READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
Roughly six hours after learning that President Barack Obama and the White House had denied a petition to have the host deported, "Piers Morgan Tonight" returned to the airwaves, dedicating a live broadcast to an issue that remains paramount to the health and future of the United States: "Guns in America."
Three weeks prior, host Piers Morgan had welcomed Larry Pratt, the Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, for an interview that proved combative and contentious, as the guest promoted his perspective, saying "evil's in our hearts. Not in the guns."
On Wednesday, Pratt returned for another spirited discussion with the host, during which he disputed various figures centered around murders in Britain and Wales:
"The data that you are using for the murder rate in England is a sham. There's a monumental miss-reporting of what constitutes murder," claimed Pratt. "If three people are murdered, it's likely to be counted as one event."
Of no surprise to those who regularly watch the show, Morgan didn't take too kindly to such a suggestion:
"What an absolute, absolute lie," he exclaimed.
"You are telling me that 50 murders a year, these are simply invented statistics, and in fact the figures in Britain for gun murders are many more times that?" Morgan asked.
"That's exactly what your own constabulary is saying," insisted the guest. "You had 970. I don't know what you're talking about."
At this point, Morgan had heard enough:
"This is complete nonsense, Mr. Pratt," he exclaimed. "What you're doing is deliberately lying, deliberately twisting it, so that Americans watching this who may be tempted to buy in to your ludicrous fear game, rush out tomorrow and buy more weapons, and more ammunition. Because you know what? More guns, less gun crime, less gun murders: it is a fallacy, it is based on lies, you've just propagated another lie. You've just said that a figure of 39, the official figures from the British home office, 39 gun murders in 2011, in England, in Wales, you have added a nought to that, and then tripled it. It's outrageous."
Watch the interview, and listen to the debate, then check out the statistics as explained by Morgan, and crunch the numbers for yourself.
» Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Twitter
> Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
Larry Pratt's constabulary comments seem to come from a report referenced on the gunowners.org website, they use a 2000 report by the HMIC , the Inspectorate of Constabulary ( seems to an AG type office overseeing UK police forces). The more recent HMIC website reports are still cautious about gun crime stats. But HMIC is part of the Home Office so I would give the point to Piers.
I am very much in support of gun control but wonder if the statistics bandied about by Larry Pratt, for some years in Britain, don't include all murders and not the very few committed with a firearm. That difference is an important one.
Why does the UK have the highest violent crime rate in Europe, FAR higher than the US, and higher even than South Africa since they effectively banned guns.
That article has loads of links that back up everything Pratt said.
Mr Pratt's numbers likely are total murder rate. That is what he said the first time. Morgan concentrates only on "gun murder" numbers (incidentally a Fox news reporter shows stats suggesting Morgan is still under reporting). When Mr Pratt said number of murders, Morgan said gun murders and asked him again. This was likely a deliberate ploy to avoid the stat Mr Pratt was projecting.
Overall CNN should be ashamed to have someone like Morgan on their staff. It's one thing to have an editorial bias. It's another to to shout over and insult guests who have alternative points of view. Good juralism should inform and allow the reader/viewer to make up their own minds. Morgan's type of coverage would have been right at home in any number of dictatorships or in movies such as "V for Vendetta".
Partly because the figures for the UK concerning violent crime include all incidents reported to the Police regardless of whether charges arise from the reports, the US figures only count incidents that end in a successful prosecution for violent crime.
That's exactly what he did wrong ... total murders vs gun murders. He listed more than 700 as murders for 2012. Per the UNODC's reporting, that's correct. But that is TOTAL murders in the UK (UK vs just England by the way). Neither one of them stayed firm in their terminology as they were speaking, something just saying "murders" (vs "gun murders") ... but the understood topic was gun-related, so that should be obvious. Unless, the argument is that while there are less gun murders, there are just as many actual murders ... which also isn't true. The figures there aren't quite so contrasting, but the US still has more total murders than the UK. Of course there are other things to consider, like the US's proximity to Mexico whose border towns have statistically the most dangerous cities in the world.
It's a troubling thing watching two loud-mouth, rude men argue based on statistics of which neither understand the depths of.
Regardless of what the correct number is....there happens to be more crime in Britain than any other country in Europe. ......Since their gun ban. Most of the gun violence in the US is done by gangs. I hate guns, but it seems to me, the logical thing to do is to arm those teachers who want the resposibiltiy in their school. I was a teacher and always thought it was silly to call it a "Gun Free Zone." So I don't bring a gun to the school, but a nutcase does anyway? We all know that we can not ban all guns. That used to be my desire, but now I am thinking more logically, and clearer on what would really help.
The ONLY thing that mattters is keeping Americans safe from this Government now.
Millions of people are killed all kinds of ways including hospital mistakes.
176 children have been killed in Pakistan by weaponized drones and NDAA is evil and Obama signid it when he said he wouldn't – in the cover of darkness on 12/31/11 and then fought to keep it – don't trust them taking guns from law abiding citizens – Criminals get guns anyways.
Your statement is for a different forum. You are talking about foreign policy.
Go to Fareed Zakaria's
So what's the case for the military grade rapid assault weapon with the 30 or 100 round clip in the hands of civilians?
AR-15 is considered sub-standard for military use because it's a semi-auto rifle. All semi autos = 1 round for each pull of the trigger.
Now if you we're referring to a M16 assault rifle where a pull of the trigger empties the whole mag – I'd agree, these full auto weapons have no place in civilians hands.
The M16 in use now does not do full auto. It has semi automatic and 3 shot burst. AR-15's can also be made into full auto.
Really? I did not know that. So the only difference between an M-16 and an AR-15 is the three round burst? Let’s not bring that up again. LOL
The M16A1 was semi/auto
M16A2 Semi/3 round burst used by Army
M16A3 semi/auto used by the navy
M16A4 Semi/burst used by Marines
AR-15 was originally issued to SpecOps in the early 60's
EB, that is good info. Thanks.... Seems to me that the military wasn't very happy when we left the 30 caliber world for the 223? If I remember right, they all thought it was way to lite.
Im dont think aull auto rifles are illegal just more regulated. It is not illegal to own. . Some people can pull a trigger just as fast as a full auto. So should they be illegal? It shouldnt be a point to make certain styles or kinds of guns legal or illegal. It should be all or none. All guns kill. If you responsible to own a gun it dosent matter how many bullets it holds or how fast it shoots. There should be no laws to limit what guns we can own or not. Why should we be able to own high cap magazines? Why can we own cars that go over well over 100mph when the law states much less?
People value guns (money) more than they value lives that's the sad truth in America.
I can't understand why people are so angry nobody has said they want guns banned they just want military style guns off the streets whats wrong with that. Why does the NRA always argue as if the other side wants all guns banned. It's really sad to see how people are obsessed with guns to the point where they show no compassion for the lives lost due to these military guns ...I hope they never have to lose a child...a loved one in order to finally care about lives more than they care about a piece of metal.
You have the best statement on this episode. You said it ALL.
If people like Pratt, Alex Jones and Laperre understand what YOU just said,
AMERICA will be so much better place to live.
Military weapons are NOT available to the general public...
And P.S. any monkey can change a clip in less than a second, these bans have no real effect on CRIMINALS who DON'T obey LAWS.
What if the U.S. government purchased assault rifles and their ammunition magazines at every gun show and licensed dealer (especially Wallmart) – this would take them off the market – turn them over to the military for their use – and, if those same dealers and vendors still sold them, slap a huge fine on them. Would that be too easy – after all, did they not bail out, by the billions, banks and automobile makers?
Last night Piers said that he was trying to find any humanity in his guest Mr Pratt and couldn't find any. I understand how Piers feels, because I try and find any humanity in the people who are for abortion rights. He has numerous shows about the killing of 20 children by a madman, but how many shows does he have about the MILLIONS of babies that are killed by mad-doctors (abortionist)? Good 'ol Piers has selective outrage about the killing of children, doesn't he?
You are right about part of what you are saying. No one is talking about the issue from an educated point. Military style weapon is misleading. Even the term assault weapon is misleading. I object to how we are demonizing the wrong thing. An ar-15 is not an assault weapon with a five round clip. Sorry, it is just another semi-automatic rifle. Military style weapons? My 30.06 won two world wars and is a basic hunting rifle. We need changes, but they need to be educated changes and not just another assault weapons ban that just didn’t work or make any sense. I am so upset with the NRA and people like Alex Jones that could contribute to the debate in a more meaningful way but choose to go off on extreme tangents.
Alex, you and I know that everyone cares about those children and others that were killed. I believe that it wasn't even the auto or semi automatic rifle that was used at the school in Conn. I believe it was hand guns. there is a lot of incorrect info out there put out by journalists with an agenda. I hate guns and don't own a gun, but it is true that in all countries that eventually took away all guns, did it for a reason......
Any gun can kill, but for some reason we are targeting guns for the deaths of children? Maybe banning guns there will be no gun deaths? Bad people do bad things. Over 1 million gun owners killed no one yesterday nor will never. If the thought is elimnate guns to prevent possible or further deaths. We should also target and look at the alcohol industry... the automobile industry. If the drunk driver who had such easy access to alcohol and automobiles maybe more lives would be saved. Why do you need an "military style rifle".. why do you need a car or motor cycle that goes faster than 100MPH?
It appears from checking gunpolicy.org and citizensreportuk.org that Mr. Pratt was citing the number of TOTAL HOMICIDES FOR ANY REASON in the UK/Wales in 2011. Not those related to firearms.
Before one goes on National Television and makes an ass of himself, perhaps he should check his facts! He owes Mr. Morgan an apology.
One has to assume that Mr. Pratt is used to being an ass so why not continue.
You silly troll, how does the senselessness of you argument evade you? At the heart of the argument used to justify banning semiautomatic guns is the idea that it will make us all much safer. If the statistics sited by Pratt are correct, then the truth of the matter is that the rate of murder per 100,000 people is actually much higher in the UK than in the U.S. Do you think it matters to a grieving family what implement was used to kill their loved one? This whole guns are bad argument is a total fallacy, and the statistical evidence sited by Morgan is intentionally deceptive and only serves to support his strange fetish of hating an inanimate object. For the last time, people kill people and anyone who cant see that needs to do some serious reflection!
'The heart of men is desperately wicked' as stated in the scriptures. It is saddening, that even in the wake of the abuse of guns, that some people still promote more guns. When are we going to learn. Stay safe Piers, there are too many insane people around and they look like normal people.What a shame.
You seem to know your scripture sir, but you have to take scripture as a whole. "Before I formed you in your mothers womb I knew you". Why not ask your buddy Piers why he isn't concerned by the millions of murdered babies in their mothers wombs? I haven't seen one show about the outrage of this infanticide by Mr Morgan. Since you are so versed in the Bible, why not demand Piers to do a series of shows about the evil of abortion? I'd love to see that on his show, but he is like every other lefty with selective outrage! Spare me the hypocracy!!!
You are not talking on the point on this forum.
There is no relationship between Piers Morgan talking about GUN CONTROL with your rant about ABORTION.
If you have a point to make on GUN CONTROL and empathy with people who were killed recently on mass gun murders,
you are welcome to write about it. For ABORTION, find another forum. Thanks
Funny to be quoting scripture and talking about banning guns. Do you not remember Jesus telling his people to buy swords even though it was illegal? There was a reason for that.
I was a police officer in northern England for 25 years working some rough areas and never once saw a gun other than shotguns being used by licensed firearm holders. The HMIC figure of 39 for death by firearms is about right....shootings always make national headlines here in Britain. The reality here is that because criminals and unstable people don't have easy access to guns and familiarity with them they don't use them.
The real facts tell the story. Britain is considered the most violent nation in Europe. It has has a violent crime rate much higher then the US. So if banning guns means less crime, then why is the British crime rate so much higher then the US, even higher then South Africa.
The US has the most guns, yet they are not number one in gun crime. The places where people do have concealed carry see a much lesser gun crime rate then the areas in the US where guns are prohibited completely. Clearly Chicago and NY have a much higher gun murder rate then Houston. 6000 crimes are stopped everyday by a good decent human being with a gun.
Now if you assume, which is more then likely, that many times more individuals are decent people then evil, then it makes sense to arm those good and decent people and properly train them on usage.
Switzerland trains and arms every adult male, and every female wishing too, with an assault rifle and yet there isn't a mass shooting every day there. There was even a mass shooting in the UK AFTER the gun weapons ban. Pretty easy to kill a lot of people when no one else has a gun.
Thanks Ken and well said.
The difference in England and Swiss is that people there don't have as many mental problems as USA. People in USA are much likely to get a crazy day in their life and have a switch turned on or off in their brains which will make them take a gun which may belong to them or from any other means (parents or gun show with no background check) and start shooting people for any reason that they are angry about as we have seen in Aurora, CO, New town, CT, Oregon Mall or Wisconsin temple. This reason is enough to make a "BAN ON ASSAULT WEAPONS" and save the lives of other innocent children or adults living around them. Anyone not able to comprehend this simple fact should go and see a counselor or make themselves self-deported out of America so that other people can live without fear of ASSAULT RIFLES.
Piers, THANK YOU for not backing down on gun control. We are Americans with post-grad degrees, professional careers and with small children living in Asia and we will not return to the US anymore beyond brief visits to family. The gun advocates and President need to know that the gun violence in America is keeping otherwise loyal Americans from returning to their own country (yet we still pay taxes to this country). Want to keep American children safe? Remove them from the US if at all possible (realizing this is not feasible for many families), but we live in a country that bans guns except for the police, and while we recognize there are other harms out there, at least we don't worry about our kids being gunned down in school, the mall, on public transport, etc. This is so very distressing and sad. Thank you for the backbone on this important issue.
Pierce: Have your ranter on TV again – this time – no conversation – have a child and parent/s walk in front of you both and have the child ask the question, "Why are you killing my friends" and then have the parent ask, "Why are you killing our children." They don't need to say anything else – just look at the ranter and walk off. If you have a number of children and their parent/s do the same it will be explosive, go viral and we would get our point across.
Keep it up Pierce.
You are a pathetic coward. Don't come back you will not be missed!!!!
This is one of the dumbest things ever written. Please keep your brainless children wherever you are I don't want them rubbing off on mine. U.S. is one of the safest countries to live in the world. If you don't realize that you are simply living in another world.
I agree with the above. We should also have the same kids come up who have lost familys or friends to drunk drivers. We need to ban cars and alcohol.
This is what he was referring to he mentioned it while Piers Morgan rudely tried to talk over him...no point to PM
Another misleading post by a non-literate gun fanatic. The article discusses that the UK home offices under reports gun offenses do not include firing a weapon, brandishing a gun, or pistol whipping someone. In other words, permit violations and smuggling issues. Larry the Liar's statistics of 970 murders are just that- a lie.
Piers if you don't feel safe here in America, then you should return home. Perhaps you should put your money where your mouth is and donate some of that cash you earned here in this country to the victims on your way out.
Check my math
(Guns + Violence) – Guns = 0
(Guns + Violence) – Guns = Violence
You need to CORRECT your math:
GUNS + Crazy and mentally challenged VIOLENT person = INNOCENT FOLKS mass MURDERED
(GUNS + Crazy and mentally challenged VIOLENT person) – GUNS = Crazy and mentally challenged VIOLENT person
This VIOLENT PERSON NEEDS A COUNSELOR cause he can't use GUNS like ASSAULT RIFLES but has only access to knifes or crowbars, etc = CANNOT KILL innocent people around him
DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW ?
No, I don't understand. He has access to a lot of things that even exceed the power and mass killing ability of the gun.
Better check that math again. Since when is a gun the only way to murder someone? Perhaps you missed the Parliment discussing the blunting of knives to reduce violent crime rates in GB because the ban that PM is going on about did absolutely NOTHING to lower the crime rate. Maybe you should take a statistics class instead of commenting on msg boards since you obviously are graphically and statistically challenged.
Larry is a liar. Plain and simple.
Piers Morgan I would love to debate U on live TV without scripts for U to follow about gun control. I was raised in S Calif and have lived the majority of my adult life in Missouri.
First using England as a example with gun control vs the USA does not really hold any water. Here are a few stats California: 163,696 square miles
England: 50,346 square miles
Great Britain aka United Kingdom (England, Wales, Scotland, North Ireland): 94,526 square miles
What works for a small parcel of land does not really apply to a large parcel of land. England is smaller than the single state of California. People in England don't own the acreage that people do in the USA, that live outside metro area's. They don't have the need to defend themselves and protect there property, from various forms of critters that are around the USA.
In England you don't see or hear about how "hunters" donate meat to the hungry. Missouri this year set a record of hunters donating over 400,000 lbs of venison to feed the hungry.
I see YOU flip flop around the gun control issue. Please be very clear here... What are you really talking about TOTAL GUN control? Or are you just talking about "Assault Rifles"? You tend to combine the 2 more often than not. If you are talking about Assault Rifles, please define what makes a rife a assault rifle. You like the majority of people that have little knowledge of guns probably don't have a clue. I will give you a hint... There are 3 things that make a military assault rifle different than any other type of civilian rifle.
Very much looking for your response. Have a GREAT DAY!
Wow I keep reading here and one thought pops into my mind. That is how little people really know about what makes a military assault rife a assault rifle. There are only 3 things different from a military assault rifle and a civilian rifle. NONE of the 3 things had anything to do with the recent shootings around the USA. I hear people say they have the right to live without the fear of someone owning a military assault rifle. It just goes to show how little they really know about guns or rifles in general.
Very well said and that General even made himself look stupid to any gun educated person when he gave his little ballistic leason and how the 223 was a military weapon not for the general public.
That idiot Larry Pratt was spouting overall muder rates in England/Whales instead of Gun murder rates. Apples to oranges.
What a fool.....
what a fool? what an idiotYOU are! murder is a murder. It is unimportant how it's done. Brits don't have as many guns as we do but still kill themselves at a rate greater (per capita) than Americans do. I RATHER HAVE A GUN AND TAKE MY CHANCES
People kill, by any mean necessary. Just ask the Bush family.
Check out the website Citizens Report UK. You can find the gun violence stats for London for 2006-2011. There were 2390 reported incidents of gun violence in 2011 in London alone. The notion that the entire country only had 39 gun murders is not only completely false, it is bad journalism. Which is what Morgan does best.
Gun violence and gun murder are not the same thing. Citing a number for violence and using that larger number as rationale for why the small number of gun murders is invalid is illogical.
The very website you are citing backs up the 39 statistic
Here are the official statistics – who knows where Larry Pratt made his up from: http://www.citizensreportuk.org/reports/murders-fatal-violence-uk.html
Piers morgan and CNN should be ashamed. First Piers completely acted like a child calling Larry names, (stupid, ignorant, etc.) Then not only does he not apologize for his horrible etiquette , but they chose a clip or Larry from the last debate that somehow paints Him in a rude light instead of Piers. Than Piers continually talks for well over a minute and cuts larry off repeatedly after less than 15 seconds. AS a person that still doesn't own a gun, I am genuinely appalled that CNN not only condoned this type of non-sense but has yet to apologize for it. AND PERHAPS for the sake of HONEST journalism. site a few sources on this page that CLEARLY support what Larry had to say in this debate as well. Try looking at a few of these sites to get a more balanced understanding.
Piers merely smirks, pouts, and provokes his guests. His yellow journalism which has been unveiled in England is being repeated here.
Why are we so dumb? Do not band or take away any weapons from anyone, Its stupid to even consider it in a gun sensationalized country. The solution is to simply require all firearms to be federally and state registered and all be insured against liability and tighten the federal law to a felony possession if anyone possesses a firearm without it. Let the private insurance company, gun dealers and home land security determine the risk of insuring all gun owners.
Adam still would have taken his mother’s firearm and shot her with it, went to the school and done what he did. Her gun was already registered. Insurance wouldn’t have kept him from doing it either. Laws don’t stop criminals from doing bad things. It only punishes them when they do, but in these cases, they always commit suicide so the law does nothing. We need to get these kids help before it ever comes to this. People saw this coming and did nothing.
Larry Pratt is the poster child for stupid cave man america and is so stupid, he doesn't even realize it!
Larry is a funny guy.
“Ruger is coming out with a new pistol in honor of the United States Senate and the House of Representatives. It will be named the “Congressman”.
It doesn't work and you can't fire it.” -– “Larry Pratt”
Just droping a note for those interested. Sorry Piers and CNN, you just lost another viewer. Who cares about deporting him, certainly not me, Just fire him.
The proofs not in the pudding, It's in the ratings. :) Cheers..
I will no longer watch him either. He is the most arrogant idiot. No wonder alex jones went after him if he hadnt he would have cut him off and called him a liar. I didnt hear Mr pratt calling piers a liar. He had a man there that was calm and quietly debating him and he attacked him and called him a liar. He is so disrespectful. They lose me as a viewer.
You may like Alex Jones and his GUNS. But i am sure you have some empathy for the kids who were killed by the Assault Rifles.
So what you're saying is "don't confuse me with the facts, I've already made up my mind". Duhh.......
It is a fact that Pratt is a liar. And liars don't deserve any respect!
yeah, Texans need their GUNS and ASSAULT RIFLES, not their COMMON SENSE. Something in the air in TEXAS makes them feel safe with GUNS by their side, not empathy for the kids who lost their lives to the GUNS.
They lost their lives to an idiot. I'm pretty sure if that guy wasn't there those guns wouldn't have killed those people that day! I'm almost sure? I don't know I could be wrong. I'm also pretty sure if that lady in the news didn't have that gun to shoot the robber she would have been dead today. But you know I could be wrong she could have been a tenth degree black belt
Quit using the same lame excuse that Piers uses in every debate. Think of the children!!!!!! That's not an intelligent way to think. I have a little girl of my own and it made my sick when I heard about the CT shootings but I didn't jump out of my seat and yell "ban all of the guns!!" That's not the answer. There are millions of guns and gun owners in this country and a mass shooting event like this is so rare in comparison it's like being struck by lightning or being attacked by a shark. The focus should be on mental health or finding ways to secure our schools rather than directing anger towards the legal gun owners of this country. The government and the media are using the children of CT to further their agenda of disarming the American public and that's not okay.
AIBROWN "Quit using the same lame excuse that Piers uses in every debate. Think of the children!!!!!! That's not an intelligent way to think. I have a little girl of my own and it made my sick when I heard about the CT shootings but I didn't jump out of my seat and yell "ban all of the guns!!" That's not the answer. There are millions of guns and gun owners in this country and a mass shooting event like this is so rare in comparison it's like being struck by lightning or being attacked by a shark. The focus should be on mental health or finding ways to secure our schools rather than directing anger towards the legal gun owners of this country. The government and the media are using the children of CT to further their agenda of disarming the American public and that's not okay."........YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT PIERCE MORGAN AND HIS ILK HAVE BEEN PUSHING THE ANTI-GUN AGENDA LONG BEFORE SANDY HOOK,,...NOW EVERY WORD OUT OF THEIR MOUTH WHEN CAUGHT LYING,OR IN ABSENCE OF A SUBSTANENT POINT IS..."OH YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT THESE CHILDREN!" IT'S DISCUSTING,..AND I WILL DRINK CHAMPAGNE WHEN THIS DEBATE IS OVER AND NEVER HAVE TO SEE PIERS MOGAN OR WATCH CNN EVER AGAIN.....I USED TO LIKE CNN, BUT WILL SOON LOOK FORWARD TO WATCHING FOX INSTEAD....SHAME ON PIERS MORGAN A LIAR AND A RUDE IMBECILE,..NO WONDER 100.000 WANT YOU TO LEAVE AMERICA.
Rocky, where are your tears for the nearly 700 school children, 66 of them dead, in Chicago in 2010 by guns? Are they not important because they weren't all killed in one place at one time? http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/260-school-children-killed-chicago-3-years-where-are-tears-them Are we only to weep for those killed by madmen that illegally took someone else's guns? Do you weep for the mother that buried her child killed by a stray bullet from a gangsta? Or only when groups of children die? I wish Piers Morgan would answer these questions also. Do either you or Piers weep for the children in Pakistan, Yemen, or other places in the Middle East killed by the BIG guns of American drones? Or do they not count because they aren't American? Or their skin is brown? http://www.policymic.com/articles/20884/is-america-like-adam-lanza-u-s-drone-strikes-have-killed-176-children-in-pakistan-alone
Really, Texan? The proof is in the ratings? That is where this should be settled? If so, perhaps the cast of Jersey Shore should rule the land.
I strongly suggest that Southern and Middle state Americans especially travel abroad and see how other people live..... Stop spreading fear...... of others.... It is a sign of insecurity, a false sense of superiority and a clear sign of ignorance.
FEAR is the antidote to FAITH. So live up to your saying In God we trust.
I don't know if Dr. Drew pointed this out but Alex Jones is mentally ill.
According to DSM -IV TR I would say he is :
Axis I Delusional disorder paranoid type, he also seemed manic with; noticeable racing thoughts, pressured speech, overproductive speech and some flight of ideas
II. Paranoid personality disorder
Piers, kudos for keeping a straight, calm, face. I was impressed that you didn't come across as judgmental and condescending, however, I would suggest that if you ever have another mentally ill guest who is in the throes of their illness on your show again that you don't attempt to conduct a serious interview. Mr. Jones was incapable of organized, coherent thought. Inviting him on the show was no different than having a disorganized, actively hallucinating schizophrenic as your guest then asking him what he thought about this country's policy on Iran.
uh huh – now you get to deem who's mentally ill – what a surprise – um no – a select group of people don't t get to arbitrarily decide who's okay – ask the Jews in WWII – Governments are way scarier than an individual or a group like the NRA.
Are you a doctor, if not keep your diagnosis to your self. You are blind as a bat and dont see what the rest of us see. I dont have a mental illness and i dont say that any one has mental problems because they are spiritually awake and am able to see through Gods eyes.
Actually, I AM a doctor – in fact, I'm a psychiatrist as well as a Professor who teaches at a local University. Carla is closer to the truth than you might want to think.
I'm ALSO a doctor, a licensed psychiatrist, certified geriatric and forensic psychiatrist.
One should read Carla's post very carefully for she is very much on point.
Wake up America.
Well, so Peirs seeks out mentally disturbed gun nuts to make what point? That would be the type of journalism that others have accused him of.
Piers Morgan, first of you are not even American, I dont see where you have the right to speak out on our countries issues, you cant even vote in our elections and to hear you debate this gun issues makes me as an American sick to the stomach. You say it has worked in your country, good for you, if you dont like how the USA does our things then maybe it is time for you to go home, do us a favor let Americans debate our issues we do not need foriegners doing so.
What if he isn't an American? Isn't the right to free speech suppose to be a universal right WE AMERICAN are suppose to uphold? Also If you ever had a American History class the famous slogan the "The whole world is watching" was used by African American during the civil rights movement to challenge the unpleasant norms. The slogan was aimed toward to outsiders to get them to judge America, a country that is suppose to be about trying people fairly. If American didn't live up to virtues then the Soviet would look like a better nation. Also this debate isn't about disarming citizens, but about common sense and moderate regulations of guns so the wrong people can't get their hands on them.
I have not heard such xenophobic, nativist bile in many, many years. The lack of civil discourse coming from these hypocrites who don't seem to mind America sticking its nose and military might in the entire world's business is appalling.
It is Piers Morgan's lack of citizenship that liberates him to speak freely and candidly on whatever subject he deems important. Just because the small minority "good ol' boy" contingent in America is used to bullying anyone they like, doesn't make it right.
Who knows if this vital conversation would even be taking place if not for the courage and risk Mr. Morgan is taking. Given the sheepish, lackey like posture that the vast majority of mainstream media figures have embraced the last few decades, we all should be proud that at least this journalist, foreign as he may be is confronting issues that concern all of us.
Let's not forget that 68% of the American public DO NOT own firearms and have essentially been locked out of the legislative process by the enormous lobbying resources of the NRA, et al. Neo-conservatives love to throw the "majority rules" and such about to suggest public mandates on things, but on this issue, we the clear majority by 2/3rds have zero voice on this matter.
For a country of 350 million citizens to have 310 million guns owned by only a third of the population is clear evidence that the carnage being wrought is destabilizing our entire society. Right wing nutjobs fear the UN and international intervention in global affairs, but I say bring them on to help this sick society heal itself and get on the correct track to easing the violence and insecurity that plagues us.
Hell, our bought and sold Congress even has taken the radical step to insulate and shield firearm manufacturers and dealers from civil litigation for the damage their products do. It is the ONLY industry in America to enjoy such immunity.
First of all this whole debate is going in the wrong direction and danceing around the real issue! This issue isn't guns or there efficientcy to kill people, no, its people, people are the problem until you fix the people problem, you will still have people killing people. Like these statistics peirs is giving, there for gun violence only not total violence we don't know how many people are killed total but I'm guessing its probably about the same as percentage wise as america. And another thing if your going after lethal guns its not assualt rifles its pistols. Pistols kill way way more people than assualt rifles! But they wouldn't take those away because people also have been protected by them.
GUNS don't Kill People.
People Kill People WITH GUNS.
You are way off. He (Piers) as a member of these United States has all the rights as you and I to speak out against anything he feels is wrong. He does not have to be a US citizen or resident. Just being in this country gives him the right to speak out as he pleases. It is the 1st Amendment right. If you cannot figure this out maybe you should not be commenting about what he can and cannot do.
By the way, why doesn't all citizens have the right to own a grenade, rocket launcher, etc.? Because they are deadly weapons that cause great harm and damage of human lives. They are controlled by our government for military use only. Is this the next level of weaponry Larry Pratt and Alex Jones want to be included in the 2nd Amendment? A bit ridiculous in my comment but if you think about it, it makes sense.
It is time for gun activists to stop thinking of what they should be allowed to have or not and start thinking of society as a whole. More guns mean more deaths, simply put. The gun argument is not that all guns should be disallowed. If anyone with some intelligence actually listens, Piers and others are stating that these deadly machine guns should be used by military only and not by all citizens. Gun owners and those who argue for owning guns (no matter what type) are so one sided thinkers they do not get the point being discussed.
Art, you need to take a step back and look at the whole picture before you speak.
To be more specific, more guns means more gun-related deaths. It does not mean more deaths in general. And I love when people go with that argument. Well what about rocket launchers and grenades? Citizens can't have those so why not stop them from getting military style assault rifles while we're at it. It's ridiculous. Is anyone out there advocating getting these under the 2nd amendment? No. So enough of the fallacious arguments.
How many deaths per year are committed using these "deadly machine guns"? Any clue? The total number of people killed a year with rifles is around 350. And that includes ALL rifles. So tell me, exactly, how is eliminating 350 gun deaths per year ( and I would argue that banning assault rifles will put no dent in that number ) supposed to tackle the "gun problem"? Hmm? I would love to hear how much of a problem rifles are when they account for 3% of all gun murders ( military assault rifles used in murders are even less because that stat counts all rifles, hunting etc. )
So please, enlighten me. Since I'm a gun owner and am only capable of thinking one-sidedly. How exactly will banning a gun that's almost NEVER used in murder, solve the high murder problem? You think if that mass shootings like that can only happen with that rifle? You are delusional. Virginia tech, Columbine, and the worst one before Virginia Tech in Texas at a diner were not committed with a rifle. Gun owners are upset because banning assault weapons does nothing to alleviate the problem of gun murders or mass murders. Please. I really would love to hear your response.
As far as I can tell, Philip, it has to do with the trauma of mass shootings - and how to bring that particular type of crime down because it is so traumatic for everyone..it brings up all kinds of fears. I think most rational people believe that gun violence is a very complicated problem that would not be solved with one kind of solution...so if you narrow it down to one kind of a situation - a dangerous person wanting to commit suicide and take a lot of innocent people with him...how do we stop THAT? It's a whole different question when you are talking about other shootings. This problem has to do with the perfect storm as I mentioned in another box...of dangerous person with violent intent suddenly buying a great number of big guns and many thousands of rounds of ammo....how do see to it that law enforcement puts all the pieces together before an event and are alble to prevent it. Whether or not someone wants to go shoot off big guns in the woods is irrelevant...stopping a manica from shooting up public places is a whole other thing. How do we do it? Surely there is a way?
to enlighten you here is my response. Yes, rifles do not kill as many as other weapons. And yes, rifles were not used during the killings at Columbine, VT, etc. Machine gun (style) weapons were. It is not a matter of how many deaths occur in the US with rifles, guns, etc. It is a matter of how many people are killed in such a short amount of time with these types of weapons. Even though these are far and between incidents where a weapon of this type is used and so many people die is the issue at hand. I can't believe weapon owners are more concern about their rights than to consider the human lives lost by any weapon (machine gun, shot gun, or any other type of weapon). I for one do not agree with anyone owning a weapon but I also set aside my point of view in agreement with the 2nd amendment. What I do totally agree with is limiting the weponry allowed to be owned, that is why I made my ridiculous comment of the tank, grenade,etc. If our gov. can limit our ownership of these items for the stated reason then they should also limit our ownership of weapons that take so many lives as machine gun style weapons. If you can't see this then maybe you should not be allowed to own any at all.
You made a very good argument and when it comes to these weapons that have a magazine that allows such carnage, I have been on the same page you are one. The problem however is we are trying to rethink a situation after that fact. If only he had only a 10 round magazine, or if only he didn’t even have a gun none of this would have happened. The truth is we are trying to change it after the fact. If we change it before the fact they guy would be there with something else to do what he wanted to do. In the end, we have to deal with these people. Like I said, I thought like you until I looked a lot deeper into the problem.
Well said Jackie! When one looks deeper than surface value there is lots to be considered. First many people are mistaken and have little gun knowledge. 1st a big argument about military style assault rifles. There are 3 things that make a military assault rife different than a civilian rifle. 1 it has a flash suppressor so it makes it harder at a distance to see where a shot is coming from. 2 it has a clip on the end of the barrel for a bayonet. and 3rd and perhaps the most important it has a lever to switch to fully automatic. The weapon today that our troops use only fires 3 rounds at a time in fully automatic, due to the fact that the rifle becomes very inaccurate in this mode when you can just empty the clip.
The rifles used in the recent shootings did not have a fully automatic switch so they are NOT really military assault rifles. They are reproductions or modified rifles. They are semi automatic but semi automatic weapons have been around for over 100 years. The magazine issue is also not fully understood. In the service when using a m16 we would tape 3 clips together, 1 up and 2 down. This way in a second or so one was reloaded. My point is even if a law was passed that the max number of rounds in a clip would be say 10, one still would have access for 30 or 90 rounds if they were carrying 2 extra clips taped together as described above.
Next something most don't consider as they live in dense populated area's is how many people across the USA would starve as they rely on the game they hunt for food. What happens in states like Missouri that have wildlife managed areas? Mo for example has generally more deer taken ever year than it did the year before. The excess of deer for one would cause many car accidents. Also this year hunters donated over 400,000 pounds of venison to feed the hungry. How would someone protect themselves from wild critters that roam the country. Like the bear, fox, mountain lion, bobcat etc etc. if not for guns. Its not only protecting themselves it protecting there family, pets and live stock.
How many people would loose there jobs if guns were eliminated and how many other related industries would be affected?
The solution is gun education and more intense background investigation. Putting the "In God We Trust" back into our way of thought would not be a bad idea either. IMHO!
Sadly, you seem to be fixated on the issue of citizenship.Not on the real issue of large numbers of people being murdered by assault weapons. And in reality, are you all not immigrants.Not including native americans of course.
This large number of people being killed by assault weapons, how many exactly? Don't worry I did the foot work for you. Out of the 11000+ gun murders in the US, 350 or so were committed with rifles. All rifles. Including "assault weapons." I'm not seeing this large number you're talking about. You see this is what is called being misleading. They quote a high number "over 11000 gun murders in the US!" and then show a picture of a scary looking weapon that is used in less than 3% of those murders. Because that's what they want to ban. 11000. 350.
Whenever you having this feeling welling up inside you that you just hate that scary looking gun and you can't think why anyone would need it and it's so horrible and devastating, just think, 11000, 350. Why anyone needs it and how scary and how devastating it is, is practically a non issue. Why? Because despite the media playing it out to be the most effective killing machine ever invented, guess what? It isn't used that much. They put up that big number to mislead you and make you think that they're related. It isn't used. Don't be a zombie and think for yourself.
Large numbers? Everything is relative, but as a percentage of the total we're looking at around 3% of 'gun murders' being committed with long-guns...
I agree and if he doesnt like our laws then he needs to go back and suck on the queens toes. Alex jones had to do what he did because last time he was on piers show he wouldnt let him speak.
So this time Alex Jones had to shout like a crazy lion and and advocate shootings by crazy people with ASSAULT RIFLES and killings of innocent children and adults as legitimate?
He was asking Piers Morgan for a boxing match.
This makes a perfect sense that people like him should not only have NO ASSAULT RIFLES in their possession, but any kind of weapons with them. People like him have 911 to call from their cell phone.
HE SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS DANGEROUS and VIOLENT MAN; enough to keep him from getting any kind of weapons on him.
That's because he has empathy for people who die everyday with THESE GUNS.
One does not have to be a Citizen or VOTE in order to speak humanely about unjust happenings in the country and community he is living among.
I don't know why YOU are not speaking anything about the tools (semi-automatic assault rifles) used by people to kill fellow people. Don't YOU have any empathy for people being killed, not to mention 20 young children ?
Dont try to put me on a guilt trip, Yes I feel empathy for the people who have lost those who were killed, just because I have a view on guns doesnt mean I dont, thats the problem with you liberals, cant say one thing without you all thinking the worst, get off your high horse and get back to reality.
Here is the thing many people who LOVE their GUNS and sleep with them don't understand:
The difference in England and Swiss is that people there don't have as many mental problems as USA. People in USA are much likely to get a crazy day in their life and have a switch turned on or off in their brains which will make them take a gun which may belong to them or from any other means (parents or gun show with no background check) and start shooting people for any reason that they are angry about as we have seen in Aurora, CO, New town, CT, Oregon Mall or Wisconsin temple.
This reason is enough to make a "BAN ON ASSAULT WEAPONS" and save the lives of other innocent children or adults living around them. Anyone not able to comprehend this simple fact should go and see a counselor or make themselves self-deported out of America so that other people can live without fear of ASSAULT RIFLES.
That Reply was for Art Parra.
first off I have personally been involved in a situation where I had to use a gun (it was an AR-15) to protect myself and 2 members of my family. I dread the thought of what the outcome may have been had I not had it. In my case the sound of me chambering my rifle and yelling that I was armed was enough to make the 3 intruders in my home flee immediately. They were caught later the same night, with help from my description of them and their vehicle, burglarizing a home near mine and all three were armed, convicted felons. Two of them had stolen pistols on them when arrested.
I usually keep my pistol that I carry daily close by when at home but I had my wallet stolen and was waiting for my concealed carry license to come in the mail so I had my pistols stored and locked away in my larger safe.
Being that my daily carry is a 357 magnum revolver, it would not have made the deterring sound that my AR did when I lcharged a round as the men were entering my home, and that immediately stopped them from coming any further.
I am thankful every day I wake up and see the faces of my wife and daughter that I had my gun for protection and it is not any persons nor the governments place to tell me I don't have the right to own it, as a legally licensed, trained, law abiding citizen.
These arguments get so off the point it is ridiculous. The fact that I own and carry any kind of gun does not mean I am not empathetic to the tragedies that happen around our country. The fact that one lunatic uses a particular weapon to carry out an unspeakable act does not mean that particular weapon is to blame. We need to look at what is really going on with youth in this country, and also why we so heavily protect everything else around us but not our children in schools. There are armed guards protecting everything of value in our society except our children in school. A derainged person intent on doing harm will do so with whatever means available, the type of weapon is irrelevant. In the case of these school shootings, the gunman is simply taking the path of least resistance where they can do the most harm, unprotected, vulnerable, defenseless school children and teachers.
I dare any person who is in favor of heavier gun restrictions to ask themselves a question and really really ask yourself, if a person with a gun hell bent on killing as many people as possible has a gun pointed at your son, daughter, loved one or yourself, what do you want standing between them and you or your loved one...a good guy with a gun or a REGULATION that told that madman he wasnt allowed to buy or own the gun hes about to pull the trigger of...I know my choice, and I hope if that nightmare ever came to be that there is someone there to protect both your family and mine.
i am not American or British. I don't live in the US or the UK. However, I find Piers Morgan's behaviour with Larry Pratt downright disgraceful and unprofessional. CNN should fire him and he should be thrown out of the US..
Boontham or whoever you are,
Make a point on why you think Piers Morgan should be fired by CNN.
You have no right in advocating his right of speaking his feelings, if you don't understand what he is talking about.
Piers, So glad that America's First Ammendment behind you so you can speak to the devastation that assault weapons have caused. Mr. Pratt may have to eat his words one day if a family or friend of his is murdered by an assault weapon at a mall, walking down the street or on their knees in church. Your numbers for England and Whales are spot on and he is a blatant liar that 3 murders count as 1.
He also mentioned Chicago, my home town, as having 1 murder a day which is true. However, it is the gangs with the assault rifles that are killing the children and devastating parents daily. Chicago is the murder Capitol of the US and I'm in favor or bringing in the National Guard to take back the city and get the guns off the street!
Thanks Piers for speaking up for us that don't have the same platform.
Please give the legal definition of an assault weapon can you gungrabbers please do that
An assault weapon is any firearm "military style" designed and manufactured primarily to be used in the act of killing human beings that has little value to hunters or violates the hunting ethics of "one shot, one kill". It has had modifications built into it or added on that increase its muzzle velocity, magazine capacity, triggering speed and lethality beyond what a reasonable person would describe as being necessary for common home defense.
Sir the 2nd amendment isn't meant for hunting. It was meant to protect the people from there government. That's why they put it in there because were a democracy persay and the founding fathers wanted to ensure the chance that we could have achance to protect ourselves from gov and foreign enemys. " a militia" that's doesn't sound like they meant hunting. If the goventment wanted to find the most lethal weapon it would be pistols they kill far more people than assualt rifles ever have! So then why are they aiming at assualt rifles? Maybe because they are the best weapon against an unpopular government and they want to eliminate any chance of an uprising
*BZZZZT* Oh, I'm sorry, but that's incorrect! Thanks for playing though.
The actual definition of "assault weapon" as defined by the AWB is a semi-automatic weapon with a detachable magazine and two additional features from a list that varies based on the weapon type. For rifles, which people are so hopped up to get rid of, these include a pistol grip, flash suppressor, collapsible stock, bayonet lug, or the barrel threadings necessary for rifle grenades.
There are some issues presented by these. Rifle grenades aren't really made or used anymore; they fell out of use with the advent of grenade launchers. A flash suppressor is not a suppressor; it just limits the visible flash to levels that don't blind you or others around you. And bayonet lugs? Really?
This all comes back to being an Ugly Gun Ban. Look up the comparison between a Ruger Mini-14 (not legally an assault weapon) and an AR-15 (legally an assault weapon). They're basically the same gun with different furniture.
And you think that when semi-automatic weapons are banned, the gangs will just hand theirs over too? Rifles aren't the problem anyways. There were only 323 rifle murders in the US in 2011. The long and the short of it is that taking away our so-called "assault weapons" will do nothing to curtail crime and will only neuter us if we ever have to stand up against our government or a foreign invasion. And maybe someday, you'll have to eat your words when one of us so-called gun nuts saves one of your family members.
Only?? Only 323? These are human beings for God's sake. It is this type of mentality that sickens me. This type of disregard for human life is the problem here
Ok. So we ban assault weapons and that eliminates those 323 deaths ( it won't but for the sake of argument lets go with it). Congratulations, we have essentially done nothing to solve the problem. Do you have any other solutions that, I don't know, might make a difference?
Again, 323 gun murders used with rifles total in a year, out of 11000+. People are being killed in chicago with handguns. Don't play in to their fear.
Murders happen by all sorts of weapons, so tallying them under a category listing of 'gun murders' isn't really telling the whole truth. What also wasn't said, is the percentage of British populace that are allowed private ownership of firearms. It's easy to boast numbers when you've groomed them to your favor. Well done mainstream media. :P
Our government does not negotiate with terrorists. Why are Alex Jones, Larry Pratt and the NRA included in the gun debate?
Clearly these guys are in it for the money.
Finally, please have a spokesman for the British government on your show to discuss crime in the UK.
I don't agree with most of Alex Jones' ideas simply because he is very far out there politically. On the other hand though, you have no right to criticize Larry Pratt or the NRA or call them "terrorists." They are lobbying to protect your rights too, whether you realize it or not. The second amendment is the cornerstone of the bill of rights; as long as it exists, so do the other 9. If you take it away and neuter our ability to keep our government in check, we may all be losing more than just our right to own "scary rifles."
The only thing Pratt, Jones, Noory are defending is their pockets!. They profit for the fear they dissiminate across the most ignorant folk in America. Pratt is the marketing agent for the gun manufacturers in this country, and Jones and Noory got American white trash scared to death that ze germanz are coming so they can sell them gold and survivalist stuff. George Noory has Jones as his regular on his show, and it makes me weep to hear the ignorant people that call that program. It makes me really mad how these two are siphoning these people's savings. Clearly the folk that call these shows are suffering of mental distress,and some sound outright crazy...just like Jones. These people are being subjected to fear tactics and psychological manipulation by these greedy sob's. At the end of the day, the Limbaughs, and Noorys and Joneses and the Pratts are directly responsible for creating unrest in this country. Lets have a Congressional inquiry on these individuals now.
As for crime in the UK:
To see the guns of 1791 - google "1791 guns". These were the guns the 2nd Amendment related to.
Thanks Jim. I keep telling my friends who are screaming about 2nd ammendment rights to go buy a musket. Funny thing is while they are doing all the holloring they are precluded from owning a fire arm because they are ex-felons.
Or....how about if those who like their 1st amendment freedoms go back to the methods of speech from the 1700's?
After all, there was no internet, movies, TV, etc. when the 1st amendment was established. Maybe it's time to put some limits on Hollywood and other methods used that promote violence.
That's because those were the weapons of the day. We had em, the Brits had em, the pirates had em, etc. Do you really think we can defend ourselves against all enemies, foreign & domestic, in this day and age, if all we had were muskets? No, of course not! Don't be such an idiot! You can only defend yourself with equal force!
What an idiotic comment and what a pathetic lack of critical thinking! If in fact a "tyrannical"government would take over, the last thing they would need to do is to engage in a gun battle...one drone blowing each NRA leadership, one on Jones, one on Limbaugh and the monkey lost his arms.
Seems your critical thinking failed as well. LOL
Your an idiot!
"Your" – Ha!
Then maybe the 2nd amendment should have been written, "the right of the people to keep and bear muskets shall not be infringed".
Yeah I know right? I mean muskets were the only arms they had so that's why the 2nd amendment only applies muskets. Just like the 1st amendment only applies to speech and not what we are doing here in this advanced age, oh wait...
The 2nd says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
Kudo's Piers! You don't have to be a citizen of the United States to be afforded the right to freedom of speech. This country needs to take a serious look at not only our outdated ideas about the 2nd ammendment, but a lot of others ideas held by a large portion of our population.
Debra, I disagree that it is a large portion of our population making all the noise on these issues. Choose whatever social issue you like, the mainstream media relishes and insists on a "balanced" and horse race of an argument. They elevate the smallest, most strident minority opinion in order to create the illusion of parity in order to create a construct that gives the average viewer the illusion of it being hotly contested issue to sensationalize things and create added tension.
2/3rds of the American public DO NOT own any firearms. That percentage has not radically changed in decades despite all the fearmongering and recruitment efforts of gun lobbying groups.
In fact, the entire "we are a nation of hunters" argument is a red herring also. The sales of hunting licenses have been dropping nationwide for several decades in a row. A tiny minority of the population has any interest in hunting and most find it to be an outdated, cruel bloodsport even when practiced in the most ethical way possible.
Not being intimate with the USA but being a close neighbour, are you saying that 1/3rd of americans own 300,000 guns? More or Less? So on average every gun owner would have 3 guns then, very roughly.
Sorry I should have stated 300 million guns not 300,000.
Hunting is not an outdated, cruel bloodsport. They are wild animal populations, that require conservation by means of ethical killing. If we stopped hunting, the populations would skyrocket and disease would run rampant through wild animal populations. Please don't label hunting as a cruel bloodsport just because you buy your meat pre-killed and pre-packaged. Many people in the south still depend on hunted food to supplement their groceries. And as far as licensing goes, I haven't bought a license in 14 years because I bought a lifetime license when I was younger. I hunt 5 or 6 different hunting seasons every year, so conservatively, I've bought 14 less licenses and 70 less hunting tags than I theoretically should have. This is a big contributor to skewing those statistics.
Our views on the 2nd amendment are not outdated. Protection from tyranny and/or foreign invasion will always justify the 2nd amendment.
And as a reply to Rob B, yes that would mean that each gun owner has ~3 guns. It's really not that crazy. Nearly everyone in the south owns at least a .22 and a shotgun of some kind. That's two of the three right there. Also, guns are family heirlooms; there's a lot of pride in being able to shoot a gun that belonged to your great-grandfather that has been passed down. My family owns somewhere in the ballpark of 20 guns, most are for hunting, some for fun, and some are family heirlooms.
Most Americans are not bothering to enter this conversation yet, and I doubt many have seen Jones on TV, but at the end of the day the vast majority of Americans repudiate this kind of people. They baggers like to bark nonsense in every direction, I guess they think that as long as they throw as much shait as they can..something may end up sticking. Their days are over, we live in the 21 century and we ain't gonna let a bunch of redneck white trash paranoid psychos to turn this country upside down anymore. They might as well get holed up somewhere in the middle of Montana far away from anyone, so we don't have the bad fortune of having to cross paths with them. At the end of the day they will die off just like anything else in this planet, they are a dinosaur of evil....and evil does not win.
I think that reason will prevail at the end of the day and smart people will figure out that banning guns is not the solution.
I think it's time Morgan went back to the UK, Oh right they don't want their trash so they throw it our way. CNN either he goes or your ratings go down. Take you pick. he's not a talk show host, & I for one do not agree how he treats his guest. Don't bring them on if he doesn't like them. So sick of his views, We ran the Brits out of this country once we can do it again starting with Piers Morgan
Your empty, xenophobic threats illustrate the deep insecurity that drives your hatred of anything you can't control.
Actually, his ratings are skyrocketing and the more exposure he is given by efforts to have him muzzled and/or deported will only bring more viewers in to see what all the fuss is about.
Face it, the neo-conservative honeymoon in this country is waning and we, the heretofore silent but reasonable MAJORITY have spoken loudly in two presidential elections in a row and if not for the gerrymandering of congressional districts would control both the legislative and executive branches of our federal government. This issue is merely one more weight being added to the eventual tipping point that will empower a large progressive, democratic, critical mass for decades to come. Get used to it!
As an American citizen, I surely hope we never have to experience a single party in control of everything. Both sides have good and bad, and full control would lead to some nasty things.
JOJO, first of all, your hatred for anyone who has some intelligence is disgusting. You need to look at the whole picture and speak intelligently. His support is increasing not because he is from the UK but he makes total sense of how our country is lacking control. Also, he is not rude to his guest. In fact Alex Jones was extremely rude and plainly gave a true and sick representation of what gun lovers are like. Alex Jones and all US citizens have a responsibility to act gentlemanly and with respect towards others, no matter the opinion of the opposite individual.
Not rude to his guests? He yelled and yelled at Larry Pratt and wouldn't let him finish a sentence the first time he was on and called him an "unbelievably stupid man." Bringing on Alex Jones was a planned stunt to discredit the gun lobby. Alex Jones may be pro gun, but he does not represent the gun lobby in any way, shape, or fashion. He is a conspiracy theorist and a far right lunatic.
Why no time spent on Piers' show discussing our culture of violence?
Ok to limit guns, but don't try to put any restrictions on liberal Hollywood.
Does First Amendment apply to non citizens? mmmmmm Think White House ered. Piers Morgan has breeched the terms of his Visa by becoming involved in politics, read the small print......
I like the way you think!
I dont believe you have any right to influence our laws and freedom due to the fact you are not an american. I'd like to know why such a hard stance on our country? Why are you are so passionate about our rights and freedoms? Why did you leave your country Mr Morgan? What is your plan when the criminal who doesn't listen to gun laws shows up on your kids school or house? Do you own a gun Mr. Morgan? Honestly I think you know nothing about guns based on your terms Assault weapon. At least take the time to google it. Just look up "Leroy Ple the truth about semi-auto firearms". Yes you had lower gun laws in YOUR country, but didn't you have more DEATHS by other means?
CNN I'm blocking your channel until you get rid of this guy. I don't appreciate people who lie and talk over people who have facts.
How many of these liberal anti-gun zealots have their own hired, armed security guards?
How many of the Washington elites have their own kids in schools which have armed security guards on duty?
Looks like what is good for the kids of the elite is not good for the kids of the commoner.
If a criminal shows up at his house or school in the UK the homeowner /victim must flee the house or school rather than injure the criminal. He also fails to mention the violent crime rate in the UK is 436% greater than in the U S and one of the highest in the world.
Totally fabricated numbers. Shame on you.
See what the British Gov't did to a farmer named Tony Martin. Google it. Out there you can't even protect yourself in your own house...they make you into a criminal and let the real criminal go range free...it will make you sick!
Now imagine if Americans we're enslaved with this type of BS!
Not made up. Britain is the MURDER capital of Europe. South Africa has a lower crime rate. Look at the statistics.
Americans are killing Americans in the home soil, including children of 6 and 7 years old because of a laxed law on gun control & having people like Pratt, propagating lies or lunatics like Alex Jones, who can't even behave like a normal person & who can still have radio shows followed by millions... If we cannot see that ourselves–the many facets of a broken society–, we have to be greatful that a foreign host can have such guts to address an epidemic that has left hundreds of American families without loved ones or injured for life because some disturbed civilians had access to semi-automatic weapons. How many more massacres do we need to wake-up?
On this issue, CNN is the channel that is doing what a professional newsroom should be doing: go to the facts, be compassionate to the victims' families, be unafraid of the NRA & fight for a solution to these repeated tragedies.
Alex Jones did not act a whole lot differently than the antics we have seen from Piers Morgan on some of his recent shows.
And by showing this empathy to victims of mass shootings, CNN is also showing to AMERICA that WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION are indeed in the front yards of AMERICA, not in Iraq or Afghanistan. Ex-President George BUSH should note that. Now the present PRESIDENT needs to fix this problem (of Assault Rifles Control) as he has fixed the return of troops from Iraq and shortly from Afghanistan. And at the same time he needs to fix the fiscal crisis that resulted from costly wrong wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Looks like Piers is back to his abusive ways again tonight.
The arrogance and rudeness of Mr. Morgan is not much different than what we saw from Alex Jones a few nights ago. Instead of criticizing pro-gun guests, Piers might want to look into the mirror when it comes to his own zealotry when it comes to restricting guns. When people are killed by knives, crow bars, cars, etc. why no discussion about restricting them? Is it the knife's fault when someone kills someone with it? If not, then it also is not the gun's fault when some lunatic kills someone with it.
Bacause it is NOT SO EASY to kill several people in few minutes with knifes, crowbars, etc. as you said that it can be done.
IT seems you are stupid, but PIERS MORGAN is not.
Can any of you loons tell me the difference between a 223 bushmaster "assault rifle" and a glock hand gun? besides the obvious (cartridge, or one being a hand gun and the other being a rifle) considering you want them banned..I'd like to hear
Ooh, ooh, I know!
The AR-15 is the less lethal and less effective weapon in a close-quarters scenario against unarmored targets, due to it's larger length which prevents effective cornering, as well as the small size of the .223 rifle round, which tends to cause through-and-through wounds with only minor cavitation.
But people think that they're horrible because they LOOK like the M16 and variants that our armed forces use. Nevermind the fact that the M16 utilizes rifle rounds because U.S. Military doctrine doesn't encourage close quarters where it can be avoided, and the same factor that causes the wounds from such a rifle to be relatively small grants the bullet better armor and cover penetration ballistics.
Oh wait, sorry, we're with Piers. "Both bad! Shoot bullitz!"
How many times does Piers call the semi auto ar-15 rifle a machine gun? Is he doing it on purpose and reporting incorrect facts to make viewers think they are worse then they really are or does he really believe a semi auto is a machine gun? He really needs to look up the definition of a semi auto and an auto rifle. What a tool.
It's not a matter of getting it right or not. He is making a point that it is a weapon that can kill many in a small amount of time vs. a small hand gun. Read between the lines and get off the issue of being able to own what ever type of weapon, even an AR-15, machine gun, M-16 or any other that can kill so many so fast. That is the point.
Let me explain the difference: Handgun or a AR-15 rifle are semi-automatics. Each trigger pull translates into firing 1 round.
A fully automatic machine gun is called an assault rifle such as the one our military uses. It is called the M16 and offers a 3-round burst mode and full auto. With full auto capability, a pull of the trigger empties the whole magazine in a few seconds.
All fully automatic assault rifles (such as the M16s) are not allowed for civilian to buy, however they often get mistaken for the semi automatics such as the AR-15 as they look almost the same though the functionality is completely different.
Wesley, I know that's an important distinction to you. But the AR 15 is the weapon used in these massacres...I understand that semi-automatic handguns are used as well..but the AR15 is the big scary one for most of us...the point for me was the audio recording of the first 911 call during the Aurora shooting...they say the call is 27 seconds long...and that there are 30 shots. To me, that level of fire in a crowded movie theater is slaughter...pure and simple...and in fact, 70 people were shot...some were scarred permanently or mamed and way too many were murdered. Whatever you want to call it, this is a dangerous weapon in the wrong hands...how do we make sure that they don't end up in the hands of someone crazy enough...or determined enough to commit suicide by cop or otherwise? I would bet you would not like to be in that theater with that kind of weapon firing that fast..whether it takes a full trigger pull or multiple pulls or what...and you CERTAINLY wouldn't want your family in that position. My guess is that gun owners want guns thinking that they can protect themselves from such an encounter - while I appreciate that position, I think it's not realistic for most of us - unless you are fully prepared, well-trained, know exactly where the bad guy or guys are at any particular moment, and that there are no innocents in your way. This of course does not apply to cops, off-duty or on, military personnel, armed guards, etc. Even the event in San Antonio that everyone points to did not involve a civilian with permit to carry...the woman who shot and stopped a shooter was an off duty cop who was working in the movie theater as an armed guard. It was her JOB to shoot him and she did well. But for most of us, well...it's just not likely...there are those of us with big purses filled with God knows what...during a fire fight, we'd be rummaging for our pistol? Or if you do find your gun like the fellow in Arizona when Gabby Giffords and all those folks were shot, he says he nearly shot an innocent man and actually, in the long run, it wasn't necessary for him to shoot at all because a very brave unarmed man tackled Loughner.
The thing of it is...I'm really really glad that automatics are against the law for civilians. I just wish that the AR15s and the like were too...but if they can't be, then HOW do we protect our citizens? So far, no civilian that I know of has stepped up with an AR 15 and duked it out with an AR15 during a mass shooting and the NRA has been less than helpful with their suggestions...
No my point is getting facts correct and spewing incorrect statements and false information does not give people who are uneducated about firearms a true knowledge of how they function. I am a firearm instructor and your statement serves my point exactly. You say "He is making a point that it is a weapon that can kill many in a small amount of time vs. a small hand gun.". So you think a small handgun cant kill a lot of people quickly? That statement proves to me that you have no real firearm experience. I can teach a student in a matter of hours how to effectively shoot multiple targets and reload without missing a beat. With a small handgun. The difference is my students are defensive shooting and aren't mentally deranged like the nuts in the news that shoot innocent people. You can't fix crazy. Don't blame the weapons because that nut could have did the same thing with a so called small gun. I don't think any firearms should be banned but I do think everyone purchasing a firearm should get a background check and medical records should not be sealed for background checks when someone has mental health issues. Semper Fi
A few things must be mentioned.
1) The AR-15 is generally chambered for .223 caliber rifle rounds, which is an intermediate rifle round. Additionally, in the case of Aurora, the shooter was using full metal jacket steel core rounds. The ballistics of this type of bullet are very predictable; upon hitting a target, the bullet will enter, creating a .223 inch wide hole, pass through the body, and exit, creating a hole around .25 inches wide. That's the reason 70 people were shot and only 12 died. He was able to hit multiple people per shot due the the bullet overpenetrating, but the vast majority of these were relatively minor injuries.
2) You do not need an AR-15 to neutralize a hostile armed with an AR-15. Any handgun would have done in any of the recent shootings. However, these shootings, like every other rampage killing, occured at places known to not have guns. Police have a significant response delay, during which time the shooter can pick and choose targets, reload, or find a position to ambush the police upon entering. The Virginia Tech shooter was able to empty and reload his weapon four times, because no one was able to put pressure on him.
3) You may speak for yourself when it comes to preparedness with a firearm, especially a concealed carry weapon, but don't assume we follow the same mentality. By carrying in public, we recognize our rights and responsibilities to our nation and it's people. There have been multiple times that a rampage has been stopped by an armed civilian; in fact, per DOJ statistics, there are an average of 10 less people killed per shooting when an armed civilian intervenes to neutralize the shooter vs. waiting for the police. We are diligent, and we are disciplined.
Sorry, just felt I had to get that information out there.
What I want to know is where does Piers Morgan's credibility come from. He got his start here in America as a host on American idle, come on. How could this man be taken seriously about American political issues? Anyone who does take his opinions seriously, is a bigger fool than Piers himself. He's in show business, that's what modern media is, a big staged show. Politicians use the media to control the masses, and that's a fact. If you can't see this and accept it as fact, then your ability to think freely is already lost.
Piers has simply latched on to the liberal cause of the day.
If he was truly interested in putting an end to these deaths, he would look at what in our culture is producing these mass murderers.
It appears that this is another crisis that liberals don't want to let go to waste. Unfortunately, they don't want to spend much time pointing some fingers at their big dollar supporters in Hollywood.
Whatever is the culture..does it matter when Assault Rifles are used to kill people ?
Do you want to correct the culture first and have the people keep their assault Rifles OR
You want to make sure no one uses these assault Rifles by removing these assault Rifles from circulation ?
Any man of average intelligence will know the answer to the above question. It is pathetic that YOU can't do that.
Concerned Citizen, you can say the same thing about Rush LImbaugh, Ted Nugent, Sean Hannity and others. They also rant and rave about what they feel so deeply about, which is usually nonsense. The problem is there are so many individuals who do not think for themselves but rather listen to these, as you put it, show hosts and act upon their comments. They like to put fear into anyone who listens to them and that is why they are so popular. At least Piers, no matter whether he is from this country or not, is stating that we in the US have a serious gun and death issue and we should do something about it. It baffles me how many US citizens would prefer to continue to own a gun no matter how many people will eventually die.
195,000 people die per year do to accidents that were preventable in the hospital. You're more likely to die in the hospital from an accident than to be shot by a gun. Just don't share that around too much.
Interesting discussion with Mr. Pratt at least his number were not totally crazy like the manic/bipolar guy from previous nite but this is what i found from homeoffice.gov.uk for England and Wales (USA has about 6x their population) 12 month period 2010/11 apr-mar: 648 deaths were recorded as homicide, including 60 firearm homicide victims
For about the same period in USA according to FBI stats over 11,000 firearm homicide victims adjust for 6x population that make the Americans more than 30 times more likely to be killed with a firearm. Total homicide in USA in 2011 according to FBI 13,913 therefore Americans 3.58 times more likely to be killed than British. We will never be as safe as the British because we must defend ourselves against an out of control Government with "jack-booted thugs" according to NRA's LaPierre, but we don't need to lie about the nice folks in England and Wales to make us feel good about ourselves.
Piers, Once again you are making a ridiculous argument. How about you spend a segment tomorrow and show the actual impact of the Britan gun ban, before and after. Look at the total violent crime and murder rate from 1990 to say 2011 and then try to tell us with a straight face that the gun ban has reduced the problem.
Let's say 100 people are murdered this year, all from guns , we then ban guns. Now next year, none die from guns but 110 from knives instead. Your argument is that the gun ban has totally worked where the truth is the problem is actually worse. Wake up!
Here is an article from your own UK paper making the same argument. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208782/Britains-drug-gun-culture-bad-U-S-crime-The-Wire-say-Tories.html
As Piers pointed out, mass shootings have increased over the past 5 or so years. The type of guns that Piers wants to ban have been around a lot longer than that. That leads me to question what has caused the uptick in these events. It's not because these guns suddenly appeared on the scene 5 years ago. What we need to look at is why there has been an uptick in lunatics doing this sort of thing. It appears that Piers does not have any interest in digging deeper into the issue, but rather wants to engage in the theatrics and hysterics that many in the mainstream media have been doing. The deeper question is why these incidents have increased. the guns are the method, but the person using the gun is who the focus should be on. What in our culture is producing these crazed killers? It's not the gun.
How can you say its not the GUNS ?
Assault semi-auto Guns are the tools used by these killers. Go back and looks at the NEWS.
Most police officers use semi-auto guns as well. I don't get your point. Do you even know the difference between semi-auto and fully automatic guns?
Most handguns are semi-automatic. In fact almost every gun is semi-automatic.
Good point, Jan. The focus is certainly misplaced. But by same logic, I do not think there has been any dramatic change in number or severity of the mentally unstable people that has occurred in the last 5 years. So, what changed? Maybe the already blurry boundary between real and virtual of the lunatics is aggravated by computer games and Hollywood movies.In addition, the media made this kind of stuff fashionable for the same kind of people.
GO HOME YOU DAMN BRIT!
Were your ancestors from this country or did they come from some where else? Just because you were born in the US does not make you any better than everyone else. Why don't you ask your ancestors to go home as well? Unless you are a Native American, every body else is from another country.
I am Native American so amen to Arts comments
I am. 60 year old hunter who has been hunting and owning guns since I was 12. I hunt 2-3 times a week from the opening of pheasant season to the end of goose season. When I hunt ducks and geese, I am restricted to 3 shots and I cannot use lead shot. This in no way limits my rights as a gun owner. Why is this acceptable but limiting assault weapons or clips is such big deal, I don't get it. Why haven't the people arguing for limits use this fact more effectively ?
Because it does nothing to attack the problem. 323 people a year are killed with assault rifles. Out of over 11000 gun murders a year. If you have a 100 round clip you can shoot a hundred rounds in 100 seconds. It takes 3 seconds to change a magazine. So if you have 10, 10 round clips, it will take 130 seconds to shoot 100 rounds. You just saved 30 seconds. See the problem?
My point is we already restrict weapons, types of ammunition and number of potential shots for hunting waterfowl so why is expanding this to rifles so wrong? I have a number of rifles and none of them have clips. Maybe we should ban guns that have clips all together. Having to manually reload a weapon takes time, time that might allow someone to intervene and stop the shooter. There are no perfect answers but we need to start somewhere. I say no weapons that use clips, simple and easy to apply.
Would Piers ask this: If having guns around would allow you to protect yourself in your own home, how is is the MOTHER of the shooter got shot four times in the face and was unable to defend herself, since the guns were hers and she was supposed to know how to handle them?????
Uh gee I don't know. Probably because she didn't expect that her son was planning on shooting her in the face. Just a guess though. What a silly question.
"For burglaries and robberies England and Wales had more crimes per 100,000 people than the USA. "
"England and Wales was ranked sixth for burglaries – worse than Sweden, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Turkey, Italy and Chile – and for robberies, England and Wales was seventh."
"Among two other measures, England and Wales fared better, being ranked 16th out of 35 countries for “intentional homicides” and 19th for major assaults."
This is what you get when a population is unable to defend themselves with firearms.
No one is suggesting to take away ALL firearms. The current suggestion is restricting assault style firearms. Again, because it seems as though this very simple fact is being ignored : NO one is suggesting to ban ALL firearms. You will still be able to protect your homes with other firearms.
Very simple Pierce, if you don't like the gun laws of the USA, just go back to England. Nobody forced you to come here. I used to like your show, but you just lost another viewer. A shame you are trying to push your agenda from your country here in my country. Again, no one goes to your country to change your laws as a visitor of England.
Piers Morgan runs his own show at CNN. He has every right to make his voice heard as he does of his guests like Alex Jones and Pratt..whatever.
Be a Gentleman and Respect his views even if you don't like him or don't like his views.
Like you have the 2nd amendment right to own a gun (not an assault rifle) , he has the 1st amendment right to express his views.
No need for him to go back to UK.
That's why the founders said "arms" and not muskets or pistols. I would love to hear the argument for why a rifle is not under the "arms" category.
Love the way piers talks about gun control and violence and banning assault weapons and then when he goes to a commercial it says "Piers morgan Brought to you by Zero Dark Thirty.
F U ! No....I'm not going to listen to your looney toon, pompas assed brit explain anything! And then crunch the numbers?
Your full of it! That P.O.S. does nothing but humiliate & ridicule anyone on his show, if he doesn't want to engage in any type of fair debate! And you people are nothing but a bunch of usless pu$$ies for giving that guy any air-time! Wasn't he convicted of hacking people's phones in the U.K.? Can't find any work over there, so you gave him a job here? YOU SUCK!
Piers is just a pompous bully. Every night is the same, he talks over his guests, spews the same statistics, and refuses to answer questions asked of him. Piers should interview a non-nut job. His most recent guests are such an extreme faction of gun owning Americans; they don't represent anyone but themselves. I wish he would interview some well spoken and calm center leaning gun owners. I guess that would not serve his agenda. Also he constantly talks about his wishes for gun control but never offers a feasible strategy to attain those wishes. And will he ever, ever, ever discuss some of the underlying issues of violent crime. I could go on all day but I doubt he reads these posts anyway. I wish he had a phone in line for the show, I would love to ask him some questions.
great video. clearly articulated facts is what we need in order to really improve the situation.
You data does not make any sense.
Have you not heard any news about theater shootings in Aurora, School Shootings in Newton, Temple shootings in Wisconsin, Mall Shootings in Oregon ?
Were you hearing so many shootings which resulted in mass murders in 1992 -2002 ?
Mass murders started happening after 1999 relaxed laws for AR-15 type semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles.
GO BACK AND DO YOUR HOMEWORK ONCE MORE.
LESS GUNS WILL MAKE USA SAFER.
@Rocky. Perhaps you should do your homework. It seems you were unaware that there was an assault weapons ban from 1994-2004, just like the one being proposed now.
Here are some very simple apples to apples numbers for you:
Chicago – Population – 2,700,000 – Murders in 2012 – 500
Detroit – Population – 700,000 – Murders in 2012 – 411
Cleveland – Population – 400,000 – Murders in 2012 – 97
Toronto – Population – 2,500,000 – Murders in 2012 – 54
These 4 cities are all on the shores of the same body of water – The Great Lakes. They have similar climate. The population of Toronto is much more multicultural than the others and visible minorities are now in the majority. Toronto also has very restrictive laws on Hand Guns and Assault Rifles. Long rifles and Shotguns are allowed but you must be licensed just like you must have a license to drive a car. As you can see Toronto's murder rate is a small fraction of the rate in similar American Cities.
Wow... just wow... You're comparing these numbers without controlling at all for other factors besides gun laws.... Detroit is an economic disaster area. Chicago has some of the worst ghettos in our nation. The culture of Canada and the US is vastly different. There's more to the increased incidence of murder in the US than the availability of guns. Furthermore, MOST of those gun deaths are gang-on-gang or drug related and are NOT committed with long guns (assault-style weapons/carbines/rifles/etc...)
Finally! Someone who can discuss this calmly! We need more of this, more calm, unemotional analysis of the core of the problems that are causing these violent attacks of late. The thing I fear more than an assault rifle ban is a poorly constructed piece of hurried legislation (or worse, some quick "Executive Order") that sets the framework for gun control that can then be morfed over the next decade to cover whatever type of firearm that is at the center of the then current media storm.
No self-respecting gun owner wants to have that Alex Jones nut making our case, just like we don't want Peirs Morgan using his nightly hour to craft this countries response to recent events.
I believe we want a sensible solution to the problems in our culture that are creating these monsters just like everyone else does. I believe that if we'd all stop shouting at each other, we would then put ourselves in the best position to have a reasonable debate on this so we could come up with solutions that we as a country would have the best chance of getting behind, but as long as the debate is more of this shouting, talking over each other and calling each other names we'll only get a bigger divide and more polarization.
According to the website guardian.co.uk:
The murder rate in England and Wales rose by 5% last year to 636 but overall crime remained stable or even fell despite the August riots, according to Home Office figures.
Looking at the statistics there is a BIG disclaimer from the UK..."(excluding air weapons)".. By definition this excludes a rifle (air rifle), pistol (air pistol), or shotgun that fires projectiles by means of compressed air or other gas, in contrast to a firearm which fires projectiles by means of a burning propellant. Next time make sure you are comparing apples to apples.
My take on this, again, is that more guns equates to more gun-related crimes. Think about the idea – people all arming themselves at every level. What that means is a regression back to the 'old west'. Is that really what you want?
The answer is to start identifying risk factors, start identifying the distribution of guns, and act accordingly. The fact that I have made a concious choice at not having access to firearms should tell you tales...
The fact that the rest of you feel comfortable with killing, i.e. owning a gun, makes me feel disturbed about the rest of you. I don't know where your feeling of free access to guns is an answer is disturbing. We have free-thinking military. A free-thinking police. Surely if it gets bad enough, they will take your side.
The fact is, limiting guns based on risk factor as well as intelligent decisions without revealing medical data, is a more plausible argument rather than just stating 'lets arm everyone'...
You are being influenced by fear. The facts: 3/2,000,000 have committed a mass-murder on the basis of mental illness. These same individuals are 10X more likely to be victims of gun-related crimes rather than normal citizens. Based on fear of the stereotype. More guns for the rest of you are not the answer. You will find that there will be more crime.
The answer is to identify risk factors, and mandate security of weapons against such stipulations..
Ok, let's look at those numbers. One, there are definitely more than 3 violent crimes commited by mentally unstable people. Even if we're focusing on mass shootings, we have Aurora, Newtown, Virginia Tech, Clackamas Mall, the list goes on. Two, let's take a count of the firearms used by these people: 4, 4, 2, 1. That's 11 total. Let's use the argument that they were legally obtained, I know how much we like that one, despite the fact that laws currently exist to fight that, and are just not enforced. But anyway.
4/2,000,000 = .000002, or .0002% of mentally unstable people will commit a rampage killing.
11/300,000,000 = .0000000366, or .00000366% of legally owned firearms are used in a rampage killing.
Ooh! Wait! We're just worried about the "assault weapons," aren't we? Well, then:
3/300,000,000 = .00000001, or .000001% of legally owned "assault weapons" are used in a rampage killing.
Hmmm... nope, still more likely to be a problem with mental health. By a factor of 200 if we are considering just "assault weapons."
Thank you, Piers, for having the courage to stand up and speak out against the fear, paranoia and insanity of the gun culture – something I suspect many of my countrymen will not. If a flamethrower and a Sherman tank had been used in the recent tragedies, I suppose the NRA and gun lobbyists would tell us to stock up on flamethrowers and tanks. The idea that our founding fathers had this in mind is beyond insulting to the intelligence of rationally-minded people. I don't need anywhere near that kind of firepower to hunt or protect my home. They will deny facts, statistics and common sense to satisfy their own compulsive self-interest. How many more children and innocent people must die by these weapons before common sense prevails?
Flamethrowers are actually completely legal. They are often collector's items, but many are used to combat invasive plant and insect species such as Africanized honey bees.
Sherman tanks, or really, armored vehicles of any kind, are also completely legal to own, provided the gun is deactivated. Again, they are usually collectors items, but if they are street legal (many armored personnel carriers and fighting vehicles are) you can drive them to the grocery store. Watch out though, they'll need a big parking space.
There are a lot of things that are completely legal that could do horrifying things to innocent people. It does not matter what tool is used, it is the person wielding the tool who is responsible for whatever is done with it. There are millions of firearm owners who have never and will never use their firearms to hurt another human being. There are also millions of people who will use whatever tool they can find to hurt themselves or others. Where do we stand against this?
Let's see how many different ways cars kill people everyday.....
Hit and runs
Maybe we should outlaw cars too...idiots.
Outlaw cars? You do provide very valid reasons. However, it's also a great idea to outlaw airplanes.
Think about it – There are thousands of them buzzing in the sky every given moment of the day. In addition, hammers can be weaponized as well.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT: If you are afraid for your life because your law abiding neighbor is a gun owner, pilot or a driver and may go "rouge", please contact your representative and tell them they got your vote on the "Save our children and ban guns, cars, hammers and airplanes act of 2013".
Okay...so if we are talking about cars...they ARE dangerous...and as a result, you must take a test to prove you can handle them...if you MIShandle them, your right to drive them is suspended...and you have to register them so we can keep track of them ... insure them to cover any catastrophe you might cause for yourself or others in your car....why not treat guns the same way?
You have to have take a test to get a license to own a gun...different test for each type of gun...and you have to retest every few years to make sure you are still safe to use them...and you have to register your weapons...and insure them so that if one of them is used to cause havoc, the injured and terrorized have money to address their medical issues. The more dangerous the gun as assessed by insurance companies, the higher the premium. It would be illegal to have an unregister, uninsured weapon...but you can have any weapon you can pay for and which safety test you can pass...would that be fair?
@JKF They already have those kinds of tests. Whenever you want to carry a weapon around with you, you have to get a license and you have to take a proficiency test. I mean, accidental shootings do to non proficiency is a non issue.
I just made alist of the people that advertise on the show. I will be letting them know I will not be buying any of their products.
You should share the list to make it very easy for the rest of us to do the same!
I do not necessarily agree with everything that Piers says, and I embarrased for Jones and Pratt. In my opinion they truly come across as two children trying to argue a point that they do not know about. I agree that the U.S. has suffered some of the greatest tragedies of all times, but Piers has to accept that as an American we have a different mindset when it comes to our guns. I will never surrender my weapons, and the government should never be allowed to take them.
THEY ARE NOT TRYING TO TAKE THEM FROM YOU. BOY, I cannot figure out why every one is so scared of gun control. Gun control does not mean they are going to take them away from you, it means they (gov.) will limit what is allowed to be owned by citizens and what is not!!!!!!!! Get this through your head.!!!!!!! Gun control is the reason we (citizens) are not allowed to own a tank, a rocket launcher, grenades, etc., etc., etc. The bill and what Piers is talking about is removing the assault weapons from the streets while still allowing the regular citizen to own a hand gun, rifle, hunting rifle, shot gun, etc. STOP USING THE "THEY CAN'T TAKE MY GUN AWAY" DEFENSE.
Apparently, english isn't your strong suit. I never said "they are going to take my guns" but if you begin to allow, any control, there MAY be a possibility, of complete revocation of gun rights.
Over the course of history, registration always eventually leads to confiscation. And it shouldn't be the government's right to tell me I can't pass my guns on to my kids or anything of the sort.
Rifles killed 323 people last year. What scares me is that they are banning something that is not really a part of the problem. What happens when they ban something that is part of the problem, like handguns? They are responsible for the majority of the gun crime and death. They are banning something just to do it. If people think sandy hook and the other mass shootings would not have happened or been as bad if he didn't have that rifle they are fooling themselves. There have been a lot of mass shootings that have been equally horrible without those rifles. Columbine and Virginia Tech come to mind. Conveniently omitted from the gun debate. Why? Because the rifle they want to ban wasn't used.
The crime rate per capita in the UK is many times greater than the US. The UK population is 1/5 that of the US. Yet it reported total crimes of 6 Million in 2011 vs roughly 11 Million in the US. Do the math.
I am a former Solider of 8 years is the US Army, while I am a game (deer and fowl) hunter and grew up in a safe family in Wisconsin who has and still owns many weapons (guns for those who don’t know the difference). We live by and always have gun locks on all our weapons.
The whole of my family does not want assault weapons and supports any and all bills and laws to ban assault weapons. Kudos to Piers for putting a foremost voice to this MAJOR issue. The 2nd Amendment is crap. We don’t need assault weapons. The 2nd Amendment was about war. That was meant for a long time ago.
Well said!! I'm currently in the military with deployments in Afghanistan, and I've seen first hand what that style of weapon can do. No person needs this style of weapon.
The second amendment is the safeguard that guarantees the rest of the amendments. It is not "crap."
Rifles killed 323 people last year. What scares me is that they are banning something that is not really a part of the problem. What happens when they ban something that is part of the problem, like handguns? They are responsible for the majority of the gun crime and death. They are banning something just to do it. If people think sandy hook and the other mass shootings would not have happened or been as bad if he didn't have that rifle they are fooling themselves. There have been a lot of mass shootings that have been equally horrible without those rifles. Columbine and Virginia Tech come to mind. Conveniently omitted from the gun debate. Why? Because the rifle they want to ban wasn't used.
I'm a huge liberal hippie gay gaia worshipping peta member but I think assault rifles are awesome.
Give me what ever he is smoking..... Just kidding. LOL
Though I agree in general terms with Piers' position on gun control I do think that in his passion for the subject he has at times lost his cool and been less than reasonable when debating some of the points. I think the way he is conducting some of these interviews causes him to loose authority. I have to say he did great with Alex Jones, but that was easy prey. Not so great with the Marine, who was a cool customer and even with Larry Pratt, who comes across irreverent and insensitive. On occasion Piers did not recognize valid points which were calmly and clearly articulated by guests, forced them into obvious trivia traps and talked over guests even when they were listening to him. I am afraid Piers crusade may backfire if he keeps this aggressive posture. Cool, reasonable debate will be the most effective in the long run.
Piers Morgan couldn't win a calm, reasonable debate with a stump, let alone someone with a brain. He uses those tactics because he's losing the debate.
The thing I find so interesting about your comment is that you said Piers is loosing "authority"... I don't believe he can be counted as any type of authority figure, rather I believe he is a Television Entertainer. I don't consider him a journalist or a new commentator, he lost those roles (if he ever had them to begin with) in my opinion the minute he chose to begin his campaign to shape the political landscape of the US. I believe that his "guests" are selected to maximize the polarization of this issue, to make everyone mad on both sides of the argument so that he can continue to get us all fired up and watching every night.
But as far as a person of authority is concerned, he is not one! Let's see him for what he is.
Thank you for speaking up Piers. It is a shame that that you are the only news person speaking up about the need gun control. I'm glad you are willing to do it. Hopefully Americans will listen. Keep up the good work. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
John Stewart and Stephen Colbert are the other few speaking about GUN CONTROL.
I think this guy is a moron and doesn't reflect real advocates for guns. I'm a Liberal Democrate who voted for Obama. I'm also a big supporter for gun rights. I do not believe the government should tell us we can't own guns of any kind. I am not a hunter. Nor am I a fan of hunting. I think if it's done for food and not for fun that's one thing. I do very much enjoy shooting guns tho. We have parties that we invite ppl over with their own firearms and shoot at targets that we set up on our own property. I also believe they should be used for protection if the need arises. We should start looking at mental problems ppl have tho and have better gun safety classes. Also we should not have gun free zones. Statistics show those are the places crazy ppl target for mass murders. Also tho I do enjoy your show and happen to like piers. I think your are busy being one sided and trying to push your countries decissions on our country. I do really hope you find other things to talk about again so that I don't end up just turning your show off. One final note. If they tried to take away guns from americans there would be a revolt from the people.
Then you should also revolt for taking away your right for :
1. Drinking and Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of Alcohol
2. Driving without License
3. Paying no taxes
4. Not following the rules of the highways and motor vehicles
5. Going to any other country without passport
6. Being able to go to anyplace like Disney parks and museums without paying any fees.
7. Getting healthcare free of cost.
8. Getting free food from your favorite grocery store and free clothes from any designer store.
9. Being able to study any subject free of cost at any school or college you like.
10. For not making you the PRESIDENT of this country.
Fox news and Glenn Beck has been attack many time. Even the internet has been said to be dangerously for to much information out there, said by Obama. But on Morgan being Deported the white house comes out and says this, on his behave. Enshrines the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press fundamental principles that are essential to our democracy.
Do you see any freedom of press? Or do you see one way of thinking in our news and that is only on the left. Even a joke that is said many times we know theres a one side view so what.
No one should be punished by the government simply because expressed a view. But when the man that made the video than walked out of his home by six arm cops for making a video on Islamic seem to blow that out of the water wouldn’t you say? Or all the ones drag in front of the people to say they are sorry for there views over the years.
Who is this man, Morgan, working for? I ask again?
As always tonight not with all of his guess just the one he had on that seem to not think the same as him, Larry Pratt, Morgan would ask a question than Morgan would cut him off and answer it for him. If the man laugh about this. Morgan than would attack him for laughing. Morgan faces with Larry was as if he had been eating Lemons. The faces I love the most when, Larry said King George the 3rd die in a nut house was the best faces on Morgan. To the end he said sorry people of American. Wow did he just say that? Who does he work for I ask again?
Piers is an idiot. Go back where you came from,then you won't have to worry about our guns.
Want some facts about Piers' homeland?
Larry Pratt is a nut too..after they take alex jones guns away they should head to pratts house and take his, very scary these people own guns...Piers i wouldnt waste my time on these nuts, you'll never get through their thick skulls, they are without conscience and you can't rationalize with people like that...
Obama is coming for all the guns – is anyone surprised – ? everyone knew he would and he is.
And yet some of us sit on the other side of the fence with completely rational arguments that people like you won't listen to.
Practically no better argument – look above to Chris B....
and NDAA and weaponized drones are enought for me to never trust this administration. Romney would have been exactly the same. Why do people trust tjhis government and Executive Order ?
Paid Shills like Piers Morgan are Propoganda. Obama lied about NDAA twice and is sneaky.
Governments kill people :
Millions of people in the 20th Century – it can happen here – Back off and take your enviro techno spying with you :
Piers, you were just made out to be a fool. In any sort of moderated debate you would have been silenced and chastised. You are very good at what you do; pushing an agenda without regard to truth or any form of integrity, journalistic or otherwise.
Oh, and to the family members of Aurora victims who are currently being interviewed:
I am very sorry for your loss. However, your loss does not justify spreading lies and misinformation. You stated "automatic" ar-15, "automatic shotgun", and body armor. None of those 3 were actually involved in the tragic loss of your loved ones, nor are any of these legal to own by US citizens, outside of automatic firearms manufactured domestically and registered with the federal government prior to May 19, 1986 (current market prices of these firearms start around $15,000 and go up from there, pending a 6 month background check and approval process by the BATFE).
Piers and CNN, I would greatly appreciate if you would not selectively choose what statements you challenge. Facts are facts, and lies are lies. You have zero integrity.
@Piers: Keep at it. The facts – you are closer to a plausible answer than the rest. I congratulate you on taking on this issue rather than putting it on the wayside out of fear. It's fear that's driving the rest of these idiots.
a mother of two shot a man in her home may not have kill him from the lack of power her gun had, but she was save, and so was her kids. the nut in the school, and mall, killed many and not one pulled a gun to try to stop him. oh! that’s right, they would have been breaking the law to do so. banding guns think about this one band Morgan and movies and most of the nuts in Hollywood who are brain washing our kids. why is it so many are throwing out there TV that have kids?
It's about an out of control Government. OUT OF CONTROL KING OBAMA and his henchmen.
They will do anything to take your power for themselves. ANYTHING while taxing the air you breathe with a CO2 carbon tax – Nighmare for this country. – are w esurprised – any of us that he is coming for the guns?
Looks like Pratt was correct! And you were wrong. Go back to GB and make it 971. Your an idiot
Yesterday, Alex now today Morgan gets owned by 70 year old Larry Pratt. Thanks piers
Piers is a piece of crap. He has been on the warpath for weeks attacking gun owners, parading the images of the fallen children in CT on the television to back up his personal optinions, and talking over all of his guests with the exception of Alex Jones. His guests tonight were obviously pre-screened and spouted a bunch of incorrect facts like the Aurora shooter having an automatic shotgun and having a rifle shooting 8 bullets a second, and this just reinforces the fact that he's trying to push the anti-gun agenda on his show rather than have a real debate about gun control.
I think Piers Morgan is an intelligent, talented, and highly awesome guy. As an American whose family has been here for 400 years, I would much rather have him as a fellow American and neighbor than the mentally deranged people such as pro-gun nuts like Alex Jones and Larry Pratt. When the insane asylums were closed down, unfortunately it allowed people like Pratt and Jones to run loose. I'm sure Piers must feel like taking a shower after interviewing lowlifes like them. As far as I'm concerned, Piers is welcome to stay here as long as he likes!!! The U.S. has clearly gone insane when these murderous gun lovers are allowed to run around unmedicated. It's clear England is a much saner country. We need more people like Piers here and much less murderous gun fetishist wackos heret! And BTW, I went to the Home Office website... Piers was right about the number of murders too.
While you were there did you check out the violent crime rate of the UK vs the rest of the world. N.B. it is the highest in the world!
Human fingers pull the iron triggers on guns. Without these fingers the gun would never fire. Same goes for bombs and any other weapons capable of being used by one human on another. Now, think about the hands that pull the triggers and you will find the brain that is commanding the finger to pull the trigger. this is where the killing begins-in the mind of people who have evil intentions. Why isn't the debate for higher moral standards in this country ragging like this ridiculous gun control debate is? Accountability is what has to happen here. You need to be accountable for your actions. The actions of a parent. the actions of other humans charged with the responsibility of raising your children and being an example of moral value to everyone else in your life and job. I believe parents need to held accountable for the action of their chilrden regardless of their childrens age. Children are the mirrors of our homes. Our children are the products of our environments we create. I say, create a bad environment, and be charged with a crime. Because if you do not raise your children correctly they go out and commit these crimes. Look at yourselves first instead of villianizing the gun owners. What do you have to say about the elite rich cats on wall street and in the global world banking systems? They use money to kill off entire communities in 3rd world countries.Guns like anything else, are just tools for humans to use to act out what is really in their heart. Make a donation and a sacrifice to our society and stop expecting Piers and the TV and the entertainment industry to speak for you and raise your kids with their own morals and agendas. Sheepeople.
Piers Morgan keeps comparing considered gun murders in the UK vs. TOTAL considered murders in the U.S.
The reality is that in 2011 8,5k people were killed in the U.S. by firearms. Over 75% were gang related. Over 90% were committed with illegal guns, and from just Chicago alone where there is very strict gun control, more than 500+ homicides. Did I mention most of these "mass murders" have happened in gun free zones? Yea, where criminals care about the law, NOT.
Now all you have to do is to compare population size and look at the OVERALL crime in the U.S. vs the UK and you will find out that the OVERALL crime in the UK is about 6 times higher than the U.S.
For a better explanation please check out Reality Check and Ben Swann or Google/YouTube: "Reality Check: Piers Morgan vs. Alex Jones – The Truth About Gun Homicide Rates"
Agreed. Chicago and New York City gun murders alone stand at 500+ and 445 respectively for 2011. This translates into about 11% of the nation's gun murders are committed in the most gun controlled cities in the nation.
Let Piers Morgan mention these on his show. I'm sure he will not, goes against his agenda of brainwashing his viewers. I hope they are smart enough to figure this out.
Just thinking we may have found a solution to the deficit. Lets use the well armed public militia in Afganistan and other places, at their own cost, and dissolve the National Guard.
The flu kills 49,000 people per year in the US... 49,000!!! Diane Feinstein where are you!!! You MUST introduce a Bill banning the flu immediately!
People don't die from flu cause they want to or some other people take the FLU GUN to kill them.
You statement shows how STUPID you are. .........
No need to malign unless you can't debate the facts – paid shills bullying Conservatives and Christians –
Feminized Men and 300 thousand abortions last year and Obama really cares about gun control to save Americans with his NDAA kill list – pleeeeez
Rocky, it is called sarcasm with a hint of satire and your inability to recognize that tends to support my developing thesis that you may be a moron.
Agreed! Ban the flu Piers, and after that head on over to the airport and go home Mercenary.
It doesn't matter if you're American or not. If you know right from wrong, you're good to go. Obviously Piers knows common sense. Why the hell do American citizens need weapons that produce such slaughter. Honestly, I think we need foreigners like Piers to give opinions, sometimes foreigners see things that are mutually right, that we Americans cannot see. We aren't perfect, and it breaks my heart to see my own country become blind to the truth. At least there are a handful of us, American or not, that can see the damage being done. Now is a time for change, not 3 years from now or so on. And some of these Amendments do need to be freshened up a bit, we are no longer in the "musket time era". We have advanced in technology, we need amendments that relate to this current technology. I am not proud in a America at this time. We are hurt, and we should be glad we have a person like Piers spreading truths and facts that we the people, need to hear. Regardless of where he is from, he knows right from wrong, and that relates to every human on Earth, not just every human in a certain country, so quit whining saying he isn't even American, you don't have to be American to be correct.
It does matter if you're an American because many of us were brought up with hunting and guns as part of childhood while I would venture to guess that doesnt happen in the UK. My grandfather built a hunting camp that has been passed down to me. I was taught to shoot a 22 rifle at the age of 8 years old by my father and taught gun safety. This progressed into rifles and handguns. This is not Europe and handguns are going no where so Piers argument comparing to the UK is stupid and uneducated because it just wont happen. We will revisit bans on assualt type weapons, expanded clips, and increased background checks (even though if current laws done correctly it would be ok) but handguns and guns ownership will not leave the US like it did in the UK....
Jimmy, you very seriously need to get educated about what has been going on in the world within the last 30 years. They are counting on you to be to busy chasing the 'american dream' to really know whats happening behind the scenes. This slow 'chinese sytled water torture' where it is a small consistent drip over long periods of time is very effective on our human nature. Then you fall asleep at the wheel and kill every body under your control and responsibility.And while you slept, they sold the car your driving in.
Wake up Bud.
Why would you need 30 rounds of amo as "protection"? Join the military, if you want to be Rambo
America is the target of foreign banks that will stop at nothing to get this country and Canada could be next – how do you protect yourself from the tyranny? We are already in a war – many wars and these kids were innocent like those kids in Pakistan. WE are being domesticated and they plan to take it all. Starting with the guns because they have to deweaponize first. All these redcoats turning on America. Sick.
They want all guns don't be fooled.
I am watching the Morgan/Pratt interview and I have never seen such an opinionated interview as Piers Morgan has had on all the gun control interviews. I don't recall Anderson Cooper or Larry King call his guests "idiots". He quotes the murders by guns in UK but not the murders by other means(stabbings, etc.) Why doesn't he quote those? -because the numbers are high! Didn't our founding fathers (or radicals in the British eyes) already debate this issue with the Brits and go to war with them? Maybe Mr. Morgan should go back to his beloved Britain and face the charges against him. He has lost another viewer! I have family in London who asked why Americans so enamored with Morgan. Evidently he and the paper he was editor of is not highly regarded there.
As I understand it, he was run out of the UK as a journalist. Take your microphone and pencil and go home Morgan. Mind to the affairs of your own country. You are a foreigner over here on borrowed time. Don't forget it. We have allowed to many outside influences to come into our country because we were just trying to be helpful. Now, we have a guy who has 'birth certificate issues' telling us to leave the foreigner TV host alone with the green card from the UK. And when the real americans who represent the true american values get on tv, they are villianized! America has lost its way.
We should all be polite in our discourse and as accurate with facts as possible.
Mr. Jones - as an earlier poster pointed out - is obviously mentally ill...and to my mind, dangerous. I would not feel safe having him in my home or even my neighborhood as he is a human explosion. Mr. Pratt, on the other hand, is a different kind of dangerous - willing to twist facts and then act as though what he has just made up is true. His position that more people with carry permits is the answer is unrealistic. (The only exception would be well-trained police officers of course) In a mass shooting like these, pulling a gun out of a pocket would not stop the shooting at all...and it would draw fire to himself and the people around him. The lady whose parents were killed during the Luby's shooting made a much better case for permits to carry...and I respect her feelings of wishing she could have done more to protect them...and I understand why she feels she needs to carry a gun now. And honestly, I don't se a problem to society with her doing it. She's not likely to take the gun in her purse to Luby's and shoot dozens of people with it. However, while there is a small chance that she might have been able to kill their attacker during that massacre, I think if she had her gun that day, there is a larger chance that she would be dead too. Of course, these things are unknowable...and I'm very happy that she survived and seems to be thriving despite her terrible loss. She has my respect.
However, I don't think any of the measures being considered at the moment would impact her in the slightest. While I'm personally uncomfortable with the idea of someone sitting at the next table has a gun in his pocket that might fall out at any moment and shoot me, I have to presume that those with permits to carry are well trained in order to get those permits.
AR-15 and other weapons like that...whether you call them assault rifles or machine guns or military style or whatever, folks, it makes no difference. We are talking about long guns that can shoot many dangerous projectiles in a short period of time. So let's not get off on semantics...it detracts from a thoughtful conversation. And you know, if you are a gun aficionado, you may be comfortable with these things and find them a thing of beauty - however, I have rights too...fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...and these shootings (and either alien or home grown terrorism) prevent that. I can't believe that any of you gun owners want anyone else to be miserable or shot or afraid of being shot all the time. All you want is to be able to feel safe too. I get that part.
The REAL issue here...is how do we prevent murder in general...and these mass public shootings in particular...it has to be a convergence of culture issues, mental health issues, reporting issues - record keeping that alerts law enforcement when someone who is dangerous starts acquiring these large weapons and lots and lots of ammunition...it's the convergence of many elements that brings on the perfect storm. We need you lawful gun owners to help us stop this stuff...give us alternative ideas...and you know, realistic ones...the guy who said that the principal at Sandy Hook would be alive today if she had an M4 locked up in her office that day obviously didn't think it through...I mean, unless she carried it on her shoulder everywhere she went within the school, she wasn't IN her office when the shooter broke in...so please remember that those of us who are terrified of bebe guns won't be able to deal with weapons like this...so arming us is as dangerous as disarming you...LOL
The issue isn't YOUR guns...the issue is mass shootings by unhinged maniacs...please join us in helping solve that problem.
There is a large difference of opinion in America regarding guns. Some fear them, while others see them as necessary to protect themselves, as reliance on police is futile.
For those that fear guns, my suggestion would be to move to an area with very strict gun control, where civilains rights' to own guns are severly restricted. Might I suggest Chicago or NYC. If strict gun control is the answer to violence, then obviously you would be much safer in these areas.
The cheeky answer would be, why not have all the gun owners move to where they can carry all they want...but of course, that's not realistic either...we have had three mass shootings in our area...all three times, it was the police who came to the rescue...quickly and efficiently. It may be because they are very well trained...in one case, we heard that they had practiced for just this eventuality....but regardless, they have my kudos. Having said that, I know that folks in more rural areas or poorer areas might not have that kind of police support...I just want to be sure that our cops are better armed than the bad guys...but you know, it's not just the ordinary criminal we are talking about here...we are talking about mass murder by someone willing and ready to die...and I don't think the idea of an armed civilian would make any difference in that scenario...
and they all used ILLEGAL guns – don't take guns from law abiding citizens – the police can not protect us anymore.
Keith, Chicago is the murder capitol of the U S. There were 500 murders there last year! You think that's safe?
Look, you're scared of guns. I get that. They have the ability to kill. But it is an irrational fear. You are more likely to die in a car accident than be shot. Also there are 195000 accidental deaths in hospitals due to preventable accidents. You are way more likely to be killed by accident in the hospital than shot. In fact, if you look at the number of people shot by people with permits, the number is astronomically lower than hospital deaths. This fear of guns is being played up because they want to ban a certain type of weapon. Which is barely used it all in gun murders. And there are at least 3 other equally horrible mass shootings that I can think of where that kind of rifle wasn't used. Columbine, Virginia tech, and the Luby's you mentioned. There is absolutely no reason to be afraid of a law abiding citizen with a gun. In fact you are more likely to be shot by the police on accident than to be killed or shot by a law abiding citizen with a gun. Just look at the Empire state building shooting. 9 innocent bystanders shot by police. 1 shot by the shooter, his intended target.
You are afraid of guns and people with guns. And that's ok. I'm just telling you that trying to make policy solely based on that fear is not good for any of us. Gun owners or not.
And the unhinged maniacs are the children of american citizens who have refuse to raise their children with any moral fiber. Maybe thats because they were not raised with any. You are witnessing the effects of a de-moralized society They have traded their moral values for wealth and a chance at stardom. Because America is now 'all about me'. Sheepeople.
Why don't we hear about NDAA or weaponized drones killing hundreds of children –
PROPOGANDA – war machine – inciting wars in the name of 'peace', class warfare – disgusting
This is EVIL at work – trotting out victims – while slughtering Pakistani children and locking up people including Americna Citizens forever with no trial – forever – no trial – forever no trial NDAA – Obama signed it twice – lied in the middle of the night signed it – terroriaing people with drones and his kill list – disgusting!!!!
Yes! Obama is discusting!!!
Right on RW!!
Let's see Piers take on the drone issue of killing children in Pakistan! Do you care about all children Piers or just when it suits your agenda??
I applaud you for your honesty and forthright approach to this issue. I totally agree with a bang on assault type weapons and would also go as far as to say hand guns as well. My concern is the enforcement of such a ban. With the US having more prisoners than the rest of the civilized world, and a government who is painfully aware of this fact and all that it entails. (overpopulation in prisons, the need for more facilities etc). Do you really think that the government would pass such a ban on guns knowing that it would put more stress on prisons and ultimately the tax payers? Glad to be Canadian. Not that we don't have violent crime here, but we do have strict gun laws. I do hope that some changes are made in memory of all those who have been victims of gun violence in your country.
Our jails are over crowded because of the strict drug laws not guns
Mr. Morgan, I thank you for taking on the assault weapon topic. And astounded that you would have Larry Pratt back on your show – I could not have done it. The man makes me ill to my stomach to see his smug demeanor, with no conscious about him advocating assault weapons. I have no problem with the public responsibly owning guns for self defense (if they feel they need it) or legitimate hunters. I see absolutely no reason to own military type weapons. I totally support the idea of getting them out of the hands of private individuals.
The maniacs like Alex Jones, Larry Pratt and their supporters must not be allowed to bully the sane public. Their thinking is irrational and only serves to help gun and ammunition manufacturers. If the Republicans are afraid to stand up for us, they have no business being in office since they clearly do not represent the views of the majority, especially if they are being bought by the gun lobbyists.
So glad you will not be deported – I'm sure it was never a concern. We need you to keep this topic at the foreground until we get satisfactory resolution. We cannot have another tragic mass murder. If Larry Pratt had a grandchild in Newtown who was murdered, would he get it that assault weapons have no business in private hands?
Wish it were that simple. Unfortunately it's not – Jones and Pratt are trying to protect American Citizens from tyranny. They know why there is a 2nd Amendment to begin with and it has nothing to do with hunting and everyting to do with defense with appropriate weapons which police are already outgunned and call 911 in LA – you'll get put on hold.
The AR platform rifle is the US made revolutionary era musket of today. The Brown Bess was an English made musket used by both sides. The Pennsylvania / Kentucky rifle was the sniper rifle of its day. Made in American it had superior long range accuracy over English muskets. The second amendment was written by men who had just taken their country from the British over a lack of government representation and arms confiscation with equal and in some cases superior arms. Many American soldiers were average colonist whom had bought their own weapons. Do you think the writers of the second amendment would take AR platform rifles from average Americans or restrict their ownership in anyway? According to the FBI report Crime in the US 2011 Expanded Homicide Data Table 8 rifles were used in 323 murders. Handguns were used in 8,583.
David, the question in my mind isn't to take away safe, law abiding gun owners property...the question is, how to stop these mass murders. Certainly, predicting risk has to be an important element of that task.The chances of citizens actually stopping these things is very small in my mind...inevitably it's someone well trained who can stop the carnage...would it work to improve background checks for people buying large amounts of ammo AND who are known to be dangerous AND who also own one of these weapons? That would require everyone to register their weapons so we know who has what...would that be acceptable?
These mass shootings are usually done by people with no prior history. Stocking up on ammo is not a crime.
I believe the issues with the Brits is they only view violence when someone is murdered by a gun. Therefore they banned guns. If anything Englands ban taught us their is no correlation between gun ownership and criminals. Criminals have now taken over their country!
What a ridiculous assertion. 39 murders with firearms last year in the UK.
A total of 5 police officers shot and killed on duty since 2000.
The public don't need guns nor do the police in the UK.
The US is clearly different. Gun Control works, but it's too late to implement fully in the US. The gun ownership right is too embedded in its culture.
The right thing to do would be to repeal the Second Amendment. It's an outdated relic from a time long ago, is no longer needed, and the mentally ill gun worshippers are using it as a crutch in which they live out their murderous fantasies and feelings of inadequacy. I'm sure they feel mighty powerful when they're holding a murder machine. I wonder how many little first graders they've fantasized about slaughtering.
I would also suspect that these murder machine fetishists also have very small penises too, for their mass-murder machines they so love obviously give them a sense of power they don't get from someplace else where they're a little "short".
Hopefully president Obama will do something by executive order, and it would be a great day in America if he were able to get rid of these tools of mass slaughter that only the mentally ill can appreciate.
THANK YOU, PIERS for having the courage to stand up to the insane madness gripping our country right now. I am appalled that anyone would want to deport you. You are more welcome here than any of these gun nuts any day. Don't let these deranged idiots get to you. Obviously they're very sick people who with their murder machines are trying to compensate for areas of their life where they don't "measure up".
...um no way...not with NDAA...and Redcoat World Bank taking over...no way
I am beginning to think ALL you gun owners are nuts. Look at your comments! The Second Amendment allows people the right to bear arms to form militias to protect our country. It does not state that everyone has the right to bear arms to protect themselves from other armed citizens ... which is the "kill or be killed" mentality we have today. The Second Amendment is outdated. Stop using it to further your own agenda.
Assault weapons should be banned. Why do you need them? Because everyone else has them? Well, YOU have created THAT problem. We have to control who has access to weapons through background checks, registration, licensure, and proper education and training for EVERY gun owner. Just like owning a vehicle...which in the wrong hands is also a weapon. Why are you so resistant to change that protects everyone?
What you want s NOT working. We must stop the slaughter of innocent victims. Not all gun owners are responsible or mentally stable. You need to wake up to the facts. Crazy people with guns KILL.
The 2nd Amendment was put in place to protect American Citizens from Government Tyranny.
The framers knew that Governments ALWAYS take as much power as they can get away with.
Millions of people have been killed by their own Government. Millions in the 20th century.
I live an work in Korea. They do not allow guns here to be in the hands of citizens. They people like it like that. They have very few murders here.
Paid Shills and Redcoats go home
So the got you questions that Piers Morgan believes he has gun owners trapped under is “Why dose anyone need a semi-automatic weapon? Are they necessary?” The power in this question is that it plays into type casting gun owners, second amendment supporters and/or defenders of gun rights as radicals. In doing so he hopes to appeal to the less informed broader population base. Those individuals, who form their opinions, as Pierce Morgan understands, based on their emotions. So at the risk of being cast as a radical I would like to take a crack at Mr. Morgan’s question.
We call the United States a free country, but we still have rules, laws and regulations that inhibit our absolute freedom. Of course it would be impossible for all Americans to exercise pure freedom of will. Choices that I make might infringe upon others rights to be free; we therefore have laws that limit behavior. When we submit ourselves to these laws we are in fact surrendering freedom and liberty. Now often time we do so willingly because what we get in return is beneficial to the preservation of our broader freedoms or wellbeing. Example: freedom is worthless to the deceased; we therefore create laws that restrict people from behaving in a way that would endanger others lives. So you see all debates in America really tie back to this truth; we can never be absolutely free, we must surrender some liberties in society, the question is where do we draw the line? What freedoms are we willing to surrender?
So Mr. Morgan when you ask “why dose anyone need a semi-automatic weapon?” the answer is they do not need it per-say but where as you look at the ownership of semi-automatic weapons as impractical and of no real purpose; I contend that the right to own such is a freedom of American Citizens that they should not and need not surrender. Why am I of this opinion? Well the pro-gun side has already conceded to your argument Mr. Morgan; in 1986 President Ronald Reagan signed into law a ban on automatic weapons. These automatic weapons are what can truly and honestly be described as “assault weapons”, a term far to overused in the discourse of the subject today. Mr. Morgan many Americans in 1986 asked themselves the same thing you are asking today “do these weapons have any practical use in civilian society?” The answer then just as it is today is no, but in America’s free society, practicality is hardly the litmus test for what is acceptable. Americans were willing do without automatic weapons but now you and those who agree with you are asking them to surrender more. It appears to me that we are witnessing the often scoffed at slippery slope argument in effect. The populous surrenders a slight, but seemingly reasonable liberty only to be asked to go even further some time down the road. In simplest terms guns can be dived into three categories; fully automatic, semi-automatic, and the rest. If we have already surrendered the first category and now you ask for a surrendering of the second, you actually want me to believe that someone will not ask for the third at a latter date. It makes me wonder how many proponents of the 1986 legislation assured gun owners at the time that this was it, if they would only go along with this ban nothing more would be asked.
Now I am sure one argument you might make is “come on there is no evidence that the government will completely out law guns in America” and to that I will say stop being dishonest and trying to paint me as a radical so that you might compromise the validity of what I have stated before. Tell the truth you understand the history of how fascist rulers come to power. You know that a primary objective of establishing tyranny is disarmament of the people. And before you again attempt to label me as being ridicules by saying something like “but this is America no one is trying to drag it down into tyranny” allow me to point out that it dose not need to be the intentions of any one individual for a nation to be dragged into tyranny. The unintended consequences of often well intentioned individuals just might open the door for those of lesser forthright intentions and that history provides us with evidence of; I do not think anyone involved with the Treaty of Versailles intended for their actions to facilitate the rise of the Third Reich.
The first part of your argument makes sense but then the logic disappears. You rightly point out at the beginning that to live in a civilized society we must give up some of our barbarian "rights". And there are trade-offs and lines drawn to balance the advantages of civilization with the loss of freedom. It's all a matter of where you draw the line.
But then you go on to make some hard to justify claims about where that line should be drawn. And the final part of your argument were bring up the issue of tyranny and try to draw some analogy to the Treaty of Versailles is just plain silly. As a person educated in history I cringe at such ridiculous historical name dropping and see it for what it is: an attempt win over the uneducated who don’t know any history.
To listen to some of the gun advocates, there should be no line. Their logic is that a criminal will always be able to get an illegal more powerful weapon than the law abiding citizen so law abiding citizens should have access to anything a criminal can get. So if there is no line drawn where would it lead to? – To neighbourhood nuclear superiority? Would that make you safer? There’s a good analogy to the famous “Laffer Curve” of Tax theory which tries to explain why increasing tax rates doesn’t necessarily bring in more revenue for the government. What if tax rates where 100% then how much revenue would that bring the government? Obviously zero since who would work if all your pay had to be given to the government. But let’s work back along that curve. What if taxes where 99%?, 90%, 80%? At what point would the majority of people consider it worthwhile to work and thus pay taxes. Many studies have shown that when total taxes (federal, state and local) exceed 50% or so, an increase in tax rate actually brings in less money to the government. Whether that number is 50% or 40% is not the point. The point is that there is a point. A line.
Now what about weapons? What if everyone had tactical nuclear weapons. Would that make us safer? Most people would probably agree no. (Though I wonder about the NRA). Now let’s work back along the line. What about 500 pound bombs? Gatling guns with uranium projectiles? Machine Guns? Assault Rifles?, Sawed-off Shotguns?, Concealable Pistols?, Long Rifles?, Shot Guns?. Somewhere along that line is a point where we are collectively not safer.
If you look at the four former British Colonies – Australia, Canada, New Zeeland and the USA, all except the USA have drawn the line between Concealable Pistols and Long Rifles. And those three have murder rates orders of magnitude lower than the USA. That’s gotta tell you something!
As far as the second amendment is concerned, I'd like to quote Dr. Phil on that. "How's it working out for you?"
Your theory, though I disagree, atleast does hold a truth in that we must give up some small liberties for the good and freedom for others. However, in this case, we are not simply giving up playing loud music at night so we won't disturb our neighbors. This issue affects all of us and the scale is huge and consequences dire. Therefore, giving up assault type guns is the more logical, humane solution.
Your theory, though I disagree, atleast does hold a truth in that we must give up some small liberties for the good and freedom for others. However, in this case, we are not simply giving up playing loud music at night so we won't disturb our neighbors. This issue affects all of us and the scale is huge and consequences dire. Therefore, giving up assault type guns is the more logical, humane solution. And since we strive to be a humane society, I think its in our best interest to use common sense here.
I like Piers Morgan. He may ruffle feathers, yet he views the whole picture.
Now you're lying and he's lying, so NOW who do we believe. Piers your an ass hole!
Now you're lying and he's lying, so NOW who do we believe. Piers your an ass hole! If we eliminate guns in this country, only the criminals willl have guns! You said it yourself, over 80% of guns optained by crimimals were obtained illegally! This is a human issue, and will not be solved by eliminating guns. Like all problems in this country, it will be solved by the common person, and not by the legislature, period! However, with that said, assult weapons need to be eliminated from private hands, that one thing might help.
Dr Gothican, you are clearly not following the debate closely. Piers is advocating for military guns to be regulated. Pay attention.
I understand owning a gun to protect on or ones family. I respect hunting for food.
These people respect their arms.
I oppose, these daily killings, of innocent people, crimes of ignorant passion.
These people do not respect their arms.
The right to bear arms in America?
So where does it stop, flame throwers, bazooka’s, rocket launchers, why not have a tank in every driveway?
If this was a logical strategy to lower the risk against the bad guys, then why not give everyone an assault rifle at birth, free arms for every responsible American, have the serial numbers linked to each citizen at birth, kids can be trained to use them when they start to go to school, they can keep them in their lockers and do target practice at recess. The bad guys wouldn’t dare try anything at the schools any more for sure, right?
If you want to take this to the ultimate illogical conclusion, let's ramp it up and get it over with, give everyone a nuclear warhead then the bad guys will really be nervous not to do something stupid, the ultimate deterrent against mass killings!
You mess with us, we will nuke you!
The rest of the world is laughing at the stupidity.
If something doesn’t change, with all the guns in circulation Americans will end up killing each other, gun fights in the streets, you’re heading for a civil war over gun control.
In a hundred years from now, Americans will look back at this time in history with embarrassment, the same way they do about slavery in the last civil war.
I love the fallacious arguments. Flame throwers and bazooka's and rocker launchers! Yeah! We say we want to keep the ability to purchase assault weapons, and you say oh and bazooka's too right!? Of course it's not logical, that's why no one is bringing that up. I don't know why you anti gun people keep bringing that up. Just stop. I mean if you want to have a good debate about it then let's debate.
323 rifle deaths in 2011. Over 11000 total gun murders. How will banning an assault rifle, which adds almost nothing to that number, solve this "gun problem"?
I said 'where does it stop'?
Do you recognize sarcasm?
America has the right to bear arms, fine!
America has a problem, why?
Other respectable countries around the world don’t have the right to bear arms written in 1776 when the world was still flat, and they don’t have the same problem as the USA, why?
Answer these questions and we can debate.
Saying countries that don't have guns don't have gun problems is...well obvious. Obviously guns can't be used in crimes if they aren't there. Define "has a problem"? I don't think the US does have a problem. I think the fact that 99 percent of all the guns in the US aren't being used in crimes is excellent.
I will say that violent crime is an issue. I mean not as much of an issue as other countries. I think we rank around number 28 or so for most violent crime. Not only that, but violent crime and murders have fallen by almost 50% in the past 20 years here in the US. Don't hear that on the news do ya?
I understand the dilemma; there are too many guns in circulation ‘the horse is out of the barn’ now what to do?
There has to be a better answer than allowing more guns into circulation, it keeps escalating, assault rifles now, what next?
Assault rifles aren't the problem. They aren't a problem at all. Neither are shotguns. I have yet to hear a good argument for why assault rifles are a problem.
They were used in recent mass shootings. Okay. What about all the other mass shootings that were equally horrible that they weren't used in?
In fact, I have yet to hear a good reason why guns are a problem at all. If the leading cause of death was "shot by a gun" then yes I would have to agree, guns are a problem. However, that is not the case. You are more likely to be in a lethal car accident driving everyday than shot by a gun. You are also way more likely to be killed in the hospital by accident than to be shot (195000 people a year killed by preventable accidents in the hospital). So why are guns even being talked about when almost all the violence comes from gangs and drugs in small isolated pockets in metropolitan cities with a population of 240000 or higher. Hm? Can you answer me that?
Cars are designed for transportation.
Hospitals exist to help people who are sick.
Guns are designed to kill.
You can compare these issues like you have done.
Guns are efficient killing tools.
We can’t stop crazy people from killing, but let’s leave them with less efficient options to use to execute their deeds, like assault rifles.
Sorry, you CAN'T compare these issues like you have done.
It's all about 'purpose'.
well said i couldn`t agree more
It makes me wonder why America is what it is.
I think it a worry when you see young male and female Children/teenagers posing with their Xmas present.(A machine gun of course.) A couple of facts from `Business Insider` There are 15.000 more gun stores than grocery stores.There are as many gun dealers as gas stations.There are twice as many gun stores in America than McDonalds Restaurants. American gun companies made 5.5 million guns in 2010 and 95% sold to Americans.These 5 millions guns weren`t enough to satisfy American demand for guns so another 3.3 million were imported.I think it is time for those who don`t agree with Gun control to take a look at the figures and take their heads out of the sand and start to use common sense .In 1776 they didn`t write the 2nd amendment for semi automatics or bazookas.
I would also like to say all pro gun people who start comparing gun control to road death or suicide etc etc or whatever else, stop changing the subject and face the truth.Because really the truth hurts
I know right. I mean with all the guns, we should be by far the highest in the world for gun murders and gun related crime. But we aren't.
Nothing to brag about being slightly better that Somalia!
I can go to a gun show and purchase a `assault weapon` no records ,no question asked ?
It`s easier to buy a gun than a packet of sudafed.
Laws change all the time so if certain weapons are banned , they are banned.
i have noticed there are a lot of people who think they are above the law if some weapons become illegal(If they are banned they will not hand in . If they are given the oppurtunity for a buy back and don`t comply and they are caught in posession they should be given prison sentences.It`s already out of control even if you stop these weapons in the near future it`s too little too late
You've obviously never bought a gun from a gun show. Your statement is completely ignorant.
I agree, cheers Australia!
Also gun buy back programs are worthless. Criminals can use a gun in a crime then take it to police, no questions asked, and get money and get the evidence destroyed for them. Yeah, great idea.
Philip, I'm sure you’re a nice guy, so nothing personal.
But, the way I see this playing out is that it can go one of two ways … it can get better or it can get worse, either way it’s going to get ugly.
At least if you take the decision to disarm the assault type of weapons at some point eventually it will get better than going the other way and putting more out there is circulation.
Banning assault rifles will be short term pain for long term gain; just like other countries that currently enjoy not having them.
Sorry i meant to say you can go to a gun show and no background check is done. If this is true then thats pretty slack rules.
You are obviously not living in Australia.
Crime and murder have been in decline over the past 20 years. In fact crime and murder have fallen over 50% over the past 20 years. Almost all gun crime and murder comes from gangs and drugs in small isolated pockets in metropolitan cities with a population of 240000 or higher. Move to smaller city and your chances of being shot almost disappear entirely. And your chances of being shot are only high if you're in those bad areas of the larger cities. So yeah, not really seeing a big widespread problem here.
I'm just wondering if Piers Morgan's security detail, which he must have or have had over the years carry conceiled firearms? Does anyone have a photo of this from past or present? I'd really like to know.
We are talking about assault rifles, stick to the program, stay focused on the topic.
When Piers first interviewed Larry Pratt it was very raw just after the massacre, he was angry, the world was angry. Now the weeks have gone Piers has not let up on this issue, he should be congratulated it is fantastic we need to keep talking about it as usually this issue go off the radar. I agree with some of the comments we need to get the core of the problem, lets talk about violence within the US overall. I think people need to stop attacking his nationality this has nothing to do with the issue and it makes you sound so backwards , keep the conversation going even if its good or bad. Keep up the good work Piers.
Someone, please check the statistics. Perhaps viewing http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp will help. No correlation between crime and gun control laws.
I Support the second amendment, but it is bantering idiots like this that make me feel bad for supporting it. Piers should not be deported and every idiot who want him to be deported should be sent back to school. Most of the supporters reasons for keeping guns a trivial at best. Larry tries to shoot out statistics, tries to say what kill more to justify gun deaths. Fact of the matter is if her is going to try to use that to justify guns why not ban cars. Then he tries to say psychologist give prescriptions and that's not true only psychiatrist can. How ever one of my two biggest problems with this man is how he says big European banks want to take over the United states they are just waiting for our guns, does he not realize that CEO's and businesses are what runs this country and every year various government organizations put thousands of people in danger just to help companies turn profit, this is with any president. Last if you are going to argue about guns why don't you site about how we have the highest crime rate in the world period. This is due to our economic system and belief that money is power and it does not matter how you make it. Thus if you ban guns all you are doing is taking away weapons from the Innocent because due to black markets, bad people will always find away to weapons. Look at gang violence in American, a lot of guns that they obtain are fully automatic which can not be bought in stores. Larry was also wrong in an earlier statement in saying that Hugo Chaves took the guns away, if this was true then in my visits to Venezuela i would not hear about violent shootings and see everyone with guns like i do. However, even there i do not support gun control because everyone i know who has one is to protect them from crime which has spiked due to the totalitarian and communist like government system there. If you are going to argue for the second amendment use your head and formulate an argument do not yell and throw out incoherent babble. Please for my sake in support and for the sake of improving the image of the average american in our international community. Thank you.
I completely agree that Larry Pratt and other recent guests of Piers' are nuts! However, Piers too needs to sharpen his position and debating style here, as he is clearly emotional. Piers sets up his position on this issue by stating that it is his intent to ban assault weapons and large magazine clips in America. As the conversation/debate with his guests continue, I for one get the impression Piers' true intent goes beyond this - he wants guns out! All guns! For instance, when we talk about having armed guards at schools, which is admittedly a controversial issue, I don't think anyone is saying these guards would be armed with AR-15's. This would more likely be a small concealed handgun handled by a professional. Purely from a debate position standpoint, how does this conflict with the Assualt Weapon ban? Answer: It doesn't. There are many other examples as well when the debate shifts into "gun violence" and "gun crime" and the debate begins to shift well off-course of Piers' stated intent of a ban on Assault Weapons.
No question the gun issue is not about hunting. This is a "good old boy" argument. If you hunt and use guns for that then fine. However the right to bear arms is intended to provide individuals with the ability to defend themselves. Be that from a home intruder, a tyranical government, sasquatch, or whatever the need may be. This is a basic right of Americans that is not to be infringed upon. Now, where Assault rifles and some level of gun control is concerned, sign me up! However, I fear advocates like Piers and, by association, CNN are moving the conversation much further to guns on the whole. I think Piers is to passionate about this issue and that, although he's handled himself somewhat well in interviews to date, he may even find himself losing his job in the future over this given his passion and controversial position.
If you are not US citizen, it is none of your business.
Tourism is a big industry for the US, don’t upset people by saying it’s none of anyone else’s business!
We are in a global community now – grow up.
As a teacher of kindergarten students, I applaud Mr. Morgan for holding the raw conversations concerning gun control. The bottom line is, we as a nation, have not done enough to prevent the massacres that are occurring both on a large scale and also on a small scale in our country. What is unbelievable is the loss of belief that assault weapons belong on a battlefield, not within the general society. Protection of society is important but at what cost? The tragedy of Newtown tragically spotlighted the reality of current gun control legislation, and to do anything but to fix it, is disrespectful to the memory of anyone who has lost life unnecessarily. As a nation, it is time to join together, and retain a focus on stopping the slaughtering our citizens due to the availability of assault weaponry.
I am constantly amazed by how obtuse some Americans are, particularly those in a position of influence. It's no wonder gun massacres are increasing. It's simple math......reduce guns and reduce gun-related deaths. To say there is no relationship is to call crazy the issue America has with Iran having nuclear weaponry. If you don't trust the people carrying the weapons, you can't trust the outcome or what they'll do with them. The issue of gun control is the same: there are too many 'crazies' out there; a hand gun can defend you plenty and if a mad man gets a hold of one, he can get tackled before too many rounds are fired...........not so a semi-automatic or more powerful weapons.
Piers, please keep up the hard work you do! Don't get bugged down by loud people or lobbyists who think they speak for a majority. Your discussions help to bring some common sense to some Americans, unfortunately not enough. Don't give up!
I for one have been stating the same concept on Americans and their rights to bear arms since The Sandy Hook Tragedy. Yes Americans have a right to bare arms but why on god’s green earth does the majority feel they need to bare military grade weapons? This is one fact that I have a HARD TIME wrapping my head around. When it comes to the majority feeling the need to have a weapon to protect them and their loved ones for the most part they envision a one on one confrontation. So why do average American gun enthusiast feel the need for automatic weapons? I have yet to hear any SOUND discussion giving a solid foundation to this argument. By allowing the access of these types of weapons to the average citizen it opens the door to these extreme acts of violence. I whole heartedly believe that the average American should not in any shape or form have access to these weapons, if we could focus on eliminating the access to these types of weapons and removing them from the hands of the unstable, untrained, and clearly twisted individuals who believe that this is appropriate weapon to protect one’s self or loved ones we would have a dramatic impact on these horrific events. So I for one support Piers Morgan and the argument he is trying to make solely to enlighten people on the facts, strictly the facts NOT OPINION. Good luck Piers Morgan you have a supporter.
Aguy appears in your house,as soon as he sees you he pulls a gun,,this renders YOUR gun as useless,cos if you reach he might shoot,what do the gun lovers suggest in this situation.Or a guy takes a job on low pay protecting a school,,when the shooting starts why should this guy risk his life?,,why do most run away with thier gun in pocket?
Because nobody wants to be the dead hero.Teachers gave thier lives to protect students but thier heroic act is being tarnished by the gun lobby,who I bet none of them could tell you the teachers names.
Oh dear,from Australia, this gun debate, as well as some comments posted on this linkare ridiculous. Why does anyone need an assault weapon?No one has been able to answer this question rationally. My country had a gun massacre and our Prime Minister then, John Howard, banned them and introduced a buy back system. We haven't had a massacre since. America, you really need to revisit if your 2nd right is valid and relevant today.Your gun landscape is so different now when this was done. In fact, Jefferson recommended this was revisted every 20 years. If Obama can change the law here, it will be his everlasting legacy.... just like Howard.
Nobody has a real good answer to your question
from Melbourne for the record
Thank you for taking a stand on this issue and for keeping it in the news! I believe that you speak for the silent majority of Americans. Keep up the good work! I support you!!
It's because Morgan wants to boost his ratings, is why he using all of the bogus statistics and twisted truths to create controversy..and by pandering to the uninformed who actually think he is doing a service,he has increased his ratings somewhat....Morgan is more of a entertainer then anything,and he is only concerned with himself and ratings and not the facts and no one should be be a sucker and believe his bs.
People are being killed,,,if your speed limit was 100mph and it led to peoples deaths,something would be done,,,Im trying to think of another domestic situation where people were losing thier lives and nothing was done!!
You gun guys should drop the guns and ignore you soft media and get your news online,then you might find out what your country is up to in the world.The pen is trully mightyer than the sword.
It is Morgan who is using twisted facts.about the shooting committed in the UK....Like Mark Twain once said.. "There are lies and damned lies and statistics" Morgan is using bogus statistics. Professor Joyce Lee Malcolm...has done extensive research in the UK's gun violence after the gun bans took effect there ...And the truth is that gun violence has actually "doubled" in the UK after the ban...And because the handguns had to be registered, the government there confiscated the weapons. even the knifings there are through the roof,to the point now that there is serious consideration being given to banning large kitchen knifes. The point is after the ban the citizens in the UK were left defenseless from the thugs. Morgan is twisting the facts to create controversy to boost that show's miserable ratings...and he has no interest is facts just ratings...Morgan should go home to do his preaching ..and the sooner then better.
After all the bullying it only reflects and a shame that Americans who support, lobbied and pushing for more guns does not feel the security, safety and freedom that America provides. 300 million guns is a 300 million risk as well these are legally owned guns only it means it can go up even more. Laws are subject to amendments it can be change if it is not effective and suitable as time requires it. Stricter gun control on acquiring possession and handling of assault weapons more than a pistol must be prohibited to the public and maybe coupled it with social reforms to treat the mentally ill americans and maybe they could start with the gun lobbyist.
More power Piers keep up the good fight for Americans who truly deserve a gun violence free society. For the victims and their families may they find comfort and peace.
Piers Morgan is nothing more than a pompous ass who is using his position to create civil unrest. It is obvious by his behavior he has no intentions of debating or attempting to understand the other side of an issue he is passionate about. The name calling and under the breath comments such as “you’re not my friend” after the camera was off Mr. Pratt was simply childish and representative of a simpleton mind. Comments suggesting the government should force people to turn their weapons in so only the government or authorities may possess any form of power is ridiculous. I would suggest Mr. Morgan be the first man to step up and volunteer his personal service (not his paid hands) to start knocking on doors demanding people turn their weapons over.
It is interesting to note that Mr Morgan is really operating as an agent of a foreign country and is influencing US policy and legislation. I do agree with Mr Morgan on most of his suggestions. We need to strictly control or eliminate military grade weapons with high capacity magazines. However I will continue to CC for my own protection. With that said, there is no amount of legislation that will prevent deadly weapons from reaching the hands of insane individuals or criminals. And it will take years, if not decades eliminate hicap magazines. Mr Morgan fails to address an important point. As odd as it may sound, it appears that it is not the career criminal that is entering our schools and killing the children. It is the climically insane. Our first job in my mind would be to prevent deadly weapons from reaching the hands of these individuals. I am not convinced, however, that anything other than a complete ban on all deadly weapons would impact the issues at hand for decades. But, common sense tells us that is unlikely to happen. So, that puts us back to some kind of common ground approach and I am not hopeful that anything concrete will come from that approach.
For me personally, I still feel safer with my CC and I would dread the day that I would have to turn in my weapon, because I know that the criminal and insane people will never play by the rules.They will continue to obtain deadly weapons and use them to kill people.
I see no solution to this situation, at least in the near term.
Figures to be published by the Home Office this week will massively understate the scale of the problem.
Data provided to The Sunday Telegraph by nearly every police force in England and Wales, under freedom of information laws, show that the number of firearms incidents dealt with by officers annually is 60 per cent higher than figures stated by the Home Office.
Last year 5,600 firearms offences were excluded from the official figures. It means that, whereas the Home Office said there were only 9,800 offences in 2007/8, the real total was around 15,400. The latest quarterly figures, due to be released on Thursday, will again exclude a significant number of incidents.
The explanation for the gulf is that the Government figures only include cases where guns are fired, used to “pistol whip” victims, or brandished as a threat.
Thousands of offences including gun-smuggling and illegal possession of a firearm – which normally carries a minimum five-year jail sentence – are omitted from the Home Office’s headline count, raising questions about the reliability of Government crime data.
Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said: “These alarming new figures not only highlight the appalling state of gun crime in this country, but also remind us just how poor the Government’s statistics actually are.
“Crime statistics must also be compiled and published independent of the Home Office, and crime mapping rolled out so that people can have confidence in what they are being told about the state of crime in this country.”
Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said the figures revealed the extent to which gun crime is a “scar on society”.
“It is shocking that the Home Office is in denial about the extent of gun crime by refusing to include offences where a gun is present but not brandished,” he said.
“This is another strong reason why the Home Office should not be in charge of collecting its own statistics, which should be put directly under the responsibility of the Office for National Statistics.
“Gun crime must be treated with the same seriousness and concern as knife crime. Both are a scar on our society.”
In all, there were at least 5,612 offences excluded from the Home Office’s official gun crime total last year, according to figures supplied by police forces.
The true total number of excluded offences will have been even higher, because two of the 43 forces in England and Wales, Thames Valley and Leicestershire, failed to hand over their data when asked to do so under the Freedom of Information Act, and a large urban force, Greater Manchester, provided incomplete statistics. Scotland records gun crime differently.
When the Home Office publishes its latest quarterly crime figures on Thursday, they will include a section on gun crime injuries and deaths, but the figures will again exclude a significant number of incidents.
The Sunday Telegraph’s figures suggest that the Metropolitan Police’s official tally of 3,300 gun crimes in 2006/7, the most recent available, would have risen to around 5,000 if excluded categories had been counted. In 2007, Met officers dealt with 1,678 firearms incidents which were not included in the official tally. The Met’s figures show that offences of firearms possession in the capital rose from 850 five years ago to 1,400 last year.
After the Met, the second-highest number of offences excluded from the official statistics was recorded by West Midlands Police with 404, taking the force’s true annual total of gun crimes to around 1,400.
Piers, I fully support you and am grateful for you saying the things that many of us would like to
say as reasonably, intelligently and compellingly as you do. Keep strong, You gotta lot of people at your side and behind you. Something has gotta change regarding the irrational obsession with guns. It's not true that guns do not kill people, people do. It's people in possession of guns that kill people. People without guns may hurt other people in anger, if the anger is excessive, but they do not always kill people as guns are created to do.
Why would you support someone who is not a citizen of this Country? Ask him to give up his body guards and ask him to have senator feinstein to do the same! Of course they won't because its not about gun control at all. Its about money and agendas. It should be about combating mental health and our criminal elements in our government that use these people to fullfill there agendas. Rene, I used to have your concern about guns, but life lessons have taught me to appreciate the ability to defend my Kids, Wife, Myself and anyone else that may be in danger. cnn and all the other major news networks fail to air and post the stories of men and women who have protected themselves from grave situations by having a concealed firearm on hand. Of course how can cnn push an agenda if they report the news fairly.
Why do we have a foreigner debating gun control for this Country? Piers is not a citizen and should not be leading a campaign to have all guns banned in this country! Leave it to the communist news network to shove its slanted liberal views toward a sheepish audience. I agree with Mr. Pratt and Mr. Jones totally on this issue, piers has no justification to lead such a movement. I will say everyone has the right to an opinion, but that should be all piers is allowed. Take away the guns, then only criminals will have them (and the WILL), leaves the rest of us sitting ducks. If piers wants no guns, then he should have no armed body guards, all political leaders should be designated gun free zones, and all Government buildings should also be gun free zones!! To ALL LIBERALS, post on your house; this is a gun free zone! Let senator feinstein give up her armed body guards if she wants all guns banned. Lead by example. piers, feinstein, obama, bieden are all crooks with agendas. If you don't believe this then you are truly a sheep! Wake up AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!
As noted by others; this is the story Pratt was referencing: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3222063/Gun-crime-60pc-higher-than-official-figures.html Interestingly the UK had 38,000 Serious knife crimes in one year... so take away guns and the knife violence goes up, take away the knives and the baseball bat violence increases.
In the U.S. in any given year, roughly 32,000 people are killed by guns.... roughly 11k are murders, 20k are suicides and the roughly 1k remainder are "other"- accidental deaths by civilaians, police etc. Sadly if we are realistic, most of those committing suicide will find other ways of guns are not available. Now depending on what study you check, U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime anywhere from 850,000 to 2.5 million times a year. Also the FBI states that assault style weapons (weapons that look like true military assault rifles) are used in 1/5 of 1% of all crimes with guns.... so we have legislators and media who are flipping out over a gun type that is used in far less than 1% of all gun related crimes.
The real questions are:
1) how do we minimze the access of guns to criminals/ and how do we better ensure that dangerous criminals with recitivistic tendencies are kept out of the population?
2) In every society, there is a portion of the population that is either evil, mentally disturbed or both. The monumentally difficult question is how do we identify and treat those people?
Welcome back to America. Now all those people who tried their a$$ off to deport you because you are challenging/insulting second amendment didn't know what the first amendment is. Such a stupids/loosers.. Now after the Presidents Executive order on Gun control all those gun fanatics have to like their guns and count the days when the law becoms effective. On other note your second set of two guests the man made two valid points which I liked it.
Please continue this Gun control torch alive till we see end to it. Thanks a lot Piers. I will see you to night
This debate is the not the right debate you should be looking at the mental health of Americans. Your never going to solve the problem if you dont fix the cause of it. Most guns are not legal in England and Wales but it still happens here in Canada too. Its not the legal guns killing people here is all the stolen ones from the US making it up here. To solve that make a law against night table guns and have them locked up at all times and convict the owner of the weapon that was used just as much as the person who used it.
As for this debate Piers your a tool. He did not cut you off but you did all the time not cool. How am I to respect you, your show and CNN if you cant let the other side talk. If I wanted this kind of news stile i would watch Fox news. I think he should be invited back for a third time have a formal apology for cutting him off so much and let him say his side of the story weather it is right or wrong. The US is all about freedom of speech and you did not let him say his bit again where he was right or wrong.
Peirs you are a fraud! I checked murder rates in England and Wales and they are listed between the figures of 550 and 650. These figures come from the Homeoffice.gov.uk along with many other news sources. I believe a fair comparison would also require looking at population. Wales and Uk 60 million compared to the US that has 313 million. If we are to discuss gun control lets at least be honest.
Wow, scray stuff! This Pratt guy is really something. It's one thing to have a stance on something and be passionate about it, but to resort to lies to get your point across? Unbelievable.
Putting aside the gun debate for a moment, why can't this Pratt idiot have any compassion for the 6-7 year old children tha were brutally murdered in Newtown?
It has to be one of two things: either he is inhuman, or he has to portray a macho, cowboy, tough guy image, in which there is no place to feel sorry for the victims. In either case, it's scary! Not sure how he would have felt if one of the children in the Newtown shooting was one of his grand-children!
By the way, I'm from Canada, so this gun culture mentality is foreign to me. But I'm just wondering if it's common practice for the pro-gun side to never feel sorry for the victims. And if so, why?
Pratt wasn't lieing, he was talking about the total murder rate in Britain. Morgan was talking only about the gun murder rate. If you look at the UN stats you'll see that Britain, despite its virtual gun ban, has a very high violent crime and murder rate compared to many of its large gunning owning Western Eurpean neighbors.
Pratt did lie. They were talking about gun murder figures. And he said there were 970, which is a complete lie! If we're going to talk about overall violent crime figures, then we have to compare similar figures between US and UK.
Piers did say that it's not perfect in the UK, but the gun crimes are way, way, lower than in the US. But it's not just UK, the figures for gun murders are way, way lower in any other civilized country compared to the US.
Also, this Pratt guy didn't answer most of the questions, simply deflected the topic. Piers asked him wy he has no compassion, he answered something else.
Piers asked him if he believed what that other lunatic Jones was talking about, if he believes that the purpose is to defend against a tyranical gouvernment, he answered something else.
It's really sad that these crackpots like Pratt are heading the pro-gun lobby and brainwashing a large portion of the population.
I don't think Pratt was deliberately lying, the number he was trying quote was for total homicides. If Pratt had asked Morgan what the total homicide numbers are in Britain annually Morgan would have said in the 700 to 800 range. He had the stats right there in front of him, but kept referring to the gun homicide numbers. On a per per capita basis, Britain's murder rate is higher than most of its Western European neighbors, which is an undisputed statistic. Furthermore, if you look at the gun ownership numbers you'll see that these other countries are some of the largest gun owning nations on the planet. Switzerland, Germany and France for instance rank 3rd, 4th and 5th respectively in terms of private gun ownership, where as Britain ranks 88th. Despite the availability of guns in private circulation, according to UN stats, these three European countries have homicide rates that are 40% lower than gunless Britain. So why is that?
While the gun murder rate is low in Britain, Pratt was right about Britain's total violent crime and murder rate being one of the highest in the Western World.
Read this...... fact checkers will tell the truth!
Love to hear the replys please.
As recent as Monday Piers mentions Sandy Hook had an AR 15 used in the killing but local news showed via filiming by LE that the AR 15 was NEVER used. Do your homework Piers Larry Pratt schooled you and of course you will not bow to defeat Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
Pratt didn't school anybody. Pratt is an uncompassionate SOB whose only purpose is to make sure that there are more guns on the streets of the US, so that more people can be killed. He is lining his pockets and brainwashing a portion of the population to adopt his wild west mentality. Solve the gun problem by having more guns?!? Absolutely insane!
Not sure how this Pratt guy sleeps at night knowing that he has the blood of 6-7 year olds on his hands. What a tool! He could start by wiping that smirk of his face. What is he smirking about, that fact that 26 innocent people were massacred at Newtown, 20 of which were 6-7 year old children?
Movie Violence and Mental Health the Cause
Westerns, Clint Eastwood and Dirty Harry, talks to a chair, mental health issues.
Planet of the Apes, Charlton Heston, "not from these cold dead hands", mental ..
Batman, Aurora Colo. "The Joker", mental health issues.
Hurricane Sandy, Adam Lanza, Italian Mafia and the God Father, mental ..
The FBI profile said that it might be because his mother loved other children, mental ..
Its mental and too many guns.
HIDING THE CAUSE
A well armed population is hard to oppress, and can be scary for oppressors. (Marie Antoinette)
The stereotypes and abuse are linked to denial, bullying, mobbing, - criminal harassment networks aka organized crime.
Organized crime is causing these rage shootings, and advocates a defenseless population through stereotypes and rhetoric that is easier to repress and oppress .
1. Theory: T Trapped or Corned 2. Abuse Strategy (Marie-France Hirigoyen) 3. Damage, Provocation, Rampage 4. I Influence of the Mind .,
T Trapped or Cornered
"You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option." – Seung-Hui Cho
"it is not for economic reasons (for I have waited until I exhausted all my financial means, even refusing jobs)" – Marc Lepine
The mob is using homelessness and inflicting serious illness, cancer, to T Trap or Corner targeted citizens for coercion, and this is linked to violence, rampages, or rage shootings.
Theory: T Trapped or Corned: The mob isolates targeted citizens and tries to hide their attacks or activities, such as pushing targeted victims to homelessness. The targeted citizens may believe or be led to believe, I Influence of the Mind by mobbing or criminal harassment participants that they will become visible, I Ideation, when T Trapped or Cornered by hitting back through terrible crimes or by committing terrible crimes such as a rage shooting or massacres. They do not succeed, any mobbing involved, corruption, or organized crime activity to push the targeted citizen to homelessness is not made visible, only a person that has committed a terrible crime and evil, their crime is used to advocate gun control.
This section was taken from the Psychological Harassment Information Association website and Rage Shooting Factors page. The page can be printed, saved, emailed, etc, please share the information if you believe in this information and prevention.
Organized Crime and Acts of Terror to Advocate Defenceless Population
They use symbolism and influence of the mind that can leave clues, in this case: Hurricane Sandy, Sandy Hook Elementary, and New Jersey ..
Hiding the Cause and Misinformation
Q. The media focused on "a deranged person" and mental health but the experts claim that this was not the cause, so what was the cause?
Newtown, Connecticut: Hurricane Sandy, Sandy Hook Elementary, New Jersey, An Organized Crime Crime Act of Terror to Advocate Gun Control?
"we urge the media and professionals who participate in speculative interviews about the motives of the accused shooter to refrain from misleading comments about autism and other neurodevelopmental disabilities. ... (M)isinformation could easily trigger increased prejudice and misunderstanding."
STEREOTYPES, DISCRIMINATION, AND HIDING THE CAUSE
1. In Marc Lepine's case the media focused on an Arab Father, while the sociologists, the experts, focused on homelessness. (racial discrimination and prejudice)
2. In Adam Lanza's case the media focused on Mental Illness, while the experts claim that this was not the cause. (discrimination against the mentally ill and prejudice)
I believe organized crime is committing acts of terror to advocate a defenceless population, and Gabrielle may have been a victim of one of these.
The Federal Judge's last name was "Rolls" and organized crime criminal harassment participants use these terms when people are faced with criminal allegations "roll over" "turn over" linked to organized crime subjugation. Jared also showed different patterns linked to mobbing victims.
Unfortunately it's tactics like this that CNN uses to sway people away from the real facts that matter: Other types of violence went up and more than counteracted any drop in gun crime. Knife stabbings, etc. Criminals will commit crime no matter what the weapon is.
Thank you Piers, for using your position in the national and international media to further the long overdue debate about firearm regulation. The Larry Pratt(s) and Alex Jones(s) of our nation need to be exposed as the zealots they so clearly are. They may choose to live in fear, but I, and the vast majority of others in this nation, do not. Firearm regulation alone will not cure the disease that has infected this society, but it is a significant step in the right direction. I'll do my part and continue to make my views know to my respective, duly elected, political leaders. Keep up the good work!
OMG! This Larry Pratt's heartless, feeling less and unattractive face represents the ugly part and dark side of American culture! I have tried to understand why Americans love guns, the deadly firearms so much; the painful truth is they secretly feel empowered and manly when they have guns in their hands, this primitive passion embedded in their genes. The civilization and evolution Americans enjoy so far have not altered the genes yet.
Are you a gun owner? No? Ever do any shooting?
I'm not sure where you're coming from with your statements, other than the standard comedic propaganda that's been around for decades. There are many reasons to own a firearm. Hunting, pest control, target shooting, self-defense, these are just few. I do know that none of my firearms have been used for murder, and they won't be as long as they're mine.
I mean, I just have to wonder. If you're so afraid of something statistically less likely to kill you than a staircase... how do you do anything? Do you bubble wrap?
Unless I missed it, why has no one in these interviews asked Piers what the gun death rate in Britain was before their gun ban??? It's a legit question and all Piers does spout out that there have only been X amounts of gun deaths in England and Wales. I agree, the numbers are very very low, only in the double digits per year...but they were like that BEFORE the gun ban too. Please correct me if I am wrong. And if I am not mistaken they have only been lower for one year since the ban. Every other year they have actually increased (and please don't give me the slight population increase argument – I don't buy it.)
The 2nd Amendment and Hunting
Do you know anyone that goes hunting with 4 hand guns? Hand guns are not made for hunting, they are made to kill other men. Before they ban the semi-automatic they should ban the guns used to kill men, hand guns.
I didn't know the U.S. 2nd Amendment was about hunting.
Tough argument. You are not going to find a Glock 22 on this list, but the fact of the matter is there are handgun hunters out there......
The Italian Mafia goes hunting for people with hand guns, and I've seen them cut the head off of horse like terrorists and put it in someone's bed.
Adam Lanza is Italian and it was probably the Italian Mafia.
It's not about hunting. But a lot of these proposed laws and bans sometimes affect hunting, so people get mad. These proposed laws also only affect people that own and use their firearms legally. Since every person committing a crime with a gun is breaking the law, common sense says that we need to pass more laws to...wait a minute.
Piers, you are getting "it" handed to you hand over fist buddy. Please keep it up! You ARE truly helping!
Larry Pratt, merchant of death.
Great description of Pratt! I can also add liar, bully and uncompassionate!
Pratt always has a smirk on his face! Pratt is probably thinkng "I'm lining my pockets, we've been successful in creating a wild west, us against them mentality in the US, and I couldn't case less about thousands of people (including 6-7 years olds) being murderd with guns". quoting L. Pratt
Not sure how this tool sleeps at night, knowing he has blood on his hands!
Why should governments that have NUCLEAR WEAPONS for safety, have a right to dictate to their citizens weather or not they can have semiautomatic rifles for safety?
I never watch your show but last night was the first time . I think it is garbage that u come from another country and spout off about banning guns . If u don't like are guns laws go home that simple if it is soooo much safer on ur side of the lake go home . People who pay their taxes and go to work everyday and cause NO harm to anyone should be able to enjoy their second amendment rights without having someone like ur self infringing on them .
I find this interesting, this point is never brought up did England have a second amendment, NO !
What is the population of England and Wales, 970 gun related murders with a small population, I think Piers Morgan better shut up and go back to England.
Here's a reality check for Piers Morgan on some of the numbers he keeps quoting.
Thanks CCN and Piers! The NRA loves you! 100,000 new NRA members in 18 days, keep up the good work! If all you anti self-defense kooks don't want a peice, spend your money on more kool-aid, or better yet, a burial plot, you may need it, and put a "GUN FREE ZONE" sign on your house, but I will exercise my RIGHT to defend myself and family with a gun if need be.
it is time for Piers to change the subject. He should stop wasting his time trying to change the American gun mentality.He needs to go back to talking to celebrites about mindless stuff & save himself a lot of grief.
The rest of the civilized world is watching & shaking their heads at the amount of violence in the US & yet they still want more & more guns. Laws won't change them they need a psychology shift.
Example: There are laws against dealing drugs. Do millions of us not deal drugs because of the laws? Of course not we don't deal drugs because we have no desire to, law or no law. That is what needs to change in the States. People should not want guns in cities not because of laws but because it is not part of their psyche.
It it going to take generations to change the American gun mentality. Unfortunately the more violence the more guns they buy.
Truly mind bogling.
Fox, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Shaun Hannity etc all spew hateful vitriol on a daily basis. The US is one angry country.
The British, Austrialian, Canadian mentality is so different, yet we all live with the same daily issues. The US has made guns so readily available that Americans have become desensitized to them.
Bring the soldiers home from Afganistan & let them patrol your cities. Because at the rate you are going the average US city is becoming way more dangerous then any war zone overseas.
Newtown CT, Italian Mafia act of Terrorism
I believe that the Newtown CT shooting was an act of terror by the Italian Mafia. I've seen them cut the head off of a horse and put it in someone's bed, an act of terror.
Adam Lanza was probably watching The God Father, the Italian Mafia, couldn't find a horse, .. and committed an act of terror.
Gun in the US should be controlled and not be left in the hands of irresponsible gangs. Piers argument is correct – gun owners or sellers care only their profits from selling these deadly machines and not care the lives of these children dying at schools and streets in the US.
It is making light when some people compare US and UK in terms of the deaths caused by violent using guns. US is very close to South Africa in rate of crimes committed every day. The reason is clear and the US government should take an immediate action and change the gun law before it is too late.
Actually...no. Despite being number one for gun ownership in the world, and I mean a very strong number one. We are number 28 in gun homicides.
UK 2034 violent crimes per 100000 people. South Africa is 1609 violent crimes per 100000. US is not even in the top 10. ours is 466 per 100000, AND it has declined by almost 50% over the past 20 years. So uh, check your facts next time.
So you are saying that I am four times more likely to be a victim of violent crime in the UK? Scratch that place off my list of vacation spots.
Let's compare apples with apples, gun murder rates with gun murder rates. There could be more deaths in other countries due to car accidents, but that's not the topic of discussion.
US has by far and away the largest gun crime rate of CIVILIZED countries in the world, and the highest rate of guns per capita. PLEASE READ THIS AGAIN before responding.
300 million firearms, 11000-12000 murders by guns/year.
Seems to me the problems is simple: get rid of the guns. Simple, right??
Wrong! The solution according the crackpots like Pratt, Jones, and the NRA? Put more guns on the streets. If they had their way, it would be:
600 million firearms, 22000-24000 murders by guns/year.
More money for them, more violence and more loss of life.
Oh, but I just realized, actually loss of life is not important to Pratt, Jones, the NRA and their followers! It's the price to pay for freedom.
I forgot, they need to protect themselves from the tyranical gov't! Absolutely incredible. It's actually sickening.
I didn't read your whole post because you lost it on the first few sentences. You can’t compare gun murder rates between a country that bans guns and one that doesn’t. That is not apples and apples. The results are as you would expect. Compare murder rates to murder rates and that is more like apples and apples. The gun rights people will suggest that murder rates are up where people can’t defend themselves. The numbers seem to support that.
You said the US has the highest gun crime rate in the world. That's not true. US is number 28 for gun homicides in the world, despite being number one in gun ownership, and very strong number one at that. Unless of course you are saying that all 27 countries that have higher homicides are not civilized, in which case I think you have bigger problems.
You misinterpret the gun lobby's position. We have enough guns. They want more guns where we are not allowed to use them. Areas where all these mass murders happen.
Don't try to misrepresent the facts from sources that have false reports.
USA is Number ONE in these:
1. Highest gun related homicides (not including war zones like Syria or Afghanistan or neighboring Pakistan)
2. Highest gun ownership including Assault Rifles
3. Highest incarceration rate.
You want to challenge me with any one of the above facts that are irrefutable, then please reply ?
And almost all gun crime comes from small isolated pockets in metropolitan cities with populations of 240000 or higher. These crimes are being perpetrated by gangs killing each other or cops shooting them over the drug problem. Almost all gun crime in the US you can trace to the fact that we have banned what, drugs. Guess what, bans don't work. We banned alcohol, we got Al Capone. We ban drugs, we got the drug cartels. I don't want to be around for what happens when we ban guns. I can tell you one thing, if you think guns will disappear you are delusional. See illegal drugs and prohibition of alcohol for how well bans eliminate availability. It doesn't.
You are right about Pratt, Jones and Lapperre's NRA. However, I think there is one more important reason to further their GUN Agenda along with the ones you mentioned. And that is about MONEY and POWER.
MONEY: More and More GUNS equates to more money for gun manufacturers, middle salesmen and other folks including NRA membership.
POWER: GUNS ownership gives a sense of invincibility and fearlessness. NRA knows all about it
Not very happy with the way Larry Pratt comes across.
Mr. Morgan........Just shut up and go back to England.
Well, it is pretty obvious that Mr. Morgan doesn't understand the problem and is one a personal crusade to get media time. If he really cared, he would use his platform to dig deeper into the problem and look for real solutions.
Please Morgan come back to the UK, you are really spinning your wheels with white trash. Each time I watch you interview these...I mean what can you call these things....because they are not really human!, I wonder why the rest of America does not stand up to this vocal big mouth, full of shait minority.
How dare you.
You would accuse people of being sub-human when you appreciate a culture that has stripped the power from the old, the feeble, the young, and the weak? We are sub-human, though you support a culture that makes a victim out of anyone who does not have an advantage of extreme physical strength? I am sub-human, but you celebrate a nation where a distrustful government has placed CCTV cameras on every block, and they still have a violent crime rate that rivals backwater African nations?
If that's what it is to be human, if we have to enter a state of victimhood, where the lawless strike us every day while the lawmakers search for creative new ways to oppress us, then the species is nothing more than cattle.
I am not cattle. I am a child of man. I carry responsibility for my own well-being. I refuse to rely upon the protection of an exploitative and corrupt body of people. I make my own fate, and neither you nor anyone else will change that.
I emigrated from Amsterdam, the Netherlands in 1982 and I too was appalled by the proliferation of guns in American society. So much so that in 1987, in my college English writing class I wrote a persuasive paper on gun violence. In my paper I cited a study in which the authors compared King County, Washington (KC) with the country of Denmark (DK). Both KC and DK had similar demographics and a similar number of reported cases of assaults and other violent crime. The big difference was the outcome. Whereas in DK, the assaults and violent crimes resulted in injuries, in KC, they resulted in death. The conclusion of the study was clear....when guns are involved, people die, whereas when knives, baseball bats, etc. are used, people get injured. A prime example of this same principle occurred just recently in China where a deranged individual stabbed 22 children before he was subdued. Fortunately, none of the children died. Could some of them have died? Of course, but imagine if this person had a semi-automatic weapon, how many of these children would have survived.
Watching these debates between the gun lobbyists and the opponents, I cannot help but notice that the gun lobbyists continue to argue against common sense. Since it is practically impossible to argue against common sense, people like Alex Jones and Larry Pratt come up with insane theories of government conspiracies. To use an analogy, common sense dictates that matches in the hands of little children poses danger. The gun lobbyists are arguing that it makes more sense to provide every adults in the community with fire extinguishers than to take the matches away from the child.
@Peter: Very well said! Great analogy. I agree that it's common sense, the more guns there are, the more is the probabilty of gun murders!
It's basic, comment sense. But, like you say, the gun lobby says the way to prevent more gun crimes is to put more guns n the streets?!? Don't correct the root cause of the problem, increase the problem!
The Swiss, Germans and French are respectively ranked the 3rd, 4th and 5th largest gun owning nations on the planet, and yet they all have some of the lowest homicide rates in the world. Conversely Britain ranks 88th, and despite its virtual gun ban, its overall murder rate is nearly 40% higher. Just where is the correlation that shows more guns mean higher rates of murder? Based on your argument, the murder rates, given the number of guns in circulation, should be significantly higher than Britain's, but they are not.
So because one person goes off the deep end the rest should pay the price . That s makes perfect sense to me . Stay in ur own country . We r a free nation we don't punish the innocent at least we didn't until the bleeding hearts like urs came around .
@John: I'll stay in my country, no plans for me to change. It's safe and I have my freedom (without having to cary a gun), so all is well.
I think most people in the US have common sense and are good people. But some people are misguided and caught up in this gun culture. guns = freedom. Quite shallow, as I can tell.
And to add fuel to the fire, these crackpots like Jones and Pratt are brainwashing people to arm themselves to the max to protect themselves against the gov't! Wow! And then when there is mass gun violence, the solution is to get more and more guns to solve the problem! If this wasn't so sad and actually happening, it would be laughable!
@Mobile Find me a country that did not win freedom or independence with guns.
Did you even watch the interview with Larry Pratt? I don't remember any crazy government conspiracies coming from him. Anyways, gun crime and violence is only a problem in small isolated pockets in metropolitan cities with a population of 240000 or greater. Why you ask? Well because that's where the gangs operate, and almost all gun murders are gangs shooting each other or cops shooting them over drugs. And what's weird is the cities where this kind of crime is highest, gun control is heaviest.
why would you believe anything that Piers says
Reported BBC NEW on may 14 2004
Editor sacked over 'hoax' photos
The Mirror board said Morgan would be stepping down immediately
Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan has been sacked after the newspaper
conceded photos of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi were fake.
In a statement the Mirror said it had fallen victim to a "calculated and
malicious hoax" and that it would be "inappropriate" for Morgan to
The Queen's Lancashire Regiment (QLR) said the Mirror had endangered British troops by running the pictures.
Roger Goodman, of the QLR, said the regiment now felt "vindicated".
Mr Goodman added: "It is just a great pity it has taken so long... and that so much damage has been done in the meantime."
The Daily Mirror... apologises unreservedly for publishing the pictures
and deeply regrets the reputational damage done to the QLR and the Army in
At a news conference in Preston on Friday afternoon, the regiment
demonstrated to reporters aspects of uniform and equipment which it said
proved the photographs were fake.
The regiment's Brigadier Geoff Sheldon said the vehicle featured in the
photographs had been located in a Territorial Army base in Lancashire
and had never been in Iraq.
He said the QLR's reputation had been damaged by the Mirror and asked
the newspaper to apologise because the evidence they were staged was
The Conservatives said they hoped lessons had been learned from the row.
Deputy leader and foreign affairs spokesman, Michael Ancram, said:
"Looking at the facts objectively, this is the right thing for Piers
Morgan to have done.
"The photos that were published in the Daily Mirror have done great
damage to the reputation of our troops, who are serving under some of
the most difficult conditions in Iraq."
I looked at the spreadsheet that you uploaded, but then went to the source that was credited with compiling them. The subset of statistics that were pulled out are not what is reflected in the raw data provided here: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/hosb1011/hosb1011?view=Binary Also, the entire statistic is based on a voluntary survey of 68,000 households, 33 % of which didn't even respond to the survey. The "facts" that Morgan is basing his arguments on are not even supported by the source he claims to be quoting from.
Piers Morgan has NO RIGHT to demean people on the show. He is a a mean spirited person on so many levels. Mr. Morgan can not see the forest through the trees, if he thinks getting into argurements is good TV.
He needs to go away! All my family and friends turn the channel when he is on.
Piers, I love your show and watch it almost every night. But when you have people on like Mr. Pratt, please let them speak their mind. If some one disagrees with you, you get beligerent. I feel you can have a healthy debate without name calling and cutting the other person off in mid-sentence.
Piers stats don't seem to match up to this report.
That's because he only likes spouting how many people were killed with guns. It's silly. I mean if there are no guns, then of course you're going to have less gun crime. He doesn't like acknowledging the fact however that his home country has one of the highest crime rates in the world. Sure, you probably won't be shot, but everything else will happen to you.
I have yet to see an example of a place where less guns equals less crime. Read that sentence again before replying to me.
I believe that anyone that buys a gun legally should have the right to choose what type or how many they would like. Some have collections of guns because that is what they like. People have access to cars too......an average of 93 people are killed a day by cars. We could just stop driving and that would solve a lot....right? (sarcasm in that one)
Certain over the counter drugs used to be available to the masses...now you have to show an id to get a simple decongestant...Why? Because bad people have illegal uses and wanted to be the doctor...didn't want to stick to the dosages provided for the meds in the first place caused the rest of the law abiding crowd to suffer.
It seems to becoming the norm to take away privileges because we cannot be left to our own discretion. Has Society become so empty headed that we have to look to the government to tell us what to do?
I grew up with a loaded gun in my house.... we all knew where it was and we had respect for the power it has. We left it alone. I've taken gun courses and only decided on buying one recently. Why? I live in a rural area....I don't worry so much about the people than the wild life that can pose a danger to my children. Worse case scenario.....to protect my life.
I do not own an assault rifle...nor do I want one.
It is my opinion that there are a few generations that have gotten lost along the way....war like video games are played by young children when the parents should no better than to allow it. No proper training on gun use is also a problem. People that need attention young and old just being ignored....to grow into despondent individuals that feel invisible and want to act out. Maybe its a chance to go out in a blaze of glory not thinking of the people around them. (sick idea....but how many movies and tv shows have put horrible ideas into empty heads anyways...right?)
Who forgot to instill the value of life to our children? We can't depend on the Video game industry or the government....I really don't want the government in my household. I definitely don't want the government to regulate what my kids do at home. I'm a mother I do my very best to teach them everything I know and more.
My gun is in a safe....who knows if I will get to it in time if my home is invaded. I keep it there because that is where it needs to be in this day and age.
Personally I don't know why someone would have an assault rifle....but whatever floats their boat.....this is America. Just like cars.....we have the options to choose what we like....although cars cost more.
It's what is in the head of the person that is at the wheel or handle at the time. There should definitely be more looked into the individual to help spot out others...to get them help.
A gun left alone doesn't hurt anyone...it's the person and the intention. It is a sad situation....I agree with the recent shootings.
What makes it worse in my mind is that is a few sick individuals are going to cause the rest of use to lose another right.
Never would I imagine people using meds to make street drugs or not follow the instructions and become a self professed doctor. I actually talk to someone who thought more would be better....**sigh**
I hope the best answer will come out of this....this issue has gotten out of control.
It is true though...Bad people will get guns by any means. Money will get you anything if you are wanting it badly.
Laws are great, law enforcement is great too....but when you're on the wrong end of the gun.....Honestly ...chances are they aren't going to get to you fast enough....
Chances we all take everyday going about our business.....how often do we not consider where to sit in public because of bad people....look more than twice near a street....not knowing if a reckless driver is going to put our lights out.
You just have to become more aware of your situation and really listen when you hear someone talk.....my opinion again.
Genuine concern for you fellow man is a place to start.
I think people are emotionally reacting to the recent shootings instead of objectively looking at the situation, Piers Morgan especially. If banning guns were effective, cities like Chicago would not have an absurdly high murder rate. A gun ban is not going to solve the problem just like drugs being illegal has not worked in reducing our drug problem in this country. I think more common sense solutions like addressing the mental health issues in this country, requiring increased background checks, requiring gun locks or gun safes and holding gun owners accountable to make sure guns are kept out of the wrong hands. But, that being said, an assault weapons ban will not keep these types of guns out of the hands of criminals, just out of the hands of law abiding citizens.
I can find several articles from British newspapers and government websites supporting Pratt's claims. I'm not sure why CNN can't find them. You'd think a news agency could use google.
Name one that supports his claim that there were 970 gun related homicides in the UK last year. There were 39.
quote MORGAN: 50 murders in 2005. 41 [in] 2009. 39 in 2011. You…
PRATT: No, you had 970. I don’t know what you’re talking about. quote
Piers you cant be equating gun murder with murder interchangeably. You said murder, then reeled off statistics on gun murder.
I understand that in England, Morgan is known as p1ss m0ron.
Machine guns belong in a war zone not on the streets of America.
It doesn`t matter how many people are killed or not killed .It`s
There is no place for these weapons in the hands of civilians.
Where are the responsible parents out there who buy a machine gun for their 8 or 10 year old .shame
As a Canadian I can't stress enough how embarrassing it is to hear all of this. Not all, but many Americans are so brainwashed it's not even funny. Besides being arrogant and rude everytime you come up north.. GUNS KILL PEOPLE. Anybody have any idea how many gun murders Canada had last year? By the way, our country is larger than yours and we have just as many issues with wild animals. Who cares if it was 40 murders in the UK last year or 1000, the point is its nowhere near the 12,000 that the states has. I feel sorry for the intelligent US citizens who are watching the country slowly go down the tubes...
Luckily we know where the gun problem comes from. Crime and murder have been in decline over the past 20 years. In fact crime and murder have fallen over 50% over the past 20 years. Almost all gun crime and murder comes from gangs and drugs in small isolated pockets in metropolitan cities with a population of 240000 or higher. All that crime comes from the drugs and gangs. True. Guns can kill someone if someone pulls the trigger. But hospital accidents kill more. 25 times more. 195000 people killed a year due to accidents that were preventable in the hospital.
According to the FBI there were 12664 homicides in the US in 2011. 8583 were caused by firearms. Of the 8583, 400 were justifiable homicide by police, and 260 were justifiable homicide by a civilian. Which brings the total down to 7923. And we know that almost all of these are committed by career criminals and gangs because of illegal drugs in the small isolated areas in metropolitan cities with a population of 240000 or higher.
Gun problem? Ha.
In case you want to look at the numbers reported by the UK government for the years 2000-2011:
See page 34 for a summary of the data. So, who was lying?
SimonRH – thank you – I just spotted that you already posted this Home Office report for others to read also...
Someone needs to tell Piers that the reason why the U.S. general public has access to firearms in the first place, is because of Britain. If King George would have been a wee bit nicer, there's a good chance we wouldn't be having these dum bass gun debates!
And if Piers Morgan were an American Indian, would the gun lobbyists still use statistics from Britain?? This whole discussion has gotten out of hand. Morgan is holding a mirror, the face we see is ours, not his. Had Morgan not addressed the issue, would America NOT have a problem with guns?
A reasonably competent person, with a bolt action hunting rifle or a pump shotgun could have fired the same number of shots in a period of time that lasted less than a minute longer than the time-frame of the actual crime. If you think the type of weapon used would have drastically altered the outcome of events on that sad day, you are misleading yourself. If you think that the poor parents would have suffered any less because of the type of weapon used or the time it took to fire off 27 or 30 shots, you are demented. Because of this reality, if you think the gun-control fanatics will stop at simply banning so-called "assault-rifles", you have already drank the Kool-Aid. The next step will be banning pistols, because of how fast they can fire. That will be followed by restrictions on hunting rifles because "No individual needs to have 5 rounds of High-Power ammunition that can be fired in as many seconds, for hunting purposes" Merely look at England and Australia if you doubt my comments.
If you really think the founding fathers put the 2nd amendment in the bill of rights because they valued deer-hunting as much as they valued their freedom of speech, you are living in a fantasy land.
I would like to state that I do not watch Piers Morgan as a rule I think he is rediculously biased on the gun issue. I did love it when Alex Jones set him straight the other night and then Larry Pratt put him in his place also. He just has no come back for the facts and of course , the far left does not really want to hear the truth anyway. I suggest CNN send Piers Morgan back across the lake to the Redcoat headquarters...the American people will never give their guns up...can you hear me now?
Piers you need to target the ammo! Take away the bullets, they are not protected by the second ammendment.
After all that is what killed!
This weeks gun debates have been great fodder for many of us around the coffee pot @ work, however after watching the Larry Pratt and Ben Shapiro interviews tonight, I have to admit they have won me over as an independant. I believe Piers has sensed this (IMHO progressively losing the argument to pro gun advocates) as was evidenced in his personal insults / attacks against Larry Pratt. I also found Piers unwillingness to answer Mr. Shapiro directly on why he he would not take action against handguns because he respected the 2nd ammendment VERY TELLING. Piers/CNN are attacking a particular firearm which is used in only a fraction of national gun crimes relative to a 80-90% usage of handguns. To me, this is illogical and doesn't make sense unless there is a different agenda in play here. As a result, I have to admit I am know strongly considering purchasing a firearm for the first time.
Mr Morgan – in the interest of full disclosure, I must point out that in the past I haven't been your biggest fan. However, after watching your surreal interview with Alex Jones I must admit that I've been having a change of heart. Not only did I think it was remarkably courageous of you to invite him to be a guest on your show, but in addition I was incredibly impressed at how you were able to keep your head while he was quite obviously losing his. Congratulations Mr Morgan, you've earned my respect.
"The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people
forget that certain other sets of people are human."
- Aldous Huxley
morgan is a liberal JERK == SEND HIM BACK TO ENGLAND ;;;;;;;
Piers Morgan is a freakin' lunatic. Just Google "Telegraph 927 murders" and the Telegraph article comes up that Pratt was referencing. His only mistake was misspeaking and saying it was 970 instead of 927. Either way that 927 number is a far, far cry from the ridiculous 30-50 number that Morgan made up in his glitter rainbow, marshmallow cloud and unicorn filled fantasy world the he calls a brain. There is absolutely NO credibility to Morgan's fake number. None.
For goodness sake did you even read your link?
In 2007 there were 927 murders in the UK. That is 5 years ago. MORGAN CLEARLY SAID THAT LAST YEAR THERE WERE 39 GUN MURDERS.
Did you make a mistake or were you deliberately lieing like Pratt?
For comparison there were around 15000 murders in the US, of which over 8000 involved firearms.
For the record: 39 is the total figure for gun murder victims in England and Wales for 2008/2009 and in 2009/2010.
Good question. it seems to point back to interpretation. Mr Morgan said that that there were 39 murders in England and Wales vs some 11,000+ in the US. Both are accurate statistics, but as I said, the issue is how the statistics are being used. According to section D19 of the annual trends and demographic tables, which Mr Morgan used, there were 39 fatalities in 2011/2012. However, this only included the Fatalities and the severe, slight, threats, and none injuries. These were not omitted from the statistics used for the US rate. The actual gun murder rate in England and Wales with equal reporting actually sits a tad higher at 5,911, as shown in section D19 of the annual trends and demographics report from the Home Office. I hope this clarifies things a little bit.
Why don't the commenters read for themselves. Here is a report from the corrupt UK constabulary (according to Larry the Liar) that shows every detail required to make up your own mind on who is telling the truth.
Page 57 – wow that looks like a decline to me...
Page 71 – black and white – 58 deaths from guns in England and Wales in 2010/2011
For those that need any geography details (and the article writer above is one of them – "Britain and Wales" is like saying USA and California) – this report ONLY covers England and Wales. So for full transparency – this leaves Scotland and Northern Ireland statistics OUT of these numbers.
Morgans statistics do not add up
I dont know why Mr Pratt doesnt bring up the fact that we have 300 million people in the United States and theres only 62 million in Great Britain. Of course there's going to be more shootings. Which country is safer to be in is the question. Who cares if some thug shoot or stabs you to death your still dead but it you had a concealed gun to pull out and defend yourself you have a chance at least.
More guns means more chance of being shot. It has little to do with the population or which country has more people. Eventhough the US has more individuals than Britain, the US has more guns available and that is what makes the formula a dangerous one. If the US had no weapons, it would not matter how many people lived here. They would not be able to shoot anyone because they do not have any guns to do so with. That is the issue.
Do the research, it's called normalization. Use a table that shows the gun murders per 100,000 population. How about use this one:
USA = 10.2
United Kindom (England, Scotland, Wales and Northen Ireland) = 0.25
Or is Wikipedia not to be trusted either...
Check out violent crime rates or your chances to be a victim of violent crime. You would expect lower gun murder where there are no guns, but do you really think that fewer guns make fewer bad people?
Here are some resource links and studies actually performed on UK crime reporting:
US has the highest gun ownership in the world, but is #29th in terms of violent crime. UK has higher violent crime rates that South Africa, and that's with the reporting methodologies that under-report violent crimes. Kind of scary, and it's a total sham for the British people who want to keep themselves and their families safe :(
The actual violent crime increases are horrific, and the method of reporting murders (US reports initial incidents, whereas a triple homicide that doesn't make it through trial because of bad evidence or any other reason gets wiped from the stats).
About what the real crime rates are and how they're reported. By the way, why do they always forget to mention that crime is going down in America (and has been for decades) and going up in England?
MUST READ ARTICLE...
Larry Pratt: British Gun Crime Stats are a “Sham”
Piers Morgan calls the GOA Executive Director’s claim an “absolute lie.” Is it?
"As it turns out, what Pratt said does not appear to have been a “lie” at all, let alone an “absolute, absolute LIE!” Quite the opposite."
what you don't realize piers is that you're arguing with yourself and despite what media keeps saying the wild majority of Americans, gun owners or not, want to keep their guns... quit already, you've lost.
Every soldier that ever died defending America's freedom, are freedoms that belong exclusively to Americans. Those men did not give their lives for other nations freedoms! Their supreme sacrifice is their act of a sovereign countries citizen. People like Pier's have absolutely No right to infringe on these freedoms in any way, and cheapin or usurp the supreme sacrifice's made by Americans for Americans. Piers, you are not welcome here in America because you have abused you priveledges and disrespected our citizens as a visitor in America. Go home now.
Exactly man. At this point he's wrong, even if he's right. You don't go into someone else house and urinate on the rug. I can't imagine going to the UK, witnessing the 4x greater violent crime there, hearing what the people there say about not wanting firearms, and then beating them to death with my views on how people cant sleep at night, are afraid to walk the streets etc. etc. and insist everyone get guns. He's wrong on a deep level and has pushed way beyond the bounds of the argument itself.
What they both say is irrelevant to what's actually going to happen for present gun owners today. All gun owners, get ready for a big change to come regarding gun ownership. We don't live in the same world as we did when the 2nd amendment was created therefore, we can not really expect to live by the same amendment today. There needs to be a big change and a big change will come. The average gun owner has become a nut and parents of today don't teach and discipline their children as they did like those of yesterday. People are just naturally violent in 2013 and when when faced with trouble, most are apt to run like a scared chicken to stand behind their gun rather that hold their ground and stand behind their fist. A change will come so just be ready.
a change might come but to say it's because gun owners are nuts means to say so in the face of 100,000,000 gun owners who never harm anyone. i really will never understand how gun owners at large can be considered nuts. also, the fist thing? you want your grandmother going pugilistic with a home invader? or your wife? or one man against 8? change may come, but not because of the flawed things you're saying.
Piers was very unprofessional and definately not journalistic in his approach. Attempting to shame a belittle the guest was classless. Piers should learn a thing or 2 from how Larry King use to interact with guests. Doesn't matter who was right about the statistics, what matters is Pier's infra dig conduct.
only the millitary must have fire arms, the second amendent is out of touch of the changing modern world, America has Dromes, Stelf Bombers and Sefviice to Air Missiles, Tanks, Aircraft Carriers..... We all know what happened with cowboys and Indians, that was genocide? the cowboys murdered the indians and stole their land? (remember) guns the wild west, when guns are banned then the death penilty will also be banned?
Wow, How old are you? I thought you had to be over 16 years Old to sign up and comment here? Another Sheepeople.
The debates with Piers Morgan is a joke. Instead of interviewing, he use the show as a platform for his own views. He is rude, constantly interrupting his guests. What is the point of having guests?
This is why I do not watch this guy, when you have to insult, it is not a debate anymore. What a child.
Looks like Larry Pratt wasn't lying about the figures he used on Morgan's. Morgan accused Pratt of lying, inflating the figures and scaremongering!
From Britain's Daily Telegraph:
The total number of violent offences recorded compared to population is higher than any other country in Europe, as well as America, Canada, Australia and South Africa.
The UK had a greater number of murders in 2007 than any other EU country – 927 – and at a relative rate higher than most western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
Number of Murders, United States, 2009: 15,241
Number of Murders by Firearms, US, 2009: 9,146
Number of Murders, Britain, 2008: 648
(since Britain’s population is 1/5 that of US, this is equivalent to 3,240 US murders)
Number of Murders by firearms, Britain, 2008: 39
(equivalent to 195 US murders)
CR, How do you explain the difference in these total murder stats being reported about Britain?
Here is an interesting fact. I got to thinking about what ammunition would be more available if the world really did fall apart or the government went tyrannical. Guess what I found? The 9mm and the 223 NATO would be most common. No weapon is any good without ammo. Another interesting fact is that not all ar-15’s are created equal. An ar-15 that only shoots the Remington .223 will not shoot the 223 nato round. The issue here is that if the government is after you and all the ammo is 223 nato, the ammunition you capture will do you very little good. Just a side note on the whole government is out to get you idea.
THERE IS MORE VIOLENT CRIME PER 100,000 PEOPLE IN ENGLAND THAN IN THE UNITED STATES PER THEIR STATISTICS
The violent crime rate (crime / 100k people) in the UK is the highest in the civilized world and one of the highest in the uncivilized world as well, even higher than S. Africa!
LOL! Where is Poirot when you need him? I lived in London's east end for 4 years in the 1990s and I felt a lot safer than I ever did in New York City, Los Angeles or San Francisco. There must be something screwy with the statistics. Knowing the Brits, they'd count cursing in a pub as a violent crime.
In any case, here what the United Nations reports: http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-highest-reported-crime-rates.html
Again, I suspect that crime reporting is very honest in the U.K. while not so honest elsewhere, including here in the U.S. where only 4 types of crimes are considered "violent". Note too, that over 50% of violent crimes in the U.K. do not result in physical harm to any human, while only 4% of the violent crimes reported in the U.S. leave everyone unharmed physically. LOL, these statistics are messed up because the baselines are all over the place. India is the safest place in the world? I've been to India; I don't think so!
The guy is right. About 12 people murdered? Oh yes they were from Eastern Europe. Shame on them. But yes I am from the same place, and the statistics he says is total BS. Actually with 3 million people in my country and 200K working and living in UK, predominantly in London, there are at least 10-20 homicide murders every year only that involves our country's nationals. I know other countrie's gangs has even much much worse statistics. So I am sure 90 percent of murders is not involved in official statistics, because as from my own experience, English people considered themselves aristocracy of the world, and so I am sure they just involve the people who belongs to a certain class in that country.
I think this whole argument would be more accurate if the numbers were broken down into both non gang related gun deaths and gang related gun deaths. The average number per US city, of those with criminal records and or gang association is 80%. So simply, it’s not the guns, it’s the gangs. In my opinion if the Home Office stats were actually correct and the US stats were compared to them WITHOUT the gang related homicide, you would see a much much less contrasting set of numbers. Sadly Piers wouldn’t have the IQ so do a simple breakdown like that. Perhaps also someone could give him a lecture about accepting that sometimes he’s wrong and that listening to the alternative position is not just a catalyst to rant and rave about how stupid that opinion is. It’s the pathetic behaviour of a child and destroys this shows credibility. Never mind that generally people prefer reporting that is understandable not just people speaking over each other and wasting air time.
PM is a total reject to the American way of life. He only wants to hear himself talk, not allowing the opposition to counter his dumb allegations. If only PM could take the point of view from a criminal's mindset: would you rather steal or commit any other crime if the individual was armed or not armed? Easy question when you ask a criminal, NOT ARMED! Why create more sheep when we live in a world of WOLVES! PM go back to your gun free country that experiences more violent crimes because of the defenseless society you all wanted. The UK is a joke, everyone is defenseless, everyone is a sheep waiting for the Shepard to come save the day. Grow a pair and realize "you" may one day have to protect yourself or your family, and you sure as s#$% are not going to do it with a pot and pan.
If you are so proud of your country PM, go back and do something about your violent crime rate. When you figure out that objects are not the reason for crime and that it is the individual who commits the crime, come back and we'll talk. Until then, stop recording your annoying rants about firearms because your knowledge on the subject is slim to none.
Helpful info. Lucky me I discovered your site by accident, and I'm shocked why this coincidence didn't happened earlier! I bookmarked it.
Hi there, simply become aware of your blog through Google, and located that it's really informative. I am gonna be careful for brussels. I'll be grateful should you continue this in future. Numerous other people will probably be benefited out of your writing. Cheers!
I do believe all the concepts you've introduced in your post. They are really convincing and will certainly work. Nonetheless, the posts are very brief for novices. Could you please prolong them a bit from subsequent time? Thanks for the post.
are yeast infections http://my.telegraph.co.uk/areyeastinfectionscontagious/
Notify me of new comments via email.