all the Hollywood types would be happy to financially support them in the fantasy land they wish to live in and that they are not welcome in Free America.
In the end I believe that guns are the glue that hold our country together. Guns keep the government in check and the individual American safe and free. Remove guns and the government will no longer be controlled by the people. The government will control the people.


Finally, it is claimed that the Battles of Lexington and Concord, in 1775 were started because General Gage attempted to carry out an order by the British government to disarm the population resulting in the “Shot heard round the world.”



About the Author:

Paul R. Howe is a 20-year veteran and former Special Operations soldier and instructor. He owns Combat Shooting and Tactics (CSAT), where he consults with, trains and evaluates law enforcement and government agencies in technical and tactical techniques throughout the special operations spectrum. See combatshootingandtactics.com (http://www.combatshootingandtactics.com/) for details.

[TigaHawk]

If someone really wants to kill someone, it doesnt matter if guns are banned or not. They are still going to do it, but instead they'll use a knife, or a blunt object, or household chemicals, or a small bomb. Removing guns from the US would be making it like Australia in a way. Noone but the people you dont want to have the guns actually has them, this being the "bad people" and the police.


That guy, Piers Morgan? Televion and people like him that appear on it are the very reason mine is not connected to the wall. It cant get Free TV, and i dont have or want pay tv.


How can people seriously like that show? Is it for people that need reassurance that only 1 form of opinion is right (his?) ?? Is he so stopid that he realy got brickwalled by two women because they diddnt answer his questions in the way he wanted (specifically giving the answer that he wanted..) that he had to stop and just re-iterate the same thing over and over while becoming louder and more aggressive?


Oh wait... that's how the police generaly shout orders and react the same should you have an opinion/thoughts on anything different to their own? only they can pull a gun or a tazer out and get physicall to re-assure themselves of their power status, This Peirs fella can only get red faced and demand your guns be taken from you for a petty reason.

[ExomatrixTV]

Video 2:

~[Piers quote 6:05] "okay I hear you" [unquote] extremely rare that he admits he actually listens, even if he DID listen, he does not allow any sentence to be finished talking over/through the conversation looking at his key-questions card to go to the next topic, most likely written by editorial staff creating trick-questions using Orwellian double-speak techniques + leading (supposedly) "rhetorical" questions full of false assumptions CLAIMING to do a "journalistic" interview HILARIOUS!

[Piers quote: 6:39] "it makes me sick" [unquote] you mean you already are sick to begin with Piers!

~question: ... how many know that Piers Morgan is Pro Torture & Pro Drone Wars? (with lots of dead children because of it) ... and on top of that Piers is Pro Drone-Wars (where many innocent children died!) AND he approves of Government to be allowed to use Torture!Is there any video available that Piers openly apologized & changed his mind that serves the people interest not the wanking banksters agenda?

Piers is the PERFECT NWO Minion aka salesman for Global Enslavement Mentality!

cheers,
John

[ExomatrixTV]

~Hitler, NDAA & Fema Camps [Warning Dark NwoSatire!] 2013 Gun Control = 1938 German Weapons Act 2.0

oWQSb_w3LH0

[bogeyman]

As I said on Infowars.com, send Piers Morgan to Mongolia.

[scanner]

To voice my esteemed colleues from Great Britain, they don't want him back. ( from another tread).Yes we want Morgan back , so we can prosecute him for his crimes in the UK and send him to prison where he belongs .

[TargeT]

As I said on Infowars.com, send Piers Morgan to Mongolia.

why ruin that beautiful country?

Rolling hills and nomatic horse people would not mix well with an english pompus-ass-clown

[Star Tsar]

Hey BrianEn

We don't want him mate!

:happy:

[ozarkflyfisherman]

I live in St. Louis, Missouri...I love having Dana here in town.

[bogeyman]

And who was the original Americas? The Indians was it not?

[DeDukshyn]

One thing that tic's me off about this guy is he has the nerve to ask his audience how they feel. It's his audience, they agree with him, that's why they are there. Duh!

Deduk, It's even worce than that, the ship that went down was not the Titanic. It was an insurance job on the Olympic which has been proven by a French film crew. It's a fact.

Yes, you are correct, I was simplifying the story -- it gets really interesting when one starts to dig into it ... ;) I recommend that research path for anyone who wants to understand more about how the path of the earth was completely hijacked from its original course by a handful of greedy "elite" criminals, for the sole purpose of wealth, power and control over others.

[ExomatrixTV]

And who was the original Americas? The Indians was it not?

... it was the European people that came up with the name "Indians" ... you know why? simple they thought there must be a faster or different route to India using Sailing Ships ... Dutch/British VoC was the first Global Corporation of its kind using all kinds of international trading routes in 1600s & 1700s ... they were looking for a better route to India, Suez Canal did not existed back then, so they had to go all the way to South Africa and then to India!

So when you use the name "Indians" it is a double error ... 1st: The Natives Called themselves different and it was not even India, what a terrible Joke (& insult to our intelligence) it is.

cheers,
John

[jupiter]

We have so called journalists in Australia exactly the same, full of ego and self importance,funny enough one even has the same first name,now you know why I don`t watch the news or have read a paper in over 10 years,They are all full of SH....T .
If this interviewer thinks that the sound of his droning monotone passes as journalism he needs to get a refund on his uni coarse
Kind regards James

[bogeyman]

Is it the gun that is a problem in this debate or people's freedom to choose?

[Akasha]

Here's another one for Piers to chew on:

evEg1VNfX3o

[boja]

Speaking as somebody who was born and lived all my life in England (I'm old now),

PLEASE do us a favour and keep Piers Morgan over there.

(Sorry to inflict him on you).

[778 neighbour of some guy]

Jezus Christ, i have watched that interview just now, Pierce Morgan is such an inflated pedantic prick, i cant believe that guy has even landed a single job as an interviewer, he not tenacious, he's obnoxious, deaf to others peoples arguments, a know it all, pompous, ill informed, snotty and etc etc etc, what a dick!!! @#%$#@#&^* Sore loser!!!!!!!!!

[Bill Ryan]

Jezus Christ, i have watched that interview just now, Pierce Morgan is such an inflated pedantic prick, i cant believe that guy has even landed a single job as an interviewer, he not tenacious, he's obnoxious, deaf to others peoples arguments, a know it all, pompous, ill informed, snotty and etc etc etc, what a dick!!! @#%$#@#&^* Sore loser!!!!!!!!!

You should watch the interview with Ben Shapiro. :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJdhAm_oUUs
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LJdhAm_oUUs

... and this one with Larry Pratt:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_we43-q7C7g
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_we43-q7C7g

[778 neighbour of some guy]

I think anyone has the right to bare arms. weather permitting,

For some reason i read that out loud with a bad Scottish accent.

I almost sh@t myself, please do not do that again, you have no idea how my mind works.

[778 neighbour of some guy]

Jezus Christ, i have watched that interview just now, Pierce Morgan is such an inflated pedantic prick, i cant believe that guy has even landed a single job as an interviewer, he not tenacious, he's obnoxious, deaf to others peoples arguments, a know it all, pompous, ill informed, snotty and etc etc etc, what a dick!!! @#%$#@#&^* Sore loser!!!!!!!!!

You should watch the interview with Ben Shapiro. :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJdhAm_oUUs
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LJdhAm_oUUs

... and this one with Larry Pratt:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_we43-q7C7g
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_we43-q7C7g

Thanks Bill, That Ben Shapiro is an amazing young guy, he did really good in that interview so did Mr Pratt ( no family of the Pratt school founders i hope), I truly hope the American audience sees through Piers because that man is a complete sell out and a total fraude, its embarrasing to watch the man impose his views and opinions on others, the word mouthpiece of tptb ( and a dumb one) fits the man like a glove ( a latex glove that is), this guy is for sale to the moraly lowest bidder.

Its amazing how expressionless his face is while starting arguments ( do not let that man go near schools or assault rifles) if i had kids i would tell them to get in the car with the stranger if they had to choose between Pierce or the stranger, yechh.

[DevilPigeon]

The right to bare arms,

I think anyone has the right to bare arms. weather permitting, in any country. The right to bear arms is another discussion entirely. I had a choice to pick on your logic or English. I chose the latter. :jester:

It's my considered opinion that only bears have the right to bear arms :p

[DevilPigeon]

-----

I squirm watching Morgan, I think he should be deported (but not back to the UK thank you very much!)

His "guests", whenever being talked-down/insulted/mocked etc, should simply ask him how many email accounts he's illegally hacked into recently.

[jackovesk]

Keep it up 'Piss-Off Morgan', you are doing a 'Fantastic Job' at 'Waking Up & Reminding' the American people of their 'Constitutional Right' to bear arms...:thumb:

Those Girl's just smoked you on 'National TV'...:pound:

OMG, I thought you were going to :cry: again...:no:

[Pam]

I think the irony of this is that Piers sounds as ranting as Alex Jon did this time around....

[boja]

Unfortunately, if somebody wants to kill a large number of people -- they can do it with a car (automobile).

Even banning guns completely, would NOT solve the problem.

[Borden]

What I don't understand is how Piers Morgan thinks he has a right to go to another country and start lecturing them on their laws, their constitution. Quite apart from any argument about firearms, which as a non-American I wouldn't dream of engaging ... this glaring anomaly baffles me. Ah, or is it that odious little people lacking in the charisma one would normally expect of such figures lack the wit to see that their mysterious and very temporary position is usually a means to an end?

To all American members ... please do not judge the British by this man! I'm British, and his tone, demeanour and methods of 'argument' make me nauseous and angry. I feel insulted on your behalf.

[RMorgan]

What I don't understand is how Piers Morgan thinks he has a right to go to another country and start lecturing them on their laws, their constitution. Quite apart from any argument about firearms, which as a non-American I wouldn't dream of engaging ... this glaring anomaly baffles me. Ah, or is it that odious little people lacking in the charisma one would normally expect of such figures lack the wit to see that their mysterious and very temporary position is usually a means to an end?

To all American members ... please do not judge the British by this man! I'm British, and his tone, demeanour and methods of 'argument' make me nauseous and angry. I feel insulted on your behalf.

I agree mate, and please, don´t judge all the Morgans by this man as well! There are good Morgans around! ;)

Anyway, Americans should retaliate!

How about sending an American journalist to the UK, to interview people on live TV about the ignorance of supporting an extremely expensive, luxurious and useless monarchy, considering that we´re in the 21th century and going through a global economic crisis?

Raf.

[humanalien]

What i find hard to believe is, how is CNN getting
away with harboring a fugitive from justice.

Piers is wanted in the UK for hacking emails, so why
isn't the UK demanding that Piers be deported back
to the UK, to answer for his crimes?

Something just isn't right with this whole thing.

Then to have a foreigner, over here on american soil
and trashing our laws, is another matter. If one american
went to the UK and started trashing their laws, that person
would find himself or herself being promptly shipped back
to america, in the fastest possible way.

[Borden]

Hahaha, perfect! Do you know what? I think an American might at least have a right to a say in that regard, historically! Let the name of Morgan be redeemed! And slug-like climbers on TV whose venality and insincerity is so obviously written into their every gesture and word had better not be called Borden or I'll get really annoyed!

(Edit: this is a reply to RMorgan ... but things are moving quicker than my fingers in the sub-zero temperatures we have in my part of England right now)

[Ultima Thule]

I actually had to step down from my ascended status to be able to feel that immature joy out of Piers´ despair and go haa-haa!!!!!

Now, if you´ll excuse me, I´ll dematerialize again.

UT

[778 neighbour of some guy]

There are good Morgans around!

I know a Captain Morgan, we are best buddies;), nice guy, always remembers to turn the light of in the fridge when he leaves, I always see him coming, never see him leave, really weird, always leaves me a bucket at my bedside or the couch( like i decide to go wash some windows in my sleep). Meh!

[Rex]

I find it interesting that Piers is the best guy that the MSM can come up with. I would think a person in Pier's shoes would carry more weight if they were a US citizen. Feels a little desperate at times on their part.

[DevilPigeon]

I find it interesting that Piers is the best guy that the MSM can come up with. I would think a person in Pier's shoes would carry more weight if they were a US citizen. Feels a little desperate at times on their part.

I find it interesting that the arrogant, sleazy, conceited belly-crawling buffoon is given a platform at all! The lowlights of his CV read as thus:


Ex-editor of one of the UK's sleaziest red-top tabloid newspapers;
Implicated in the illegal hacking of email accounts;
Judge on "Britain's got talent" (and "America's got talent"...??? I really don't know/care...)


And now it seems the poodle's latest mission is to "debate" (and I use that term loosely, considering his arrogant, brusque manner) gun control in the US. Just how conceited is that? A UK citizen daring to dictate the political/constitutional affairs of another nation!!!

[aranuk]

Peirs Morgan has been hired as a hitman for the PTB to disarm the American people for the imminent civil war TPTB want to instigate. These automatic guns they want banned are most likely the ones they don't want to face when it comes down to a gun battle with foreign troops against American citizens fighting to protect their families. The rat face! Send him back to England to face the charges against him of phone tapping etc to get a good story on the front page of his newspaper.

Stan

[ExomatrixTV]

Real Gun Control

UA5UC1pPvjI

[jackovesk]

I think the irony of this is that Piers sounds as ranting as Alex Jon did this time around....

A comment like that, just shows how little you actually know of 'What Real Impact' Alex's 'Truth Rant' actually had on the American Psyche...:no:

In other words this smilie somes up exactly what little understanding you have on the 'Truth'..!

:noidea: Smilie Translation if you did'nt know already what it means...

'NO IDEA'..!!!

[sigma6]

I think this whole gun debate is quite fascinating.
After all it is an essential question within our current society. And even after taking leaps forward and projecting humankind into the future, maybe not every human but at least mankind will always need to arm itself for self defence.
As long as the universe is an unknown place to us we should be cautious. If on planet earth people can turn into armies and tools of destruction then elsewhere on other planets the same is possible.
Of course the utopian dream would be no necessity for arms and guns, yet in this world of duality it is not only a possibilty but a guarantee that situations will occur where the positive will meet the negative and vice versa.
Furthermore, the existence of arms/weapons/guns as a means of defence for humans is purely natural. Even nature has the most sophisticated forms of self defence mechanisms to prolongue the survivability of life.
As a European I have been raised with the idea that less guns is more safety..
Yet I can only conclude after having had a more in depth look into the matter, that it's an illusion of safety.
The metropolitan areas are getting more harsh and it is obious the guns are in the hand of the wrong people, the police is never at time to prevent or catch someone, prisons are filled and the police uses its weapons on people trying to demonstrate and march peacefully for a better world.
Things have goon crazy indeed:)
Going to raise my frequency now... it is a heavy subject indeed.

Interesting points Elan, RIGHT NOW, I think Americans need guns, as do probably everyone else on planet earth where there are governments run by SPC's (Satanic Pedophilic Criminals) (ie. some form or protection, cause it ain't the cops, their job is to pick up the pieces and suck as much money out of everyone after the fact) And I think there are other options. The Chinese and other Asian countries developed Kung Fu and other forms of martial arts many centuries ago because they were not allowed to carry weapons (so disarming is nothing new) So even when people were left defenseless to Feudal Lords for generations they still developed a means of self defense.

The alien question is interesting as well (believe it or not) if Phil Schneider and others are accurate, and from the way he was found, and he fought to the very end to get his truth out... and spoke of the many attempts on his life, before they brutally murdered him, but his account of alien technology shows that they could take out 66 marines in one sitting and no one ever mentioned if any of the aliens got killed. But the whole thing started because the aliens (with superior fire power) insisted on a no weapon zone (can you blame them? - having to work along side human beings!)

So there has to be a place for weapons, and there has to be a strict code. The aliens understand this, apparently we don't. Any race that has publicly acknowledged and integrated faster then light speed travel understands consciousness and the fact all consciousness emanates from one source. This no doubt affects their inner awareness and philosophy about life. We have been given some information about this, but most materialist oriented agencies have been trying to suppress this with materialist arguments from idiots like Richard Dawkins etc. Anyhow, in this materialist, one life to live, die with the most toys world they have created, each group is always trying to get the upper hand. The government agents want bullet proof vests, body shields, jack boots, batons, tasers, guns, assault weapons, immunity from the law, etc, and we get pop guns? It has to be more equal, and the criminals have to be dredged from the government pond.

The issue should be what the code is, not just trying to disarm a population that you want to rape and pillage of all their wealth (for the upper echelon's benefit) What that code should be, how that would look - should be the argument and the issue...

Loved, loved, loved those two women, of course who better to do Alex Jone's job... but to send in two women, who understand the value of protecting their weaker selves against physically superior forces that may not live according to reason. And the comment about CNN and ratings... spot on, spot on... Double approach, propagating anti gun paranoia, and boosting ratings using those trash talk show formulas.

Piers Morgan total sell out... they must be paying him huge, but you can see the toll it is taking to shovel that much sh** every day... is he related to Bill O'Reilly?

[bogeyman]

Piers Morgan, seems to be a bit of a pompous ass! He doesn't seem that flexible either in his view point, unless of course he's doing this for the rating of his TV show, or maybe on the instructions of his producer?

[ExomatrixTV]

hqYdTg0SrLU

[araucaria]

What I don't understand is how Piers Morgan thinks he has a right to go to another country and start lecturing them on their laws, their constitution. Quite apart from any argument about firearms, which as a non-American I wouldn't dream of engaging ... this glaring anomaly baffles me. Ah, or is it that odious little people lacking in the charisma one would normally expect of such figures lack the wit to see that their mysterious and very temporary position is usually a means to an end?

To all American members ... please do not judge the British by this man! I'm British, and his tone, demeanour and methods of 'argument' make me nauseous and angry. I feel insulted on your behalf.

I agree mate, and please, don´t judge all the Morgans by this man as well! There are good Morgans around! ;)

Anyway, Americans should retaliate!

How about sending an American journalist to the UK, to interview people on live TV about the ignorance of supporting an extremely expensive, luxurious and useless monarchy, considering that we´re in the 21th century and going through a global economic crisis?

Raf.


Hi Raf nice Morgan
There is of course an American journalist operating quite a bit from the UK and doing some pretty good work, and that is Greg Palast.

[Arrowwind]

He he he.... my town owns a tank and kept in good working order.