READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
Tonight, Piers Morgan talked with two of the survivors of the Clackamas shooting that occurred last night in Happy Valley, Oregon. Allan Fonseca helped Jocelyn Lay escape from the Macy's when they began to hear bullets fly. Now Morgan is looking for answers why semi-automatic rifles are legal in America after this latest tragedy.
"I feel like that there is not enough consequences in the United States and unfortunately it starts from the home and the home is destructing," said Lay. "It's an unfortunate situation and something has to change."
"It's dangerous because a lot of people are allowed to have guns," Fonseca said. "There is a more deep rooted thing that needs to be pointed out and it's that, what would cause a young man like the one that did the shooting to do what he did? It isn't so much just the guns but what is really going on in our society?"
Watch the clip, and listen to the interview, as Morgan searches for answers as to why Jacob Tyler Roberts killed two people before taking his own life.
» Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Twitter
> Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
Can anyone give me the website or any other communication tool for Carol Roth? This lady is giving such irresponsible statements on Piers' show, I need to tell her. Thank you!
Mr. Morgan it is painfully obvious that you cannot cover any news covering fiorearns or crime without becoming an unpaid spokesperson for the Brady anti-gun campaign. I respect the right under our laws that you can express your views but they are just that personal views not news. Perhaps sticking to the news would be better than ranting. Bye the bye your views are rubbish. At least when it comes to guns.
I willl Never watch any of your interviews, shows, "whatever" you want to call them ever again,,, instead of bashing guns, gun owners, address the problem, "individuals that have problems", the gun didn't get up that morning and say "I'm gonna shoot someone today",,,, the individual did,,, "FACT" you tell me how many murders are committed by individuals with knives and or other weapons or means and you will see there is a great difference,,,
Jan do you think it odd that no one is asking whether this kid was on medication. It seems that most of these nuts are on meds that have crazy suicidal side effects. Maybe we should get the drugs out of the hands of these children. Comon these kids shouldn't be on meds.
Piers, you re right on the button! I will never understand the American love for these weapons of mass destruction. I respect hunters, outdoorsmen, farmers.... I believe that they should be allowed to have rifles, and shotguns, but not automatic rifles, handguns of any type...All persons buying guns for hunting sports etc should have background checks, as here in Canada.....With all of these misshaps, it's about time that the lawmakers look at these events seriously...Richard Quebec City Canada
You are more than welcome to take this traitor back where sheep craze carefree.
You know Richard, over the last century an estimated 60 million people have been
murdered by their own governments. Since fighting to free ourselves from your leaders
the people here wanted to be assured no other self appointed rulers could rule with
It's called taking responsibility for your own self and those around you. Pretty much what all
adults are supposed to be able to do, but in todays world of social engineering the obvious goal
of programs like this are to convice people they would be much safer with all the guns in the hands
of the police and government. Might want to revisit the wisdom of that bankrupt idea.
Don't want to be a victim? Then grow up and take some responsibility.
So you're a Canadian. I'd tell you to educate yourself on US gun laws here. All purchasers in all states must undergo NCIS check before FFLs can release guns. Also do you know the difference between Full-Auto and Semi-Auto?. No civilians today can have Full Autos. You ignorant fool!
BAN GUN FREE ZONES YOU LIBERAL DOLTS!
Nah, how about we ban ideologues like you instead? The types that are blocking any legislation regarding debt control and unemployment relief in Congress? Now, exactly who is the "dolt"? And I didn't need to type in Caps like somebody who is unsure of themselves either.
Brian, if you are going to brag that you aren't a dolt, then at least use proper grammar. "Someone" is singular and needs a singular pronoun (himself) not "themselves."
William and MILEMAN, like Carol Roth, value the right to bear arms more than they value life. 12,000 dead bodies each year in the US doesn't mean a thing to them. They should be very, very concerned come Judgment Day!
Hmm...of course there's no relationship to Germany being the first nation to disarm it's citizens and then starting World War II is there, nor the additional 60 million murdered by their own supposed governments that so carefully watched over and protected these murder victims, and that's just in the last century. Sheeze!
LOL..how could they disarm and then start a war. With no weapons?
You need to study history more closely before you make irresponsible comments.
Germany disarmed its people, not itself. When America's government gives up her arms, THEN I'll consider giving up my personal guns. New Zealand took guns away from its citizens, BUT it also took them away from the police. Syria took guns away from its citizens, but not from itself. See the difference? Our second amendment has nothing to do with protecting ourselves from criminals–but from governments. As long as governments have guns, so will I.
I do hope you have enough money to buy a well trained military, tons of automatic weapons, tanks, jets, precision bombs, battle ships, rockets, drones, etc. etc. Good luck.
Meanwhile watch more shootings than today with innocent children killed because the gun lobbyists don't want to agree on any form serious and strict licensing requirements for gun owners. Good luck on Judgment Day.
I am willing to stand before my maker and argue that the right to defend my life, my families and our nations (i,m a vet) is more important than your moral high horse. Self defense is a right that precedes the United States and I for one and glad that the framers of our governement relazied that.
I do hope you have enough money to buy a well trained military, tons of automatic weapons, tanks, jets, precision bombs, battle ships, rockets, drones, etc. etc to be able to fight a corrupt government. Good luck.
Meanwhile watch more shootings like today with innocent children killed because the gun lobbyists don't want to agree on any form of serious and strict licensing requirements for gun owners. Like a three week training as the Swiss have. This just for starters. Thanks for saying no and good luck on Judgment Day.
I was hoping for something unbaised and enlightening, It was nothing of the sort. Please let your guests talk instead of bullying them......I thought I was watching MSNBC.
Please do me a favor and look at some of the 20,000 gun laws we already have on the books. We should enforce the laws we already have. We tried banning assualt weapons for 10yrs. It didn't work. And since the ban was lifted, crime has dropped.
I appreciate you being so passionate about background checks and banning assault weapons. I believe that your show can really make a difference. Thank you!!
Piers is a typical gun-grabbing, societal disarming, progressive European neo-socialist.
A disarmed population is a compliant population. As Hitler knew in 1937. Stalin and Mao, too. Per Lenin, the first step in establishing true socialism is to disarm any and all potential objectors. By this, of course, he meant the entire population.
Check Great Britain's escalation in gun crimes following their societal disarmament. It sure didn't go down, folks. Then the British citizens tried carrying combat knives. Britain outlawed combat knives. So, they started carrying common kitchen cutlery, i.e., steak knives. Guess what? Yep. Now It's illegal in Britain to carry a steak knife.
What to 'outlaw' next? I guess every implement of death in the game of Clue...and everything else hard, sharp, or poisonous.
"Piers is a typical gun-grabbing, societal disarming, progressive European neo-socialist. "
Ah, so not true, but, yet inflammatory! Good work, weird, scared guy! Also the rest of your post is of course full of BS. You sound like the type we should be wary of that is armed & dangerous.
Well, if it isn't our articulate contributor wendy.
Wendy has yet to learn the difference between objectivity and subjectivity.
She's pretty handy with the ad-homs though, so let's not give up on her just yet...
What's next is candlestick police! If you are caught carrying a candlestick you will be put into the pokey!
I'm just sayin' ...
The last time an attempt to disarm the american people was made it started a revolution. Is that what you want? I am a Marine veteran and I will never give up my second amendment rights!
Piers, to help your next gun debate please…please learn the difference between semi-automatic and automatic (as in fully). "Assault" rifles for military and law enforcement are “fully” automatic and capable of high frequency fire with 1 sustained trigger pull – No civilian needs one of those. OTOH semi-automatic weapons that just happen to look like their full-auto versions cannot do this. Semi-auto is 1 bullet per trigger pull. The only thing automatic about a semi-auto is the loading (not the firing) of the bullet into the chamber. As such, a semi-auto rifle (again, that just happens to look like an assault rifle) is no more/less lethal than a common hunting rifle that accepts a magazine and/or a revolver from the 1800s. So, it is patently false to lump both semi and fully auto into the general assault rifle bucket. Your passionate misunderstanding of this distinction derails every gun debate I’ve watched you attempt on-air thus far.
Your observation of Piers' attempt at misleading propaganda is, of course, accurate. But it's not about the distinction between semi- and full-automatic. Not at all.
It's about painting all guns as evil and a bane of society. it's about establishing a negative mindset about guns in general. "Evil is evil regardless of how many bullets can be fired."
The public perception of defensive handgun carry would change drastically if the liberal MSM was inclined to report on the instances of legal gun carry that averted crimes. It's in the hundreds per day. Go ask a cop. Any cop. They may be reluctant to admit it, but .... yep. It's true. This, however, is... *ahem* an "inconvenient truth" that doesn't benefit the agenda of the liberal press (or their masters.)
Yes BG, I know ;p
Have all the guns you feel you need, but keep them all at home to protect your family and keep the government in check. If everyone in the mall had a gun here is what I see happening. Citizen 1 sees shooter and shoots at him. Citizen 2 sees Citizen 1 shooting and thinks he's the shooter and shoots at him. Citizen 3 sees 3 people shooting and shoots at them. How long before everyone is shooting at someone. 10,000 people with guns in an enclosed space. No thanks.
Oh, how I long for your simple view of life that doesn't throw me any pesky little problems... and if it should, I know I'd always have the right answer.
I guess you'd feel safer walking the streets at night. Or do you hide from that, too? Malls, streets and guns, bad. Got it.
Just wanted to present a simple scenario showing a possible downside to the "utopia" of having everyone carrying to prevent crime.
I walk where I want, when I want. I guess I just have a more positive opinion of my fellow man. You carry all the guns you want. Just leave me some gun free zones.
Piers, if you do not like our gun laws in America, please go back to England. Spare us your unsolicited advice about how to run our country. I realize you've burnt a lot of bridges in England, but take a look at how much lower your ratings are than Larry King's, and quit burning them here too. This may be your last hurrah, so shut up about something that is none of your business. We who carry guns prevent 4,000 crimes per day. So of course, non crimes don't make the salacious news stories you've made a career of covering.
Jan Sykes..you sound like a NAZI: If you don't like...go somewhere else. Fact is, we have 12,000 gun related dead bodies in our country every year. Despite the death penalty. Countries with gun control and NO death penalty, do have much less dead bodies – even by percentage – than we have. That doesn't tell the gun lobbyists anything, because they value guns more than they value life.
So we should banned all fast food company's? They dish out the same amount of death and nothing is done about it. I think that more of ya'll retards should die. Just remember that there are over 20,000,000,000 oath takers in this country.
Think you added a few extra zeros there, buddy.
But you are essentially correct. Between the Oathkeepers and the Three Percenters, I don't think disarmament of the population is going to occur unless someone in the government is ok with a revolution. You know, a real one.
Tesia, Bryan, you don't know what you're talking about. Gun control doesn't mean disarmament of the population. Why don't you study how gun control really works in all civilized countries of Europe, Australia, New Zealand etc. ? Their murder rate, the murder rate of ALL of those countries, is way below that of the greatest country on earth. But you elevate your right to bear arms over other people's right to live. 12,000 people killed by guns doesn't mean anything to you. 12,000 more dead due to gun accidents and suicides. You don't care about the life of those 24,000 people If you'd pass all those requirements in countries with gun control, you'd still have your gun. No disarmament!
Switzerland requires ever citizen to have a fully automated gun in their home. Yet they have one of the lowest crime rates.
You're only partially right on that one. 1. Only able men who served in the military or were trained properly and are of good character between the age of 19 – 34 (there are exceptions up to 50 years of age) are getting the rifles. 2. They do not have any ammunition for those rifles, they need to get them in case of an attack on Switzerland or serious domestic unrest. Hasn't happened since Emperor Napoleon I and a short civil war in 1848. 3. Only 2000 of this well trained militia do have ammunition and have been assigned to special projects. 4. About 20,000 men are trained for 18 – 21 weeks every year and only then are they getting their rifles - still no ammunition.
Well trained plus no ammunition = no guns = low crime rate. Why don't we do that in the USA?
We can't take away our ammo in America because in America our GOVT has guns. Our 2nd amendment is protect us against tyranny–not crime. There are No DICTATORS in countries which allow their citizens to be armed. Dictators kill far more people than any mass murderer–ask the Syrian people.
Curiously, the country with the most freedom in the world, have the most guns.
CNN's Anthony is doing CNN's promotion of a serial killers because it creates good ratings and while we're about it lets promote our liberal left agenda too and call it news.
aka, never let a good killing go to waste at CNN
Jan Sykes..you sound like a NAZI: If you don't like...go somewhere else. Fact is, we have 12,000 gun related dead bodies in our country every year. Despite the death penalty. Countries with gun control and NO death penalty, do have much less dead bodies - even by percentage - than we have. That doesn't tell the gun lobbyists anything, because the value guns more than they value life.
I challenge anybody who supports the right to bear arms without restriction to give me a SINGLE story of a civilian owning a firearm that prevented one of these mass killings. Let's face it: assault weapons should be banned. PERIOD. We're lucky this man's gun jammed or there would be more deaths to mourn tonight.
Brian, the law abiding people have left their guns in their cars. The joker killed people in a theatre that had a no gun sign posted. The same with all the school shootings. They are illegal on schools.
To your comment to Brian: The illegal shooting took place with legally available guns. No guns, no shooting. It's that simple.
Jeanne Assam helped stop the massacre in the Church in Fort Collins Colorado. How about the Appalachia School of Law shooting? There's two off the top of my head.
" No guns, no shooting. It's that simple."
But wait... did the mall have a "no guns" sign posted? Did the shooter get his gun legally? You seem confused, Guenter. And this delusional axiom of yours about "no guns, no shooting..."
Gotta tell ya', you're nothing if not entertaining.
BG Why has the greatest country on earth, our beloved USA, been the leader in murder rates among civilized countries for decades? Why do we have more gun related dead bodies in numbers and percentage than civilized countries with gun control and NO death penalty? In Europe, there are only two countries that have a higher murder rate than the US: Russia and Belarus. These are the only European countries that have no gun control but also the death penalty. In other words, guns (and the death penalty) don't protect society from killings. Guns accelerate killings, make it easier to kill. A gun in a person's hand boosts the person's ego, confidence and the will to kill. Not for everybody, but for too many. 12,000 gun murdered dead bodies - plus another 12,000 killed by accidents and suicide - don't lie. The gun lobby loves the right to bear arms more than it loves the life of other persons.
Ah, lies, damned lies, and statistics. Here's some more.
How about Mexico, where guns are strictly prohibited outside of the home?
Here's another set of "statistics" from, of all sources, the Guardian, that identifies the (inclusive) U.S. murder rate per 100K.
So what's the point? 1. You can use any set of statistics from any source for any purpose. Given.
2. Statistics are only as good as the source providing them, (i.e., what's the 'real' rates reported among fascist governments? Iran? How about all that U.N. data? Is it murder when the shoot political prisoners? One would think so, but what box do they check on the report form?)
3. It's impossible to compare apples to oranges, (i.e., the reported per capita 'firearms homicides' in nations undergoing civil wars vrs. civilized societies with permissive gun laws. Or urban vrs. rural concentrations, causation from immigrant communities ..er, France and England, bit of a problem there, 'eh?) and lastly, good old American gang-banging. Does that count, and if so, who exactly is keeping track?)
The only constant is this. Restrictive gun laws do not reduce homicide, they just increase illegal use and/or shift the methodology. A "murderous culture" is going to murder. How's Chicago doing? Do deaths from terrorism, and civil war count as murder? Or is it simply political activism? What box gets checked in Syria? Nah. No bother. I bet Mexico is keeping good track though on all their drug running deaths though...
A free society is an armed society. The hypocrisy shouldn't be lost in Obama "recognizing" the Syrian (read, Islamist) rebels, yet wanting, since his early political days, to COMPLETELY BAN GUNS IN AMERICA.
Your statistics are proving my point: The USA is the leading civilized or First World Country when it comes to homicides. All civilized countries with gun control and no death penalty are ranking after the USA. Aren't you proud to be a gun lobbyist in a country that has the gold medal in producing dead bodies among First World Countries? Your statistics even omit our leading role in gun related dead bodies by accidents and suicides. The more dead bodies the better for gun sales. Good luck on Judgment Day!
Did anyone in the mall have a gun besides the crazy shooter? Any citizens with concealed carry? Guards? Shop Owners? Did anyone try to shoot back?
Um.. sorry. I forgot this happened in Portlandia. If it happened in my state the "run-away!" response would have been a bit different.
Piers, your show might be a little more watchable if you would let your guests actually talk and get their point across before you go off on your endless rant about a subject you are very clearly uneducated on.
There always seems to be such an argument of extremes when it comes to guns (similar to abortion). There are gun laws, but do they really work? Originally the 2nd amendment was written to give the people the power to protect themselves from the government they just formed as well as foreign militaries (natives, French, British, Spanish). They certainly were not sure that the infant nation was going to survive. Maintaining militias was an important part of American society at the start. Honestly, who really thinks that the context of the amendment still makes sense today? No amount of organization of arms currently availlable could be mustered and do any protecting from the military of a major foreign power or our own. Perhaps we should be clamoring for tanks and Patriot missiles and fighter jets to be owned by private citizens in case we need to overthrow our own government? These debates go no where because they have no where to go. We won the revolution with guns available to frontiersman (which in many cases were better than those being carried by the British regulars), yet even those advanced guns (they even had rifling in the barrels) were nothing compared to AR-15s. The self-defense argument was the same one used by our enemies for pursuing nuclear weapons. Point being, guns are more and more deadly as time goes on. I firmly believe that the only thing endangering our species is ourselves
Let's ban guns, so the guys with assault rifles can take over!
Hell, yeah. You don' need no muthafkin' gun, cracka.
Seriously, the jews, didn't have guns. The blacks, who were slaves, guess what, they didn't have guns. Women, who didn't have any rights, let's say for awhile...they didn't get taught how to shoot, in masse. You are seriously lacking intelligence, if you believe a ban on guns would do anything, but burden or war on drugs and our global war on terrorism, trying to take everyone's guns away. You're just a bleeding heart, waiting for natural selection. You want only the bad guys and police, who can be bad too, and the military to have guns. Your ignorance leaves you to only want those who can do you harm to have guns, and prevent the responsible ones, capabale of responsibly owning them, and protecting from such over-reaching or illegal behabior to not have guns. Guns are safe, when you secure them from people who should not own guns. Unfortunately, like governments in general, regulations fail to prevent all gun violence, but that should be a testament to YOU not knowing how to safely have a gun and having one for defense, as it is for regulation of them. If you had a gun, and knew how to responsibly use it, they would know people might stop them. Now they can just wait for the people with guns to not be around, because everyone else is ignorantly and irresponsibly afraid of them! Guns don't pull there own triggers! And people don't send there own people to war. People shoot guns, and governments send us to war. Think.
The 'Second Amendment' guy said that 1% of Americans are 'mentally deranged', and should not be able to acquire firearms. Here's a fact: a recent study proved 26% of Americans have a 'diagnosable mental illness' – I bet a lot of them own guns. In fact, I bet a good case could be made that the majority of gun owners in the US have a diagnosable mental illness! Call it, 'paranoia'. That's the view from Canada!
You'd better brush up on your American gun laws, nanny-stater.
Two years after TNT, CBS, NBC, ABC, hollywood, cease showing murderous behavior, psychotic behavior, with guns on TV, the movies and the internet, then come back discuss gun control. If you're wiling to give up your first amendment rights then law abiding gun owners will discuss giving up their second amendment rights.
its easier to buy a gun in Oklahoma than it is to buy a pack of ciggs, guns are everywhere, flea mkts, gun shows, private sales between indv, etc. i would say more than 50 percent of the time, theres no background check, this is a gun society state, we r a license to carry state and murders are commonplace so.. so much for security and safety. people here are paranoid and mistrustful of everyone and everything, i think the key to violence in america is just that, paranoia, mistrust and a general hate for each other and intolerance,
That's what I see: Americans who don't trust each other, are scared of each other, and think it's the other guy who is crazy...and they think having the right the carry guns is the answer?!
@ monkey pony
" i would say more than 50 percent of the time, theres no background check.."
Ah, an empirically-supported statistical finding. Thanks for that hard work. Doing those surveys must be a bítch.
PIers, lets be sociologists. Lets sow 20 people a day run over by a car, lets glorify it and empower the person behind the wheel running kids and old folks and people coming out of movies being run over by a car. Lets do it for 30 years.
Do you think the number of psychotics legally and illegally driving a car who emulate what they see will increase. So, then lest out law cars that go more than 20 miles an hour, require insurance and drivers licenses to drive. Car congtrol vs. media contgrol.
I am troubled by Pierces idea of a gun is to defend you in the home, the second amendmant should cover me any where i walk in the united states. Thank the lord a gun jammed when it did, If it wouldn't have jammed, would it have been better if there were an armed citizen there to defend the other 10,000 people in that mall Pierce? I have spent some time in Mexico for work, and I have never felt less comfortable, because I knew thew outlaws had guns, and they knew I didn't have one.
Piers needs to remember that if we had not had our own guns in 1770 we would be talking with a british accent like him.
Oh yeh I trust government to always look out for me and protect me from the bad guys.
Guns do not belong in the hands of people whom just want a toy to play with, guns are to protect if their is reason for protection or threat to whomever / anyone can own a gun without checking on their mental state / military personnel and officer of the law are not perfect gun owners/ Guns need to be regulated for the purpose of the mental state of people today/ The second amendment was about life in the old days not about today with careless people
" Guns need to be regulated for the purpose of the mental state of people today"
You have a driver's license, damon? Did they make you take an MMPI before they issued it to you? After all, your car is statistically more dangerous than a gun....
Piers needs to get educated on rifles before he can say anything. He embarresed himself on national t.v., thats why he went on his rant and rave and started bullying his guest.
Piers, please keep this issue going. This is an admirable cause that I am proud of you for. Takes courage to face the implacable.
The probability of an Anti- Democratic American Governments taking over the American Union is probably .0000000001% compared to the the percentage of shooting deaths in America. Theirs is truly only a convenient & irresbonsible translation of the 2nd Amendment. I also don't mind you interrupting fools.
Keep it up, Piers , you may save lives in the end.
Well, Wendy, with your spelling and grammar it's not likely that you'll take over the "American Union" anytime soon. And don't worry about your hero Piers. He has network-assigned security.
Big guys with nasty guns.
Sorry, I was was saving my typo "irresbonsible" for you. Scary guy, you.
there is a gun show this weekend at the expo, i bet you can get those auto rifles there
Actually, Geri, you can't. Without a Treasury license, automatic weapons are illegal to own or sell in the United States.
Or, did you mean SEMI-automatic rifles?
Those can be sold and will be available at the show; but, which one of those should be banned and why? Tell me the difference among the AKS, ADL, M1A1, M1 Carbine, AR-15, .223 Sporter, M1 Garand, the Hakim, or the Galil.
Want to confuse a gun-grabber? Tell him that you can buy a Mosin-Nagant for $99.00 at the local gun shop. Yep, the same weapon that established and maintained Communism for 70 years – now available to you with money left over for ammunition, and a matching bayonet for only ten bucks more. Wait a second... isn't a bayonet sorta dangerous? I mean you can poke your eye out with one of those. Maybe they should be banned.
Are you progressives all shuddering at that? Think I'm poking fun (pun intended) at a deadly issue? Keep something in perspective – a free society is an armed society. Unfortunately, all free societies have their fair share of aberrant human behaviors which, sadly, can't be legislated away.
But enslaved societies are far, far, worse.
GREAT COUNTRY ISN'T IT. A LOUD MOUNTH FOOL LIKE YOU GETTING A T.V. SHOW IN OUR COUNTRY! YOU ARE SO BIASED, YOU ATTACK EVERY OPPOSING SIDE YOU ENCOUNTER, NEVER ALLOWING THEM TO FINISH AND VERY RUDELY CUTTING THEM OFF . YOU WERE VERY RUDE TO MR GUENTHER. NO REASON FOR YOU TO CALL HIM CREEPY. HE WAS LAUGHING ABOUT THE STUPIDITY AND BIAS YOU DISPLAY. TYPICAL LIBERAL, ATTACK EVERYONE AND MAKE UP NUMBERS TO TRY TO MAKE YOUR CASE. BUT TO OTHER LIBERALS- SO SICKENING NICE. YOU ARE PATHETIC AS HOST. OUR COUNTRY ALREADY HAS SEVERAL LAWS IN PLACE INM ORDER TO PURCHASE ANY GUN. IF YOU BAN ANY WEAPON DO YOU THINK THIS WOULD KEEP GUNS FROM DISTURBED INDIVIDUALS ? IF YOU DO NOT LIKE OUR COUNTRY OR LAWS, GO BACK TO ENGLAND. DO NOT COME TO OUR COUNTRY AND LECTURE US !
Please do remember that immigrants like Piers made our country the great country it is. So, please don't send him home like a true NAZI would do but listen to his arguments. They make a lot of sense. We are the leading country among First World countries when it comes to homicide rates and other gun related dead bodies. All other advanced countries practice much better gun control than we do and that saves thousands of lives. If you wanna be a gun lobbyist for the rest of your life, good luck on Judgment day.
I think both you and Piers would be better served in disarming dictators like Assad (40 ,000 dead) and Ahmadinejad. Dictators have killed far more than individual loons. Put your compassion where it will benefit the most people. I grew up with a 22 hanging over our couch and boys driving pickups to school, all of which had guns hanging in the back window. There were NO shootings. So it's not the guns. Try banning violent video games, dropping out of church, stupid reality shows, disrespectful language, or whatever it is in society that thinks guns are animate objects that shoot inanimate people.
Other advanced countries do have the same social issues we have. But they have enough intelligence to protect their citizens with meaningful gun controls. That's why we have the gold medal when it comes to homicide rates and other gun related dead bodies. All you gun lobbyists must be proud of this achievement of the greatest country on earth.
Freedom and liberty is NOT having to ever own, or use a gun, not ever having to defend your life, and being able to walk freely and openly in the streets without getting accidentally or purposefully being shot.
... and if wishes were fishes..
What's your point, Liz? Let us know when the mushroom wears off and you have to come back to reality.
Liz, when you die and go to hewaven, you'll be rewarded by knowing that Saint Peter makes everyone check his guns at the door; but, how is that applicable to the United States of America in the Twenty-first Century? See my post, which follows.
Dear Mr. Morgan.
In 1 year there was 1 murder in Windsor, Ontario Canada...
BUT...just across the river is Detroit, Michigan, USA there were over 400 murders.
I agree with you and Liz B !
Interesting stat 'eh'?
Margaret, love it! Nuthin' like the truth for making an impact; 400 to 1 is very telling, indeed. Apparently, Candians own more guns per capita than Americans, yet our murder rate is soo much lower. we simply don't believe that guns are an answer to social problems! Me, I've owned guns for almost fifty years, and love'em to death; but they are a very bad way to settle arguments.
Hey, John, how's that Muslim and Sikh gang activity working out for Canada? Good luck with that.
I'm done in here.
As usual, Mr. Morgan is passionate about a subject he refuses to analyze. All we hear is that it's "absurd" for Americans to own "semi-automatic assaiult rifles." He never commits himself to what semi-automatic rifles we SHOULD be allowed to own or why the much belabored AR-15 is NOT among them, viz., in what way is it ACTUALLY different from, e.g., the ADL?
More importantly, he never gets to the real issue, for clearly Mr. Morgan does NOT support real gun control. What he supports is controling MY gun with HIS gun! I can think of no better reason why I need to be armed..
Mr. Morgan, the bottom line is this: You are British; you obviously are British; you have this thousand-year old idea that everyone should kowtow to the King. And, Americans don't kowtow to kings; they kich their butts! That's why everyone is armed - it is the ultimate dispersal of power. You are trying to create this optical illusion that the military and police somehow are a superior class, possessing rights the rest of us don't have (like knights of old). I understand your passion, but that's English, and if you want that, go back to England. But, here, yours is a totally inconsistent position because you never ask the critical question, which is WHO will be empowered to bell the cat? Underneath it all, you want that to be YOUR political supporters. THAT is why the rest of us need to be armed.
And why was it not mentioned this shooter did not even buy this gun??????
What kind of legislation would address that?
Ban them for normal citizens and only those with murderous intentions will have them. Those that want them bad enough to commit evil acts will always get tools they need.
Would we prefer a dynamite vest?
Or a van full of explosives driven through the lobby?
Or a machete chopping people to bits?
Or an axe hacking away?
Or a hammer?
Or a bat?
My point is, people can – and will – kill with any tool they can get. Ban one and you need to ban all and then where are we? Not free. That's for sure.
**What we should be disussing is mental health and social support, not tools!**
When will the kneejerking stop and the thinking start?
Its not inanimate objects killing.
Its not inanimate objects killing. Its people. Wake up.
I just wonder when someone will address the film industry for continuing to entertain America with every type of automatic weapon, bombs, or anything that will blow up as excitement and an example of macho behavior. Lets face it, American children begin pushing buttons often before they can speak well enough to understand the consequences. We teach them to use computers and cell phones and pull triggers for entertainment. Big wonder that adolescent unthinking frustrated kids turn to violence as a form of expression.
Time to tax Rich Democrats. Especially Hollyweird. Slap 'em with the excise tax program that they've ducked since the '50's. Make 'em "redistribute" along with the rest of us.
the semi automatic has been around for 50+ years ,as a hunting rifle. The type of stock has nothing to do with its capability. It's the size of the clip.Any responsible hunter will tell you if they can't drop their game in three or four shots , they are just wasting bullets. It's the mega clip that turns a hunting rifle into an assault rifle, not the design of the stock. No responsible hunter or target shooter should have any problem with registering their guns or licensing themselves. I am tired of the idea that "their coming for your guns" being sold to responsible sportsmen. Resrict these rediculous size clips and a large part of the problem would be solved.
It's not a clip-its a magazine. You could restrict a magazine to as few rounds as you feel would solve the problem but you can't stop someone from carrying a bag full of magazines. Anyone trained to use a firearms can swap out a magazine in seconds. The size of the magazine is not the issue but it certainly draws the most attention from those who don't really understand firearms. The millions of lawful Americans who own and use these firearms regularly just for fun and sport do not kill people and should not have to be denied ownership just because of a few unstable or mentally ill individuals. That is not sensible prevention. The only real solution is to focus on the individuals who commit these crimes and figure out a way to identify them early, supervise them and restrict them from access to anything that they could use to harm other people. As for firearms, we can certainly increase background checks, training and licensing requirements in an effort to prevent unstable people from acquiring firearms beyond our current laws. Most legal gun owners would support this direction as opposed to any type of ban. The only way to eliminate these millions of guns or high capacity magazine now is by forced confiscation which most current owners would refuse to obey and thereby become criminals for no reason. Do you propose a house to house search? Unstable people who want to kill for notoriety can always buy a propane tank and line it with nails, mix diesel fuel and fertilizer to make a bomb, drive a car through a school yard full of kids or simply run through the mall with an axe and kill just as many many people before being stopped. People bent on killing lots of other people will always find a more hideous way to get attention. At least cheap semi auto firearms with overly huge cheap magazines are extremely unreliable and subject to jamming- a fact known to experienced gun owners. As a person with a concealed carry license, I would rather take my chances against a crazy kid with an cheap assault weapon than one who chose to make a bomb or poisonous gas because they couldn't obtain a gun.
EVERYONE (brits and progressives included) need to educate themselves on basic gun design and function...
Fully automatic: machine guns. "Assault weapons" used by military and police only. Hold the trigger it keeps shooting completely automatically. Got it?
Semi automatic: virtually 75% of all handguns, rifles, shotguns on the market. Civilian arms. Pull trigger once.... goes bang once.... repeat. Nothing crazy. This is hunting rifles, common home and self defense pistols, hunting shotguns, etc. Really everyday stuff in this category for the most part. You all seem to focus on a small percentage of lookalikes that appear more formidable than they actually are.
A dressed up wannabe lookalike design does not a machinegun make.
This is really simple stuff folks. When you mess it up the whole issue gets muddled and breaks down. If you can't be bothered to get your head around this the debate will never go anywhere.
Yes, it is pathetic how little the basic facts seem to matter here.
Once again, "gun control" is not about identifying 'dangerous' types of guns. It's about societal disarmament.
During the Clinton 'assault weapons' ban, Diane Feinstien assembled a 'committee' of Democrats and paged through gun catalogs and circled every one they 'thought' looked dangerous. Thus, the bans on pistol grips and such that appeared 'tactical' but in reality offered no tangible rationale for prohibition other than 'it looked military.'
It ain't about 'assault weapons', folks.
The over simplification of the assault weapons band is frustrating. The question that constantly arises from the pro second amendment groups is “will the band keep assault weapons out of the hands of criminals”. No!, placing a band will not keep the guns out of the hands of criminals, but the two recent public shooting incidents were not carried out by people with criminal records. An assault weapon is made for one purpose that is to kill other people. Hunters don’t aim to over kill their prey. Is yearly revenue made from the sale of these guns that great that we placed such a miniscule value lives of our young? Why can’t we come up with a solution to this problem, are we waiting for an incident where 50, 100, 200 or 1000 people are killed? Let’s work together so that what happened in Oregon doesn’t occur again.
The problem is that banning guns doesn't actually stop gun violence, according to the statistics, but it does take away our freedom. Actually, the average hunting rifle is significantly more powerful than what you are calling an assault weapon. There are millions of these so called assault weapons (which are just semi auto rifles) in this country and you are not going to change that. How about actually focusing on the social conditions and mental health issues that give rise to this kind of violence?
Ps... the other 25% is singleshot, bolt actions, revolvers, lever actions, and pumps.
These are all manually reloaded weapons. Not assualt weapons in any way shape or form. (I mean singleshot says it all...)
Will you ever be capable of actually discussing the facts about the gun issue without having an emotional rant and insulting your guests? England seems like they have the laws you want. Please go back there and leave us alone.
Chris – the word is BAN.
Guns don't kill people Chris. People kill people, with all sorts of tools.
Why don't we focus on helping troubled brethren and accept mental illness as a simple part of human existence in this country????
We are missing the real point here.
I have always chosen to watch CNN because it was the only news channel that was unbiased and simply reported news without opinion or bias. The hosts always remained neutral and put on guests from each side of any debate. That was before Piers Morgan. Outside of his very emotional and overly dramatic campaign to ban guns in America, he does a reasonably good job of providing entertaining interviews. However, his consistent use of inaccurate and exaggerated statements to make his points and his rude tendency to shout down, talk over and refuse to listen to any opposing position is simply irritating for anyone who has any real knowledge of firearms to watch. He is so obviously one sided and uninterested in any even debate that he should not be allowed to continue his personal rant under the umbrella of an unbiased news network like CNN. Since he continues to be allowed the freedom to push his agenda I have decided to quit watching CNN until he is taken off the air. I hate Fox's biased political views but I can certainly see why their ratings are dominating CNN if your programming is going to start leaning to liberal causes. That is a shame because outside of this one extremely biased cause, CNN does appear to be neutral in every other category. So why allow it? No one would argue that these horrible killings are not a tragedy that we should seek ways to prevent. However, to focus simply on removing the instrument used to commit a murder and not on the individual, the cause and ways to intercede or prevent future deaths from such people is as silly as banning automobiles to prevent highway deaths. We can certainly have an unbiased debate on methods to improve our gun laws and do a much better job of restricting firearms from those who should not be allowed to purchase them. We could discuss background checks on all gun purchases and we could discuss requiring a firearm training course and a license before being allowed to purchase and own a firearm. These are topics for an honest and reasonable debate. Asking a guest to justify why they need a firearm that can hold 20 rounds or more of ammunition is like asking a guest why they need an automobile that can exceed the speed limit. There are millions of high powered military style firearms sold, owned and used by responsible Americans for shear pleasure or sport that Piers in his perfect world would consider excessive and unnecessary to own. In reality only a handful of them are ever used for the horrible and tragic events that he uses as a basis for wanting to ban them. Maybe he would be more comfortable doing a show in England.
Well said and I agree 100%. To me he has lost all credibility with his handling of this issue. I wonder what Piers drives.
They keep saying his gun jammed thats what kept more people from getting shot, how did he shoot himself then??
Anderson Cooper just reported that the Oregon shooting occurred after the perpetrator STOLE the AR-15, that he had several full clips of ammunition with it, that more would have been shot had the rifle not jammed, and that the perpetrator then shot himself (with the jammed gun) while he was trying to run away!
The police response: It was all a "miracle"!
What do you think the probabilities are that the suspect simply was executed by the police? Which, of course, only proves my point, supra - fruit cakes should NOT be allowed to BUY "assault" rifles (or any other kind of rifle), but police are not saints, and most of what Mr. Morgan was whining about is irrelevant, at least to this incident.
A jam can be cleared, even by an inexperienced user, in a few minutes at most. However, that time allowed the potential victims a chance to put distance and cover between themselves and the shooter. Likely he cleared the jam, saw no easy target, knew police were moving in, and never intended to be taken alive from the beginning.
I suppose it's possible the police executed him, but that doesn't sound likely to me.
I am finished with CNN and the slanted, one sided view on all topics. Piers is one of the worst hosts on allof cable t.v.
I would not doubt that like many other left wing gun haters that he may have body guards that carry wepons. So many of the whinning Hollywood liberals all complain but many have body gaurd protectors that would shoot you in a second if you threatened them.
Maybe every one can write and demand to CNN that no more ignorant hosts like Piers Morgan. Pathetic try in this interview.
Yes, if people have time, please take a moment and write a polite letter to CNN about how irresponsible they are for letting this fool rant on their air waves.
Here's the link to send CNN your comments about Piers's consistently unfair treatment of guests and shameless factual errors:
We here at the Commie New Network could care less about your pithy, self-serving "objections." The wonderful and insightful Mr. Morgan is advancing the proper Progressive views which will ultimately benefit the welfare of the American subjects.. er, citizens.
Unfortunately for you, it appears that you're far to patriotic to understand Mr. Morgan's socialist, er, social commentaries. If you weren't such a conservative, gun-mongering nit, you might benefit from the obviousness of his liberal correctness.
Keep watching – maybe you'll come around to our way of thinking after Mr. Obama relieves you of the burden of your unnecessary fascist weaponry.
There is one quote I would like to send out to mr. morgan and all other anti gun people...I'll keep my guns, freedom, money and you can keep the change.
I bet you're still clinging to that silly God of yours too...
hay piers why did you say a ar 15 is a high powered weaponit is not it fires a 556 round hay thats not high powered and you say who needs these kind of weapons well do you need a 500,000 doller car or million doller home this is america land of the free you can move back home and give back your rights but dont tread on me or my americans
here, here Carey!!! well said!! I think Piers thinks he can move to another country and pretend to bring his homeland culture to my country.............Piers, it is why we succeeded from your country in the first place. WOHOO!! I choose to have and own firearms because I am free to do so regardless if some nutter idiot thinks a rifle looks and pretends to be a assualt rifle or not. Oh yeah baby..............GOD BLESS AMERICA!!! say it with me Piers.......common, you can do it.
Hello everyone. This is a terrible event that has unfolded. There are abviously two sides to this fence. I do believe that a different set of people, and better knowledge of the issue should have been interviewed. The parents were a good call. Just two cents as a first responder. Guns should be available to Americans. The second amendment should be protected. How ever, the type of gun should be seperated into different classes, and the approval for the type of gun should meet certain criteria, and they kinda do. Not that well. The problem with this issue is the fact this is a assault riffle. As I do not believe it should be takin off the shelves. I do believe that the process in owning a gun of this caliber should require an academy to understand the power of the gun, and how to protect it from psycho paths, and miss use of the gun. If the gun owner reads this it is not your fault this guy stole your weapon. How ever it is us as a society that should have trained you to protect this weapon from foul hands. Please lock your guns up. Don't tell anyone how to get to them, and respect the power of the gun, and how it can damage our fragile lives.
WILL – a coupe of points......
it was not an assualt rifle, it was a firearm that is made to look like the military version with similar mechanical components but completely lacks the ability to fire ammunition in fully automatic mode. It therefore fire one round at a time just like a hunters rifle and pistol.
I do agree with guns owners securing thier guns properly to avoid theft and use while the gun owner is not in direct possession of the rifle.
Piers Morgan exaggrating the right to own a firearm. His whole focus on demonizing the look and name of a specific firearm is aughable. He doesn't realize how unintelligent and uneducated he is about the topics of his own show. Piers, I suggest you go to a shooting range with a trained firearms expert and get an education on firearms then, gain some experience with various types of firearms, including your feared and exaggerated "ASSUALT" civilian firearm, a pistol, a typical hunters rifle, and REAL assualt firearm. I think then, you may truely understand that your arguements you so vehemently profess to be so righteously and proper are indeed completely untrue. Until you do have real knowledge and experience, a great majority of people will not listen to your drivel. I think you will suddenly realize how irrationally stupid you looked on your show about assualt rifles with real experience and knowledge about firearms and "guns" and "assualt" rifles. The "Assualt" rifle you pointed out in your show was not a assualt rifle, It is a civilian semi-automatic rifle that is used for target shooting, hunting, pest control, and self defense and lacks the capability of a fully automatic military firearm. the one that you think civilians have. In fact, when the outer surface of the rifle you choose to mistakeningly call a 'assualt rifle", what you have is a semi-automatic rifle. The rifle you lack the intelligence to carefully research before dicussion unintellignetly on your show is not your bain you seek. become a gun owner and experience and learn the world of firemarms, get involved with the respnsible firearms community and i think you'll find a completely different well informed, intelligent, educated opinion. If you choose not to, that is your right and choice but dont expect anyone any to listen and respect your opinions or consider your thoughts.
Per capita if you did control guns then the only ones to own them are the ones doing illegal crap. We don't live in the UK or England this is the USA what worked for YOUR country wont work here Piers. Take guns away we still have a problem, make certain guns illegal we still have a problem. I say strap a gun on every adult mentally capable and tell everyone to protect. That is not being mean or any such thing. Just I look at you badger your guest and act as though America is some type of back woods nation and it is not. Switzerland has the third-highest number of guns per capita on earth, but still a low murder rate. I have issue also that you want to ban guns in the USA because a 22 year old stole one from a friend. Why didn't you mention that during your telling your guest that it was your show? The kid stole the gun!
Larry King where are you???? I am sooooooo glad to see there are so many people posting just as I am about to. Thank you Pierce Morgan for showing everybody in America EXACTLY why people like you should NOT be making the laws for us in the country. First of all, just look at the way you treated your "guest" tonight. Asking him to let you get a word in edgewise? Really? After your rant and never ending diatribe? Oh No! You're not biased at all. At least Larry knew how to conduct an interview when it was obvious he disagreed with his quest! So now to the FACTS. The 2nd Ammendment "guest" tried to tell you that you are opposed to a particular gun because of the way it LOOKS! Not functions! Wake up people, if the shooter had used a hunting rifle we all know what Pierce would be doing now! Secondly, for two nights now you've talked about how there need to be more laws to keep guns out of peoples hands BUT NOT ONCE did you address the fact that the shooter STOLE the gun he used. There goes your whole argument but you won't admit it! The shooter did not buy the gun on the internet. HE STOLE IT!!!!! So why don't you focus all that unrighteious anger on the real problem. The guy was a criminal. He stole the gun and he used it ILLEGALLY! Would it have been better if he had used a gun that looked like a Daisy Air Rifle???? Or if he had waited to weeks and carefully planned out the attack better in the meantime? After all, even the police said this was a premeditated act! Oh, I'm wasting my breath and casting my pearls before swine. People like you just can't see common sense logic.
My heart goes out to the victims and their families, friends and co workers of this senseless act.
I am an avid news watcher and do not cater to one program over the other. I feel it is important to watch programs from multiple stations to gain and understand various perspectives. I chose to watch your program tonight and was severely disappointed with your show on gun control. I was especially disappointed in how you continually slanted the argument to one side and routinely displayed unprofessionalism when you continually drowned out one of your guests even when he was attempting to answer your questions. Why did you even invite a guest on your program who does not share your personal views if you would not let him develop his own points? It is important you remember your job as a journalist/newscaster is to be objective and facilitate a sound debate.
Now on to the subject of regulating AR-15’s and other similar styled weapons. A permanent ban on these types of guns is not the solution. To take a statement from your own show tonight one of your pro gun control guests said AR-15’s have reached a critical mass in the United States and they are nearly ubiquitous. Due to this it is logical to infer that regulation may be difficult and or impossible for “black weapons”. Third party gun sales on any type of gun can occur without an FFL transfer/background check. How do you plan on regulating gun sales from individual to individual? You are naïve to think those sorts of sales will stop if regulation is passed. If bans are passed the contrary may happen and more people may choose to buy guns in straw sales or under the table. This in turn will consequently make gun ownership harder to track.
Any gun is lethal in the right or wrong hands regardless of the size of the clip, cycling rate or design. For example JFK was assassinated by a cheap bolt action rifle which was severely antiquated even by World War 2 standards. My point is banning AR-15’s simply because a small percentage of the population should not own any gun is a ridiculous argument. In situations like this it is important to think about the greater good of the people. Are the people of America really safer if “black weapons” are banned even though mentally unstable and unlawful people will still have access to them on the underground market? Any logical person would think not. I am personally an AR-15 owner and I do use it as my rifle of choice for home defense. When it comes to defending my home, my life and my family I feel the safest with that style of rifle. When it comes to defending my life I would hope my survival is not dependant on what weapon bans were passed simply because several people abused the right of owning a gun and the media had a field day with it. I hope I never have to use a firearm to defend my life and would only do so as a last resort. However I believe it is important to let each individual decide their own preferences rather than the government.
Mr. Pierce, do you read these comments? I hope so. Why would we not need an assult weapon? I am fully agreeing to back ground checks, and have had them on many of my gun purchases. But i will say that in some of our states like one i recently lived in Arizona, I personally know several families that live near the border to Mexico. These families have had several instances over the past 5 years with drug running criminals crossing thier property, and even attempting to steal thier cars, and damage thier homes. Some of these i know carry weapons on them daily now, and this does keep thier property safe. They style of a gun "assalt" or the prety pink handeled guns some ladies carry does not really make a difference in the simple speed that a bullet can come out the barrel and kill some one, or protect them self. The gun or gun type has nothing to do with the fact that some individuals simply do bad things with a gun, in a car, or any other potential force to harm people.
Bad things happen to good people everyday.
The solution is not to punish everyone for the mindless, unjustifiable acts of a very VERY small minority in a country of 300million .
Protectionism doesn't work. Just as the preachers daughter. ;)
the AR-15 used in the shooting recently had been keyword here –(stolen) - from someone Roberts knew. The theft had been reported on Tuesday, hours before the attack. a gun is gun he was hell bent on doing this. so if he got drunk ran over 3 or four in the parking lot do we ban beer or that type of beer or if he started fire to kill do we ban lighters or baseball bat oh lets ban them to and so onn
Piers was ever so rude to his guest (with the bow tie) who was trying to answer Piers' question. Piers talked all over him and kept insisting his guest "stop talking." Because he was not getting the answer of "apology" from his guest, he kept harranging him incessantly. He was ever so rude and made a fool of himself. He even went as far as saying "It's my show" to prove his point he can talk all over a guest's comments.
OK Piers we get it. You want the US to go the way of UK and outlaw guns for citizens. So shut up already and listen to the other side. Do you want "Fair and Balanced" or "my way or the highway"??
I'm just sayin' ....
Take a close look at all of his guests when it comes to a serious subject. These men are hand picked to serve his agenda and help prove his point. Out of all the great minds in this country that are against gun laws, Piers chose Porky the Pig to look like a fool. If he had picked an individual that didn't look ridiculous and had more experience with public speaking the tide would have turned; but instead there was the theatrical production we saw last night.
Your "show" is a pale comparison to Larry King, Could you please attempt to keep your big mouth shut when guests are attempting to answer your biased, uninformed questions? Thanks so much.
Does anybody want to take a new view of the gun debate, and look at the pattern of seemingly random gun violence cases of late? Since Obama came into power (yes that is what it is) there have been too many more random shootings of unstable men weilding semiauto weapons in public places.
Why so many and why now? I'm just sayin' ...
How quickly a British man like Piers Morgan forgets his own English history. When the Nazis were about to invade England, British farmers stood on the coast with pitch forks because their rifles had been taken from them by the British government in the 1930s. Ads were run in American magazines asking Americans to send a rifle to a British home. This is in addition to military rifles we were sending. I have a copy of the original ad if you doubt it. Yes, the public who are the militia NEED MILITARY STYLE RIFLES. You don't wait until the wolf is at your door the way the British did.
Agreed, If the farmers where standing on that beach armed with oh say an M1 Grand it would have sent a clear message to the nazis
What message? The British Empire sent an entire army with the best weapons they had at the time to the European Continent and they got their a.sses whipped by the Germans. Read about Dunkirk! Only the better trained Americans helped the British in 1944 to come ashore
The belief in gun control completely contradicts what our founding fathers intended the Second Amendment use; and that is to give the citizens of this country the ability to fight against our government in the event that it is not serving our best interest. As military technology advances, the weaponry that is available to people should do so as well. Horrible things can happen with the irresponsible use of guns... however, the same can be said about alcohol, tobacco, prescription medicines, or even a vehicle in the wrong hands. An item by itself is no threat. It is the person wielding it and more importantly it is the responsibility of us, the citizens, to be diligent in watching & listening for possible threats. Has there been any research done to find out if any of his friends had even inkling that he was planning this? If they did they are just as responsible as he was since nothing was reported.
The weaponry that is available to people should do so as well?? I do hope you have enough money to buy a well trained military, tons of automatic weapons, tanks, jets, precision bombs, battle ships, rockets, drones, etc. etc to be able to fight a corrupt government. Good luck.
My point is not about "having the money" to buy all of these things. It's about our founding fathers leaving those who have the courage to fight for the country they love SOME tools to do so.
Now, on to your comments... criminals pay no attention to laws. In most states Marijuana is illegal & has no traceability; but someone is probably selling it within a 10 mile radius of 90% of the countrys population. Guns have serial number and still float around the country. Do you think that if gun laws were in place a criminal would have any more trouble buying a gun than he would weed?
A professional criminal will always find a way. But thousands of amateur criminals, for whom it is way too easy to get a gun today, wouldn't get their hands on guns. Countries with strict gun controls are living proof for that. Gun control saves lives, not all lives, but very, very many.
Guenter, you're right, and it's irrelevant. The proposal still is for you to control my gun with your gun (or your agent's gun). That's not advocating gun control in any general sense. It's saying that you are a superior class of person who somehow should be excepted from the requirement..
Madison said it correctrly: If men were angels, they would need no government, and were they governed by angels, they would need no restraints on government; but, in establishing a government of men over men, the fundamental difficulty lies in this: One first must enablle the government to control the governed, then oblige the government to control itself. Elections are a good way to do that, but more is needed in the event elections don't work. Ultimate security for our liberty lies in an armed population (the militia) and in an abhorrence to standing armies. Yeah, I know, LIFE as well as liberty and property, so preventing events like this (or what happened in Connecticut) is something we have to work on, but disarming the country simply is not a viable (or legal) option.
Guenter, we already have gun control. Every dealer (including those at gun shows) have to do a background check. Criminals and the mentally ill are not allowed guns. We have to register our guns. We are not allowed fully automated guns. In almost every case, the shooter has broken the law, whether he stole the guns, took them into a no gun zone, or just Janplain broke the law by shooting someone. Some people seem to want a gun ban. That's called Syria–where we will kowtow to the government taking our property by public domain (or whatever) and getting put in jail at the government's gunpoint. Assad is 40,000 and counting. All the mass murderers combined over decades don't come that close. And don't even start with telling us how we don't need a .223 caliber gun. It is a mere varmint-killing gun–a deer gun is a 30-06.
CNN MODERATOR - My post made it on and I hit "publish" late last night. It wasn't anti-Piers or even inflammatory...please look into it and get back with me.
Piers, I watch your show regularly (and it sounds as if many others here do despite their claim to loathe it). You typically allow others to talk and display respect for their input. What in the world happened to you last night? You constantly interrupted almost everyone, and berated some. You treated the gentleman representing the second amendment terribly from the minute he spoke, and he handled himself very calmly and politely the whole time as you continued to tear into him.
I am anti-guns outside the home, aside from hunting, as long as we have a democratic government. I am conflicted about guns in the home, as I feel people should be able to defend themselves and their family when isolated and trapped in a home. However, so many accidents and suicides are a result of a gun that was intended to protect the home that I do not want one in ours. I may be able to be swayed, but at this point I feel citizens should continue to be permitted to have a gun in the home, but there should be laws about keeping it safe.
President Obama and the republicans need to get some balls and pass/enforce common sense laws instead of pandering to campaign contributors and skipping all of this to get something else in negotiations. "This" is lives of children, parents, etc. "This" is fear that chips away at well-being in America. No fully automatics, no felons/domestic or child abusers, psychologists/social workers should be informed of past gun registrations and get updates get alerts check if registered gun owner, pass gun safety class, etc. To protect citizens from a never-happening situation where they need fully automatic guns to keep a democracy (eg, extremist groups in the thousands attempt a takeover), perhaps there's a clause that allows a citizen vote for exceptions if such a never going to happen emergency arises. President Obama and Congress: After the fiscal cliff is settled, get it done. Show personal integrity and bravery and do what you know is right.
Now, for those who tore into Piers for not allowing others to voice their opinions (well, anything): please show respect here for others' opinions and prove we are not as one-sided as Piers acted or as polarized as a country as Congress would indicate. The path to a stronger country is through understanding and respecting others' perspectives, keeping an open mind, and working together despite differences of opinion.
Please make sure you get your facts straight about "AR 15" Semi Automatic rifles before you go on the air. You were factually incorrect the entire time. Please try not to read your horrible teleprompters, you look unintelligent. Try to be a real journalist and improvise. Pretty much you need some work.
Piers, why do u even bother? the american mentality will never change
10,000 murders a yr. they could have 10 million murders a yr & they will still hide under a law from 300 yrs ago. What gets americans even angrier is when u point out they are the most violent western country in the world. Satistics are facts but they refuse to listen. When McCain & the other 2 politicians sit there defending guns...well that says it all. As if those in other 'civilized countries' don't have homes or properties to protect. In the US the shopping malls & movie theatres have signs that say no guns allowed. Wow!. you can have all the laws you want but u can't change their mindset. I bet u if you asked the average Canadian, Brit or Australian what their guns laws are they wouldn't even know. We don't buy guns because we simply don't want to not because of laws. We don't have gun stores or gun shows. I wouldn't even know where to buy a gun. I am sure everybody in all those countries have the same issues as americans but we don't run around shooting each other.
After every violent act, what is their solution? buy more guns. Sad
yes, we are all grateful that you live in Canada and that your opinion is meaningless.
exactly my point. Nothing Americans hate more then when someone points out to them that they could actually learn something from others.
It is the same with the health care debate. Every western country covers their citizens so they don't go bankrupt should they get sick, & once again the US has to debate the issue.
Can u never look at anyone else & think yes maybe they do it better. It is not a sign of weakness. You can even still run around the world telling everybody that you are the greatest country
As for health care, Canadians have been coming here for surgeries–we haven't been going there. And we already ad Medicaid for our poor and Medicare for our elderly. But if you really want to do us a favor, take all our illegal Mexicans and support them as we have been doing.
You're very much confused. Having better surgeons in the US than the Canadians believe they have has nothing to do with better health care coverage. Canadians can obviously afford to come to our country because their health care insurance pays for it. If an American believes there is a better surgeon or specialist in Canada, he cannot go because our insurance doesn't pay for it or he/she couldn't afford an insurance at all. Our Canadian friend is correct. Our health insurance system is the worst of all civilized countries. We are in the medieval ages when it comes to this. Even with Obamacare our citizens do not have the freedom to choose between a government run or private insurance company. They are forced to always choose a private insurance company. Freedom in our country when it comes to health insurance?? Yeah right!
You're so right. Too many Americans keep forgetting that immigrants brought great ideas from abroad and helped to make this country great. Instead of studying and accepting that many ideas from abroad would enhance the experience being an American, they are closing their eyes and think the greatest country on earth can't get any better. When Ron Paul was asked if he knows the health care system in Switzerland which is very successful and even more advanced than Obamacare, he said "No and I don't care." And he insisted Obamacare would be bad for our country. Too many people act like Ron Paul, they don't know but judge anyway.
Ooooopss...system failure...with confused I meant Jan Sykes...with being so right I meant GREATFULL CVANADIAN
England: Population 53,000,000
Largest City: London, Population 8,000,000
Canada: Population 35,000,000
Largest City: Toronto, Population 2,600,000
Australia: Population 23,000,000
Largest City: Sydney, Population 4,600,000
California: Population 37,000,000
Largest City: Los Angeles, Population 3,800,000
Hmmm... Almost seems like it would be fitting to not compare other countries to our country, but instead to our states... About the same size, same populations, even similar sized economies in some cases.
I wonder what the numbers would be like then? Are there certain states that drag the rest down in terms of criminal activity? Or is it spread out pretty evenly?
It's hard to read statistics, isn't it? But only for the blind. When people talk "crime rate" crimes already have been weight to the population. This way you can accurately compare countries with 1 million people to countries with 10 or 100 or 1000 million. America is clearly the leader among all civilized countries by murder rate, also by the gun related murder rate. Being the gold medal winner in that categories is a proud accomplishment of the gun lobbyists.
Canadian gun owners know your laws. They had to register every gun and committed mass civil disobedience. Hence, Canada rescinded the law. It's not the gun. It's the person. Mexico has stronger gun control laws than we do and we no longer travel there because the drug lords rule the country. Switzerland REQUIRES every citizen to own a FULLY automatic gun and it has a very low crime rate.
Thank you for saying what you feel. It feels like a breath of fresh air. Someone must speak up for those innocent children and say what no one wants to hear. There is a problem and we all must step up to the plate and deal with it and stop looking around. What if it were one of your kids or family? Thank you Peirs.
Yes, let's stop the violence. Inanimate guns do not cause violence. Let's start with divorced families, watching violent video games, feeling detached from a community, a lack of spirituality, lack of impulse control....but small minds like to blame something that has no power to jump up, walk out the door, aim itself at little kids, and kill them. We need to look within–not without.
Here is something interesting that has been underreported. Apparently, the shooter in Portland was confronted by a civilian with a legally concealed firearm. After the bad guy saw the guy trying to line him up in his sights, he retreated and shot himself. This should be reported more. This guy is really a hero:
Notify me of new comments via email.