READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
As the "Guns in America" debate continues to polarize the nation, this evening "Piers Morgan Tonight" welcomes another series of compelling voices to share their insights and perspectives on the country's most hot-button issue.
Returning to the CNN airwaves, Dana Loesch will join host Piers Morgan to present her arguments against a potential firearm ban.
Well-known for her right-wing views, Loesch has used previous appearances to critique Mitt Romney during his run for the Republican presidential nomination, and also provide her opinion as to the relevance of an unearthed Barack Obama video from his days at Harvard.
Despite often sharing different opinions than those of Morgan, this week Loesch took to the social media micro-blogging service Twitter to confirm their civil coexistence:
For the record, @piersmorgan and I have always been friendly, even though I think he's so wrong on this issue and we argue on Twitter.
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) January 16, 2013
For the record, @piersmorgan and I have always been friendly, even though I think he's so wrong on this issue and we argue on Twitter.
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) January 16, 2013
On a day which has seen the president sign off on more than 20 executive actions on gun control, the host will use his evening program to welcome back a woman who likened such initiatives to that of a tyrant, insisting that such notions are precisely why Americans should be allowed to own assault weapons.
As part of Tuesday's live audience, town-hall style show, Scottie Hughes insisted that she has "the right to be able to own a gun just in case."
In adding "today, we might have a bright, sunny America. But who's to say what's going to happen," the "Tea Party News Network" News Director was persuasive enough to earn herself another place on the show, as she'll join Loesch live, in studio, for a primetime interview.
Tune in this evening at 9, as Loesch, Hughes, and a series of additional guests do their part to keep guns, and firearm legislation, in the national conversation.
» Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Twitter
> Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
I'll be watching Full Throttle Saloon and loading the 25 round mag on my new S&W M&P 15/22 "assault rifle."
The two top arguement for lack of gun control laws is;
1. If the bad guys have guns the good guys should have them as well
2. If people really want to harm someone they will find a way to do it.
By that token of reasoning- these people support a Nuclear armed Iran.
Becasue, if Iran had a a nuclear weapon the United States and Israel (good guys) could defend themselves
and if Iran truly wanted a nuclear weapon they could get one. The logic is unsupported when applying it to a practical situation.
How is it that I need a license to do everything from purchasing freon, driving a truck, building a deck or operating a business and yet the same effort in establishing competence is not applied when I want to purchase a tool originally and specifically desined for killing massive amounts of people in a short period of time.
A significant part of the discussion to date has to do with having a proper system of background checks in place before the purchase of any weapon. This afternoon the president of the nra stated that there is such a system in place and that 90% of gun owners have had checks.
Simple math – 300 million weapons in the U.S. where 10% of the sales do not have checks means that 30 million weapons are currently in the U.S. that could be in the hands of some lunatic.
What part of that makes sense to you?
Watching Piers tonight tells me that he is as clueless as the bureaucrats who have a perverted opinion of what an assault weapon looks like. He also lied when he said that the weapon used in the theatre massacre was capable of 90 rounds in less than 90 seconds. An AR15 is not a fully automatic weapon, which he inferred was a fully automatic weapon. He is ignorant and stupid.
I am so sick and tired of Piers's agenda to ban guns in America (also disappointed that CNN gives him an 'open stage' to continue this nonsense). His primary argument is "who NEEDS these types of guns..." Here's an answer:: Hey Piers, take a look around you... you are in America and Americans have a lot of things we don't 'need'.... we have them because WE CAN have them. If you don't like it, then get the heck out of here and go back to the U.K. where you enjoy your high taxes and gun bans!
You're deflecting again. Hot tip to you. . .the chief purpose of the 2nd amendment is the defense of liberty from tyranny (enemies foreign and domestic)
Gun advocates ALWAYS conveniently leave out the 1st line of 2nd Amend. which states: 'A WELL REGULATED MILITIA' . What don't they understand? 2nd Amend.does NOT say NO regulation as they try to imply & want. Where are the limits of the regulation as it specifically states, 'WELL REGULATED' & not a unregulated militia? Rocket launchers are ok to bring down planes too or dirty bombs? Even SCOTUS Justice Scalia says there are probably limits to 2nd & will have to be brought before the SCOTUS in future.
The first line of the 2nd Amendment gives the States the Right to maintain its own militia, hence the National Guard. The second line gives the citizens the right to keep and bear arms. There are 2 separate rights written in one amendment. Just like the 1st amendment has a few rights within 1 amendment.
Gun Adovocates dont raise the first line, because the first line is a state right, not an individual right. James Madison explained this, the Supreme Court upheld the same.
I am having a shed to be built on my land and need a permit from the county. The shed does not kill any one but the homeowners society has to visit my home when we are home to see where the shed will be built. They meet once a month and only then I can file a permit. This whole process will take close to two months. Yet a weapon can by purchased on line and within few days. Something is very sick and very wrong.
bwahahahahahaaha... sorry Rick full auto, semi- auto, burst fire, whatever...the AR 15 was DESIGNED to KILL people in close combat for the US military in 1957.... to fire a high velocity cartridge that would penetrate both sides of a soldiers helmet.
the select fire version of said weapon is the what? the Colt M 16... same weapon...how many rounds can u get off in a minute? does it matter if he misspoke and said automatic and not SEMI automatic? 90+ rounds a minute is enough to kill a room crowded with people.... and these fools talkin about "if I was there," or "if I they only had a gun." really.. anyone think that time on a range equals the ability to fire that weapon in a high stress kill or be killed situation? no way.. Damn we don't need cops, just arm everyone....
What makes a gun an assault rifle? Is it the magazine? is it the cool look of the gun? For that matter what does assault and battery mean? Any object can become a assault weapon. Trying to do something more is commendable but they are going about it all wrong, trampling on the rights of law abiding citizens. The criminals are the targets, their supply line of illegal weapons are the target. Mentally challenged individuals medical records pertaining to mental illness is the target, add this to the background checks, a release of this information from reporting centers..... but in the end... the criminal breaks the law,, he / she does not care about any of these 23 amendments or a gun ban.. Remember it is just a cool looking rifle,,not a assault rifle or it is a hand gun with 10 rounds, 2 guns 20 rounds.. These laws do not work.. Piers believes a reduction in guns will help, I disagree... unless the criminal turns in his /her gun or gets a background check or registers their weapons. Englan has more violent crime per 100K than any other civilized country in the world,, except Austrailia.. You never hear him talk about these numbers.. If the guns were gone,, piers thinks the world would a magical place under the rainbow,, I commend everyone wanting to do something but common sense is needed to make good decisions.. not emotion..
What a Hippocrite The NRA's Wayne Laperier is about his recent statement on gun registration dosent work to curb criminals form having guns. IN A 1994 INTERVIEW BEFORE CONGRESS LAPIERE ( OL PEPE LAPEW ) testified before congress in his own words quote " A NATIONAL GUN BACK GROUNG CHECK HELPS LAW ENFORCEMENT GET GUNS OUT OF CRIMINALS HANDS AND IS A USEFUL TOOL TO DETER GUN VIOLENCE" and that was during hearings in Clintons legislation to BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS. Lapiere said anything he could to try and stop the Ban, and he was unsuccessful. NOW HE THINKS THE AMERICAN PEOPL ARE STUPID AND FORGOT WHAT HE SAID IN 1994. now his stance is WE HAVE ENOUGH LAWS THAT ARENT BEING ENFORCED ( WHICH IS NOT TRUE : Back ground checks stopped 2.5 million people with red flags to deny those peopl a gun) and BACK GROUND CHECKS ARE NOT WARRENTED! Google Wayne Laperier and the 1994 congressional hearings on gun controll and background checks speach. Seen it with my own eyes Laperier you liar!
In the spring of 2010, I was the victim of an armed robbery. I was out visiting relatives at the time, when two young men in black clothes appeared out of the shadows of a house nearby. One of them told me, give me your wallet or your dead. I replied No to the request, and one of them begged to give me to give up my wallet so they wouldn't have to kill me. I gave them my wallet. The whole time this was going on, people were watching me get robbed, from the safety of living room windows, and were too scared to help.
If I had a CCW permit, I would have carried my pistol that night, and I would have shot both of them. They were amateurs and I had 3 opportunities to shoot them, if i had a gun.
While everyone debates gun control in light of the Newton massacre, I would like to say one thing: There are evil people out there. That's the reality of American life. The only way you can ever fight evil, violent people, is by leveling the playing field and being able to dish out violence yourself. Violent criminals don't understand civilized people and you cannot reason with them.
Until you've had something taken from you, for no reason whatsoever, you will never be able to relate to the violation and paranoia that I feel as a result of my experience.
Dont you people get it. Guns are not the real problem. It is your American culture. You constantly want to take up arms to defeat anyone who could possibly infringe upon your rights. But you would allow this carnage go on. The 2nd amendment was not meant for this. Red neck gun owners who think that the US is still the wild west are screwed in the head and the head is the NRA
ur so right rick, i wish the ladies on tonites shoe would of had a video of a semiauto vs military gun, so this guy would understand what he is talkin about
no one is talkin about hand guns... and if that's the case I'm sure u have your concealed weapons permit now right? if you don't then I don' t follow you cuz what r u going to do tomorrow or the next day when some idiot decides to walk into the restaurant, theater, or mall where you happen to be spending time with your loved ones... carrying a handgun or not I don't want the psycho strapped with body armor and and a semiautomatic assult rifle with 30 round magazines and a laser sight to my chest after watching my wife and kids scrambled on the floor....
The irony in all this hype about gun control is that as far as I know, every school zone in the U.S. is a gun and drug free area, but that hasn't stopped anything. Every bit of this is public posturing. We have so many laws now, no one can keep up with them. The laws are only as good as the citizenry, but evil and mental illness is rampant. The gun control laws will NEVER be enacted, because criminals and the mentally disturbed will always find a way to get them and use them. I live in a state where hunting is very popular and almost everyone I know owns a gun. I have never heard of anyone shooting anyone with an assault weapon. If you research where the toughest gun laws are in place, you will find some of the highest murder rates in the country, Washington, DC for example. Newtown is a terrible tragedy and my heart breaks for the entire town, but especially the parents of the slain children and the survivors who will have to live with the memories of this terrible act. If I thought that new gun laws would have prevented that, I would be totally in favor, but it wouldn't, because the laws are already in place. Murder is unlawful, drugs are illegal, DUI is illegal, and the list goes on. While no one has a solution to this problem, addressing the underlying cause for the violence is more important than regulating an inanimate object that never commits a crime without an evil or disturbed person attached to it. This is not a GUN problem, it is a PEOPLE problem.
Additionally, if CNN doesn't remove Piers Morgan, I will boycott watching the network. There has never been a more rude, ill-mannered person anywhere and his agenda is solely for his own self promotion. If he doesn't like the US, he should just go back to his native country .
An armed society is a polite society!
Ben, You're so right ! I was in a situation back in July of 2010 and just happened to leave my gun inside the cab of my truck before going inside a restaurant,,, Came out and was involved in a situation unlike yours. However, I was threaten by two individuals much bigger than me... When one made the remark that they were going to beat me up, I immediatlely replied that they wouldn't even get close enough ! That's when they backed off and my bluff saved me... Not a good situation to be in... Now I make sure I carry as often and watch my surroundings...
Assault weapon or not? Blur the faces of the sandy hook victims and release the photos. That should answer the question of whether or the ar15 is an assault weapon
My son was violently killed by a large van, which took part of his skull off. I think that we should put regulations on vans which kill people. It is no different from the crap that Obama & his myrmidons are trying to foist off on the American people. He said today that ignorance should not be rewarded, but he got re-elected didn't he.
The civilian semi-automatic AR 15 or AK 47 are not "assault rifles" which is not even any sort of official term. They are simply semi-automatic rifles. My .22 is a semi-automatic rifle. My .22 rifle would have been capable of doing the same damage the weapon or weapons Lanza used at Sandy Hook. A shot gun with 00 buck shot would have been as lethal also. The M16 select fire and the M4 carbine are military, full auto/semi auto or burst fire weapons. These weapons are capable of having grenade launchers attached. The civilian guns are not. Those are battle field rifles. None of our military would be crazy enough to go onto a battle field with a ciilian AR 15 or AK 47 and go up against an enemy with fully automatic weapons. Just for argument sake, suppose we ban larger than 10 round capacity mags. With very little practice a shooter can drop an empty 10 round and load a fresh 10 round mag in .7 seconds or less. Since virtually all these mass shootings are in gun free zones where the shooter is not challenged there is plenty of time to swap out a mag. The issue has nothing whatsoever to do with magazine capacity because it is a non-issue. It has nothing to do with the evil black rifle either. My .22 or a 12 gauge shot gun would have been just as lethal if somebody used it that knew how and what loads to fire. None of this is about the tools of the crazed gun man. It IS however about the fact that there is no resistance in a gun free zone. It is also about the fact these people were all taking psychiatric medications which are known to cause suicidal and homicidal urges. Everybody is totally focused on totally the wrong thing. The gun is simply a tool. In t he hands of a good person it is a tool for the defense of self and others. In the hands of an evil person it is a tool for destruction. Why are we not addressing the issues and causes of the evil person?
Piers unfortunately ran this interview like Jerry Springer show, no self control at all. I am completely for gun control but he is like a 5 year old child shouting "I want everything my way or I'm gonna have a hissy fit".
Dana Loesch and Scottie Hughes are trolls. They are not serious and should not be fed.
call them what u want ,but he wouldnt let them talk because they had an answer for everything and he didnt like it
Trolls for sure! Like school girls disrespecting families who lost loved one and giggling like bullies and acting like bullies.
I agree with Piers on this issue but he does not allow for discussion of the issue like CNN advertises. The second his guest(s) disagree or express an opposing point of view, he just shouts over what they are saying. I can't watch it anyymore.
If Americans want to get Piers Morgan out of America, boycott CNN. It's time we force CNN to return to reporting news and stop trying to control public opinion!
United States is no longer the Wild West tobacco shewing, bootlegging rebels. Red Necks days are over. We the people have no voice, it the Corporations and lobbiest who run United States. Our media has not been free. How long will the American people stay in in there self imposed coma? Wake up Americans your country needs you.
Morgan is always screaming about englands low gun violence. the numbers he uses for america are skewed, there is 3k suicide in that 10300 per year, as well as police shootings, law abiding citizens protecting themselves and so forth. What he never allows to be mentioned, as well as saying that it is not a relevant argument is the violent crime in england. England has more violent crime than all of europe only australia has a higher crime rate (both of these countries have very tough gun control, doesnt seem to work). Look up "violent crime worse in Britain than U.S" It is the person not the gun.....england is not as safe as he likes to point out. People will always find a way to do harm. I would rather be armed. The families of the victims should be outraged that mentally deranged people need to be mainstreamed, that is what is PC these days. They want these people out in society that is the problem.
Hi Damien, I'm Australian and I have never heard before that Australia has the highest crime rate in the world. I think that is a lie. Could you please provide your sources? Perhaps you could read the article in the New York Times yesterday written by ex Australian prime minister John Howard regarding gun control in Australia. It has some relevant and interesting FACTS. Gun control laws were tightened in Australia in 1996 after Martin Bryant went on a shooting spree killing 35 tourists with semiautomatic armalite and SKS. In the record of police interview when Martin was asked why he bought guns the reason he gave was because He had the money and they were easy to get. I hope President Obama can maintain his leadership on this issue and the rational people of America support him. Maybe in 20 years time Americans will look back and see what a great thing he has done for America, the way Australians can look back now on the work done by John Howard and thank him for our relative security.
When someone asks why you need a weapon like an AR15 with more than 10 rounds there is ONLY 1 ANSWER TO THAT: The PEOPLE need these weapons in order to prevent the government from becoming a tyrannical and oppressive state PERIOD!
And you can provide real world examples that are happening AT THIS VERY MOMENT to support that statement. For example: President Obama is currently providing support & arms to revolutionaries in Syria & other Middle Eastern countries in order for them to overthrow their leaders. Point out the hypocrisy!
I watched Piers’ Show with Dana Loesch and his repeated question »Do you think you have the right to own a tank?« Let aside Piers’ very unpolite behaviour by always interrupting Dana (as he interrupts other guests whose opinion he doesn’t like) his question was outrageously stupid. The Second Amendment gives the American people the right to bear arms. Does he really think Dana (ore someone else) could BEAR a tank??!
One has to wonder why, if 58% of the population supports banning assault rifles, the measure to ban them is unlikely to even get to a vote in the House.
A brilliant tidbit from Jim Gerlach (R) PA, “Because most people recognize that responsible gun owners, regardless of what kind of gun they have or the magazine they’re using, use them responsibly. Gerlach said he was open to tightening background checks, but not gun restrictions. “I’d be willing to look at [background checks] but actual bans of certain firearms just doesn’t seem to be the area we need to be looking at.”
Just how do you use an assault rifle responsibly? Do they come with instructions? Or do the crack employees at Walmart explain that when you buy it there? And if you need to fire off assault rifles to prove your manhood, you might want to try another approach.
The next obvious question is, Why not make rocket launchers, Sidewinder missiles and helicopter gunships available? These same responsible individuals will make sure they use them responsibly. Unfortunately what Gerlach seems to miss is that it's not necessary that most helicopter gunship owners act responsibly. All helicopter gunship owners must act responsibly or the consequences are catastrophic.
The answer to the first question posed seems equally obvious. Because voters do not control Congress, money does. No one, repeat no one, whether it be Super PACs, the NRA or any other lobby, gives money to politicians without expecting, and getting, something in return.
Love your comment about " Or do the crack employees at Walmart explain that when you buy it there?" I am certain the retired State police Sargent who sold me my ar15 would have preferred to be the Neurosurgeon you are, but someone needed to keep you safe so you could someday (when you grew up perhaps) insult them.
The answer is because the polling source you are looking at is wrong. The majority of Americans oppose another assault weapons ban today just like they did after Clinton implemented the first one. The next election proved it.
Piers can we ask you not to talk over your guests on tonight's show, especially those you don't agree with. Please let them finish so we can hear the points they are trying to making. Last night you continually interrupted the gentleman on the far right of your panel and most of what he was saying we didn't get to hear.
I agree with Piers all the way but that guy on the right was the only pro gun guest that had anything reasonable to say. I agree that he wasn't allowed to make his point.
he wont let them speak because they can show him up, he does'nt understand
Don't all liberals try to talk louder than a conservetive making a reasonable point. I believe that method is in Alinsky's book.
stand strong my brothers and sisters in arms, as one of our great pres. said speak softly and carry a big stick,this is what this country was found on, but they want to take our very soul away
I would ask Piers to please ask the NRA/pro gun community, if 2nd amendment is their primary argument, are they in support as a right to bear arms, civilians to have automatic weapons. It would be a person's right wouldn't it ? To push further, grenades and launchers. Where does it stop ? Couldn't the 2nd ammendment be interpreted to give right to those weapons also ?
You are correct, IF and that's a BIG IF, you use the NRA's 1791 interpretation, you could own a Cruise Missile; M-1 Abram and if you could afford one, try a Trident Sub. The second amendment, as ratified on the 15th of December 1791 only had muskets to deal with. I believe that IF they knew we would go from 1 round a minute to 30 a second, the amendment may have been written differently.
Thanks for your reply Tony. From my observation NRA/Gun Lobbyists are some of the most skilled people at not answering direct questions. 2nd amendment is now the defence backed up by mental health (which I'm guessing they wouldn't want to pay towards) and media exposure (games/movies). I wonder how game enthusiasts would feel having their right to play games taken away or people to see the type of movie they want.. How about the privacy of someone seeking mental health help and dumping it into a database. What makes pro-gun rights so much more important than everyone else's ?
When the 2nd Amendment was written the firearms they were referring to was black powder weapons. Do you really think when the amenment was written it was to include weapons of mass destruction?? have in their wildness imagination could foresee the tyo
No, the second Amendment was for the citizens to protect them selves from anything to criminals and or government and by the way the militias no regular army were better equiped in terms of fire arms. Militia(Citizens not army or National guard) had rifled muskets not smooth bore muskets like the army had. the American Citizen should at least be armed with semi-auto "rifles" so we can stand a chance against a bad Government and or criminals.
back then that was a weapon of mass destruction
As usual, Piers will ask questions but then won't let his guests respond because they have different views than him and he won't want to hear what they have to say. Why interview people if you are just going to talk over them and cut them off constantly? It's rude!
It's not rude of Piers...especially as he gets stupid answers from them rolling off their tongues like venom. Down with "Guns"!
PS. Well done, Mr President!
THANKS MR MORGAN, FOR STANDING UP FOR LIFE, HOWEVER PLOEASE PUSH HARDER, THE AR15 DEFINITION IS " AN ASSUALT STYLED FIREARM MODELED AFTER THE MILITARY M16. ASK YOUR GUEST
IF THEY KNOW EFFECTIVE RANGE OF THE AR15, WHY WOULD ANY CITIZEN NEED A FIREARM THAT CAN KILL ANYTHING FROM OVER 1/2 MILE AWAY. THE HITS YOU MISS WILL TRAVEL OVER A MILE ONLESS IT HITS SOMETHING WHY???
Your absolutley right, Tom! Completely rude of Piers! Completely pointless discussion if you aren't going to listen to both views on this topic!
Maybe Piers Morgan wants to restrict our 1st amendment rights too.
it would be interesting to know why citizens in almost all other countries, including Canada, do not feel they need the "right to bear arms" while U.S. citizens do. Would appreciate your views in response to this.
Maybe Canada does not have a Bill of Rights for their citizens that gives them the right to bear arms.
We have a Charter of Rights and we were recently selected as the number one place in the world for most human rights and freedoms. Get rid of your damn guns.
Piers, initially I enjoyed your show, but more and more you appear to be swaying away from interviewing to using the show as a platform for you own personal views that sometime conflict with people nice enough to be on your show. You're a bright guy, but I would find your show of much greater value to viewers if you would use your intellect to truly interview these interesting people permitting us to learn more about them and their views. Challenging their views is fine, but I believe your have swayed toward debating them. I hope you give this some consideration. Thank you.
I hate when people say about anyone hosting TV chat shows...So & so, I love/like your show...but?
People who say that...mean that they hate the show...because they're not hearing what "They" want to hear. Well..."Tough"!
The show seems to have turned more into a Jerry Springer show, constant battle and everyone trying to get louder than the other.
Bandaids don't work. Lincoln's greatest legacy was the 13th amendment. Obama has the similar leadership elements to "repeal" the 2nd amendment. Why not eliminate the 300 million plus guns in the U.S. and then start again. Why not take away everyone's guns, and then only start to re-introduce "guns" to responsible gun-owners? I have yet to meet a gun owner who enjoys killing squirrels, groundhogs and Bambi, who would not surrender that right, to preserve the precisous lives slaughtered in Newtown.
We often hear the comment that the only answer to a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. I don't think that there is such a thing as a good guy with a gun. I remember many years ago, that I retunred to my car to find that it had been broken into. In my rage at the time I wanted to do harm to the person that had stolen stuff from my car. I envisaged how I would punch them and slam the car door against them if I had caught them. What if I'd had a gun ? Nobody is safe with a gun at that moment of madeness. I wouldn't trust myself with a gun and I certainly don't trust anyone else.
You are exactly the type of personality that does not ever be able to have a gun, knife, baseball bat, rock or any other type of assault weapon. Your name should be at the top of the turndown list.
If guns are outlawed, OUTLAWS will BUILD GUNS.
New York State passed gun legislation last night that's only intent was to target law abiding citizens, and not criminals. The bill which was drafted behind closed doors and shown to the rest of the senate members 20 minutes before the vote is an example of the worst kind of legislation driven by political ambition and greed. The legislation as it stands is so badly written and so full of holes, it is akin to something that we would expect to come from a third world tyranny. New York's bill which is now law went beyond banning AR15s and affects virtually every single firearm that is currently owned by licensed gun owners in that state. Senator Greg summed up the bill in these words, "we haven't saved any lives tonight, except one, the political life of a governor who wants to be president".
I understand Piers Morgan's frustration with assault weapons; they should not be in the hands of the public, because there is no way to test people for Mental illness that is reliable. Now, I have one question. If this mass shooting had been on a schoolbus, will we then have to hire 440K new police officers, or arm 440K schoolbus drivers with assault weapons?
Is the NRA suggesting every person be tested for mental illness? Likely not but otherwise how do you know if a gun buyer is a risk if they've had no previous treatment. Hmmmm. Maybe the NRA is on to something...mandatory mental screening for all gun buyers. I would support that.
All they have to do is throw a homemade pipe bomb at the bus or through the bus window or even throw it inside the bus door when they open the door for the kids to get on or off. The killer could stalk the surrounding neighborhoods around the school and wait to throw the bomb or throw it into the bus during the loading or unloading students at the beginning or ending of the school day. There is no way even with arm guard at a school to stop a killer from killing.
I think it's great that the Tea Party finally has a transgendered leader, Scottie Hughes. I don't believe in any of his/her views but good to see the Tea Party accepting others.
What really gets me is the last two surveys I was asked to take. I got one from the Gifford’s that was very well thought out and asked all the questions. I got one from the NRA and it deliberately avoided specific questions. It asked if I felt there should be a ban on specific weapons, but avoided the high capacity magazine question as a separate issue. The survey was bias.
They can ban and make laws for gun control all they want and will solve nothing, are they that stupid?!???? If they are so concerned and worried about the school shootings then they should start a mandatory reality check in schools (starting at first grade) and show them videos of real school shooting archives and force every single kid to watch it no matter have awful and violent and scary it could be, which is basically no different than the average movie or video game that some of the first graders on up play and they should keep making the students watch these school shooting videos until they complete high school and that should teach them what bully could do at their own school. I know because of my own high school I went to. The killing takes place at school because of bullies, which start out with the first day of school and gradually get worse until BAM!!!!, the "real victim" who was mentally and emotionally abused snaps and seeks revenge. The kids do not know where the bully lives or they would kill them at their house, so where is the best place to find the school bully, AT SCHOOL!
No worries. This is all political feel good crap. It will never get through the Senate, which is under democratic control let alone the House. The Senate is between a rock and a hard place because this could cost them the Senate and they know it. It doesn’t matter if you are pro-gun control or just pro-gun. The facts are that they know this doesn’t solve the problem; it is just all for show.
Would a homemade pipe bomb be considered a military-style assault weapon and be on the ban list? A mental person seeking to kill will use anything they want, whether they buy it off the street, "find it", steal it, or just make a weapon. Duhhh!
I bet this new ban/law gets obeyed and enforced about like speeding. How many go over the speed limit when driving? Too many people out there to monitor and make sure everyone is following the new law, especially with all of the unregistered guns out there that will probably never get registered and get sold on the street.
What ban? Never going to pass. Just for show.
Anyone who can't give up their assault rifles; should be conscripted to the army. Pronto!
I'm sure a threat of a trip to Syria or Iran in the future, will pay big dividends!
That is just it. Obama isn't asking anyone to give up what they currently have.
At least he's doing something...most other Presidents were afraid to do anything to hurt NRA pockets...Congress have to stand up to the plate on this & support his main pointers. Those victims of all mass shootings (especially children) couldn't/shouldn't have died in vain.
PS. The NRA should be disgusted re; their new ad because "Thicko" in content.
No, Obama doesn't plan on the Senate or House doing anything. It they did, it would mobilize the gun rights voting block and cost them Democratic control. If it fails, he can use public opinion and cost the Republicans the control of both houses. You see, failure on the short run gives control of both houses in the long run. Well, two years that is. This is politics and about getting other stuff done.
Your idea makes as much sense as passing a law to make all doctors perform abortions with a gun.
I really wish that if You, Mr.Morgan say that you are going to listen to both sides when your panel is debating gun control that you would actually do just that!!! Cutting off someone when it's something you don't want to hear isn't fair nor are you giving both sides a fair chance to argue their point. Why have two sides on your panel at all??? Go back and watch last nights show!! REDICULOUS!!! You need to do a better job and be a better journalist.
I know right haha that gets on my nerves so bad, I mean every Debate this guy had with some one he cuts them off and never lets them finish their sentence.
I would like to know Pier's interpretation of this qoute from our first President....
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined,
but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition
to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them,
which would include their own government.
They should put the question "Should guns be banned"? to the children of US in a referendum...because at this moment in time...children in the US have far more intelligence & reasoning than adults do, regarding this subject
They should just BAN KILLING instead of banning weapons. Whether you use your hands, gun, pipe bomb, homemade device, they will never with no matter what they ban ever stop a killer, been going on since Cain and Abel.
...Guns kill. Mace, Tasers and Pepper Spray defend. Has anyone checked out how powerful these items are lately? You can defend your home with a powerful "fire extinguisher" like pepper spray that shoots a cone of debilitating pepper spray thirty feet. Your chances of hitting your target are as good as an assault weapon. Unless what you want is to kill someone, this is a BETTER option. THere is too much talk about mental illness. People kill spouses everyday in family arguments because a gun is in the house. If you catch your spouse in bed with another man, anyone could lose it. NOT having a gun prevents everyday tragedies. If we are really talking about self defense, there are better options!
Ummmm, yea if i caught my wife in bed with another person i would shot that SOB in the head, oh yea i would like to see you use pepper spray against some one that has a gun invading your house haha. Grow up. By the way you are typing im quessing your from up north and you have no religion and that you rely on Government for help and defense. Correct me if im wrong.
Not spending another second listening to this Joker call Dier Porgan, sorry Pier Morgan my bad.
I guess now that all is over he will have nothing to talk about again, his show will go back to fewer viewers with no rating. Agh , will be glad if CNN cut this joker off
Oh no, Peirs has lots to talk about. He will start talking about how it isn't enough. He wants all the guns taken. He wants a house to house.
You're absolutely right. All the gun control activists can now move to the Empire State. As of last night it became the biggest gun free zone in the nation!
All of this is based on stopping a Newtown. Well, the only possible thing might have been the mental health issue, but as I understand it, is mother got 10k a month in support. Why would she need the government to help her take care of her kid? If she thought the kid had major mental issues, why did he have access to her weapons? As I understand it she was a doomsday prepper and thought Dec. 21 might be the day. She was just as big a nut as her kid. There is much more to this specific story and it has nothing to do with AR-15’s.
You are an idiot.
You think? Just keep watching. Peirs already said we should ban all pistols.
10 USC Sec. 311 01/03/2012 (112-90) The classes of the militia are –
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the
The second Amendment is not our hunting right its our right to keep and bare arms, how can we keep our government in check with a single shot rifle? we should be armed at-least with the same rifles.
You are the reason why your country is going down the hole. Your culture of guns guns guns, is why your social frabric is dying. Take up arms, barracade the door, the feds are coming. The north against the south all over. Dont you realize how the world views Americans? Your disfunctional congress, your out of control debt, your fingers in every part of the world. HMMMMM Roman Empire...HMMMMM Ottoman Empire....HMMMMM USA Empire, all let their arrogance and their sense of "only us" in the world mantality, kill their once great culture.
funny that happened not to long ago,but it was great britian,ur right bout one thing , we should let all those other people with guns on the other side of the world kill themselves off,but then again they would eventually get here to find us citizens easy pry for we have no arms to protect ourselves. next time you see an american soldier, give him the shirt off your back,because if not for him you wouldnt get the chance to see him!
Don't even watch anymore. I liked Larry King and Morgan was O.K. at first, but now can't stand to even watch.
I just wonder how much longer he is going to use incorrect fact to build his anti gun case. The mass murder at Sandy Hook is a true tragedy but none of the killings where commited with an assualt rifle.
Also the fact when he mentions his beloved homeland that the violent crime rate is the highest in the western world, and the per capita homicide rate, despite having a virtual gun ban, is the highest in Western Europe.
There is no way to stop a killer from killing?!?!? Really? There is no way to stop a theif from stealing but somehow we have a lot less theft when the bank money is in the vault not just sitting out in the street.
Making things inaccessable impairs impulse decisions. The dedicated few will be resolute in their ambitions, but most people (criminals or other) do not have the dedication to pursue their ambitions.
A thief may not steal the money from a bank vault but would probably steal money or something of value elsewhere like from people's homes, cars, etc, but a person with an intent to kill, usually for something they want revenge from that might have caused them distress all their life and are not emotionally sound and strong enough to control their impulses will get revenge and kill them with whatever weapon is available (even just a household butcher knife) or make a weapon, etc. and kill them before they end their life.
“The survey also indicates that 55% of Americans generally favor stricter gun control laws “
Time for us to Fire Wayne LaPierre NRA we need a new leader
If you don't like where you live now you can move to the Empire State. As of last night that state has a defacto ban on virtually every gun. Most duck guns that are currently owned are now illegal. The guns won't kill you anymore in NY (apart from the ones owned by the criminals) but the taxes will!
This is my point
Wayne LaPierre agenda put us down the way Romney did
We need new leaders in GOP and NRA to protect second amendment
I think we all are very unhappy with the NRA these days. They are not doing their job.
Regarding the NRA not doing their job. Tell New Yorkers about it after last night's de facto sweeping gun ban bill! The bill was designed to target criminals but blatantly assaults legal gun owners.
I don't bame the NRA for that one. I am sure that NYC is a much safer now. NOT
I'm not talking about NYC, I'm talking about the entire state of New York!
REALLY? Oh, I missed that. It isn’t the first time a politician endangered people while trying to do something they felt was right. Just shows how one sided we can get on this issue. It is really had to see the forest for the trees sometimes. Course one posted said I was an idiot, so what do I know?
The NRA is like a cat that "hisses" when it's threatened!
Piers Morgan talks over his "guests" when he disagrees with them. I find this tactic boorish and disgusting. He just keeps on interrupting them when he doesn't like the answer and says "You're not answering the question." Does he think his television audience is stupid?
I think this guy needs to be fired.I am a liberal on most issues, but this man just lit a fire. We have 650,000 deer hunters in this state,with every type of weapon known to man. For 9 days these hunters are out in woods,1dead and 6 wounded,We shoot more people in one night in Milwaukee.I think the conservative spokeswoman won the debate, do yourself a favour and fire this bully moron.Enforce the laws on the books,stop letting felons get caught with and receive no prison time.Hope you fired for this Piers Morgan
I would like to watch Piers Morgan but I have absolutely no interest in what a Britisher thinks about U.S. gun control laws. Therefore when he starts spouting off about guns in America I switch to another channel
No matter what side of the issue you are on, I find it really annoying the Piers always tries to over talk the person he is asking questions of. I have been watching him a bit lately and find it annoying to see him handle the guests this way and it is even worse if he does not agree.
Do either of these women have children? They are so out of touch.
I think these two ladies should have been asked "if your child was blown to pieces by this type of weapon – would you still think it is OK for anyone to own this gun capable of this type of massacre?" I don't have a problem with responsible people owning guns but I do have a problem with someone able to get a gun that delivers 11 shots to a defenseless child – no one needs that type of weapon for personal use!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Gun laws only patrol law abiding citizens, not criminals. If you make stricter gun laws only law abiding citizens will obey them as they do presently. Piers Morgan is an idiot talk show host and a second rate actor at best.
the argument being advanced that we have the right to bear arms means whatever is considered "arms" is okay, is absurd. do we want to allow people to have nuclear arms. these guests are just being flippent and their comments are a waste of time.
Our second amendment say "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The definition of militia is a military force of civilians to supplement a regular army in an emergency. We can't fight off anther army with a 7 round magazine or clip when the enemy has 30-100 round magazines that are fully automatic. When ours are semi-automatic which you can not and I don care who you are you can't shoot 100 rounds out in 100 seconds!
Where is the threat to your state's border? Are Mexican tanks gathering on the Texas border, intent on re-taking the Alamo? Or perhaps the Canadians are massing their 75 tanks at the Quebec border intent on a dash to Washington?
Isn't using the 2nd amendment just an over-worked example of nra paranoia?
Just saying if there was one what do you want to take to a gun fight an anti NRA poster? Ill take my gun over your protest sign to a fight any day. Plus more people are killed by gang bangers with their 9mm than any ar.
Were you visiting Great Britain when the news reports came out about ranchers in Arizona and Texas having to defend their lives and property against drug runners?
Russ, you must have been living under a rock for the last two years. Attorney General Eric Holder sold several thousand assault weapons to the Mexican drug cartels, and they are killing Americans from the Mexican side of the border, as well as Mexicans.
Sorry, Rick, perhaps the subtlety of sarcasm is lost on you and your dull wit.
The need for 300,000,000 weapons in a country that loudly proclaims itself the "land of the free, home of the brave" is ludicrous! And especially where 10% of those weapons (according to the nra) were obtained without the benefit of a background check.
As for the drug cartels in Mexico killing citizens? Don't go – what a novel idea! I live within four hours of the border and feel quite safe, and I don't own a gun. Not only do I not own a gun, I don't feel the need to have one nor do I want them around me.
Please get someone to explain this axiom to you: The only thing that results from an 'eye for an eye' system is a world full of blind people." More guns to defend ourselves from guns is insanity...
Piers why do you waste your time with these two woman? Especially Scottie. They don't answer your questions because they CAN'T! They speak the same words over and over. All their 'propaganda' is disgusting and they show a pure lack of knowledge and more importantly 'common sense.' They set woman back. Shame on them.
What the President did today was history making for the people of this great country, the United States of America.
I think the 'fringe' segment of the US are just not bright enough to understand what was done for them today.
This country is need of very much help.
You are so right! Plus the fact that these two women could find nothing in the President's proposals that they could agree with shows how completely close minded and ridiculous they are.
It is apparent that you do not understand or have any common sense about this issue.
Piers Morgan should be banned from conducting interviews about gun control. He is abusive, disrespectful, condescending, and does not allow his guests an opportunity to answer his questions. He is much too arrogant, self-righteous, and does not believe in freedom of speech. Why does CNN allow him to continue these discussions. I totally believe a dicussion and a lwa about gun control is necessary, and the sooner the better. I do not believe Piers Morgan should be conducting any of those discussions. Please give him another topic, I like him on other topics, but he is absolutely insane on gun control.
I think that Piers is very passionate on this subject. You can not say that he is any more abusive, disrespectful, condescending than his guests. The pro gun people show a huge lack of ignorance and really NEVER even answer the questions asked. They just don't have the mental capacity to understand that he is not taking stance on banning guns, cancelling the Second Amendment. He is simply trying to get these people to understand and numbers and deaths world wide prove his point, that automatic rifles are not needed nor are the clips for these guns.
Take a moment and listen, none of these radical gun owners answer his questions. The two women on tonight's show are just totally off base. They should not be allowed to even speak on world wide TV. They are just proving Piers is right.
It is absolutely mind boggling to me.
Carry a hand gun if you feel you need to but an automatic weapon is so off limits! God Help US.
I agree with the comments in regard to Piers's interviewing tactics as being rude and abusive. I do have the same views as he does, but he needs to let these people finish their thoughts and answer his questions. I am not enjoying this show anymore. It is too stressful to watch. Let's go on to another subject, PLEASE!! As my father used to say," Never argue with a fool as a passerby may not know who is who."
Rush Limbaugh, kids wrote letter to president and their parents were present
Piers, Why do you have these idiots on your show?
While part of me agrees with Piers' opinion on guns I'm disappointed with the way he conducts his interviews with those who are against the gun ban. He is argumentative, a bully and doesn't know how to be an unbiased journalist when their opinions goe against what he believes. His aggressive manner detracts from what is being said. Can we get a real interviewer on please.
I just do not figure out why AR-15's are necessary in this day and age. the guests do not ever really answer Piers Morgans questions. They just interrupt with another statement. 3 ppl talking same time as I watch. If you have mental problem and you can find this on a background check great. But many I bet are not reported that this factor can be made. Outlaw guns that can shoot huge amounts of ammo in seconds has to be the way to go.
Why people need AR 15 ... If you ever shoot one before AR15 is easier to shoot and aim than a handgun. Try a target with .45 acp pro and see how hard it is to get your target.
Get your facts straight! In 1994 the Sunset ban did NOT ban the AR-15 from being produced for the commercial market. It did make it illegal to produce these weapons under certain "configurations". I sold these and was well within the law.
Stop trying to twist the facts for your personal agenda. Become an citizens and then you would have more grounds for your opinion!
Agh My brother is a Colonel in British Army and he said those guns belong in battle field, agh. What a ridiculous argument from a grown man, called Pier .. So we should all in America live by your British brothers idea...
Agh interesting how your thinking has gotten that low.
Also him saying when I hear that it makes me sick ... If you sick then throw up maybe that might get rid of them funky ideas you got in the first place
As if wrapping himself up in his brother's uniform makes him an expert. I know a number of former British army officerd who left Britain because of its restrictive gun laws, and moved to this country so they could continue their sport. I know they certainly don't agree with Piers and his Army brother.
Piers – please – enough with the gun control argument. I am getting tired of tuning in every night to see what is on and finding out it is the gun control control argument every night. CNN – pay attention – you are losing viewers. Enough.
Dana is a freaking idiot. I don't care if she has fired a weapon – I have killed with guns. I respect them. I don't need a tank. I dont have a gun in my house. She is an idiot and really can not justify her position except that it boosts her ratings for her (as till now) unheard of radio show. Piers – keep the guns out of our hands. For a Brit – you are a patrioit.
I love that Piers Morgan is all over this issue. Excellent program tonight. Keep it up!
Where is the churches in America on the issue of gun in America? They are always quick to give their opinion on every aspect of our social life, however they remain quiet on this very important issue. I would like to know what our Priest, Ministers of Religions,Rabbi, Pastors, Deacons etc. think of putting in place gun control. And why are they not talking to members of Congress?
I am a Pastor. I have called my Senators, Congressman and State Reps. I have made my full support known of the 2nd Amendment and the right for me to keep my AK, AR and full collection of others. It is what made America different from the rest of the world.
I posed this question to them after asking them to support my right to own an AR. The dem senator and gov, I asked "how can they justify killing unborn children and then argue that my right to own an assualt weapon endangers the futures of our children?" Their office could not provide an answer other than abortion is a separate issue and is not viewed as killing an unborn child. I then asked why are their laws allowing a person to be charged with 2 murders if that person kills a pregnant women. The response was because the pregnant women is pregnant with child. They then refused to explain how an unborn child is at the same time viewed as nothing and as a child by the same person.
First of all, Piers, you ask a question and if the person is not giving you the answer that fits your guidlines of thought, you rudely interrupt and do not let them finish. Learn decent interviewing methods and once you ask a question, keep your mouth shut and let the person answer as they see fit; you may not like the answer, you may not want to hear what they say, and it may not fit your agenda, but give them the coutesy of responding.
Secondly, give the gun issue a break; it is top priority here but we do not need to hear your British thoughts on how your country and others are preventing such tragedies. The more you expound on how other countries are doing a better job, the more we are fed up with your thoughts. Nothing turns one off more than hearing how bad they are. Friends who istened to you at the start of this debate on guns now turn you off and watch something else...tired of hearing you chat on about an issue you only want to hear one side of.
If you don't care for the way this country works, leave. After all, you are no Larry King.
Dear, Piers: Stop being so childish and let the guests on your show talk for once and state their facts! You're very immature for you age! I'm 16 about to be 17 years old in July and I don't interrupt my friends if we have a disagreement! All you ever care about is your own opinion! You just pick out reasons why the other person is wrong, because you think your right and no one else is! Everyone has their own opinion and everyone (even people on your show you don't agree with) should be allowed to state their own opinion without you interrupting them! Thank you.
I had to turn the channel. Why invite people if you keep on yelling at them when they don't give you the answer you want to hear? Maybe I am in the minority, I would actually like to hear BOTH sides of this gun debate not just what you think.
You're not alone in that thought...
anti gunner Arnold Schwarzenegger owns a M47 Patton tank.
The second amendment protects against a non-democratic government or a dictator coming to power. Americans have been lulled into a false sense of seurity by the 2nd amendment – they think that by having guns they will miraculously get together to defend – in unison – against a tyranical system of government. In fact, there will be as many opposing an overthrow as there will be favoring one – and with that said the millions of guns will come out and they will attack one another – this scenario is exactly what your enemy wants to happen. Smarten up folks, LIVE BY THE GUN – DIE BY THE GUN.
Having watched the "Guns in America" debate the past several nights, I'm surprised that a couple of facts about the 2nd Amendment havent' been raised. First, when the amendment was written in the 1780's, guns weren't mass produced as they are now. Each gun was made individually for the user by a gunsmith. And, since the gunsmith knew who he was making the gun for, he knew not to make a gun for someone that was either questionable or incompetent. Yes, tyrannical government was a fear in those days, for good reason. However, he method of gunmaking and distribution is vastly different now than it was then.
Piers, thank you for your honest and real look at the issue of gun safety, and thank you for asking direct questions of these women who don't support any of the very reasonable solutions Pres. Obama has offered. We need this honesty and directness in our discussion of gun safety today. I hope this and other discussions leads to some real gun safety in America. (ps. I'm a independent who almost always votes Republican.)
Piers: Why do you provide a platform for gun advocates to make their points? It does nothing to change their minds and may sway others to adopt their positions.
I respectfully ask why you would not advocate a forum that presents multiple sides of an issue in order to gain a better understanding of the position. If the argument is strong enough for what you believe, why would you be afraid for others to hear an opposing view point? Do you not think that critical thinking and educated opinions involve a fair representation and analysis of all sides of the argument?
Go Back Where You Came From!!!
Bravo Piers! That stupid woman wouldn't get him a straight answer, and she kept laughing and grinning. If my teeth were that yellow I would keep my mouth shut, especially on national TV.
I agree with Piers. I welcome him here in this country full of brainwashed gun happy psychos. And that blond (woman?) should have a little respect for all of the children that were killed and wipe that stupid smirk off her face! These people are sick.
The radicals are so disrespectful and show true ignorance.
Another example is the NRA advertisement, how ignorant and totally disrespectful was that?
Morgan, you're what makes me sick....please, pack up and go back to your beloved Queen and Great Britain.
Ask those guest you have what will you purpose to help prevent what has happen a far as the mass murdering?
I have stopped watching Piers the in the last few weeks because people talking over each other for the majority of the show... It serves no purpose and is beyond annoying. Why don't they do a presidential debate style program? Everybody can talk uninterrupted for 1 minute then it's the other person's turn.
Because right now NOBODY is civilized.
I COMPLETELY AGREE! If you have a minute read my post. We're on the same page.
I agree with Diane. Have to say, People kill People not guns...... Timothy Mcveigh killed 168 People AND NO Gun involved. If the sick person wants to do it, they will find a way.....
I wonder why airheads such as scottie and Dana are on his show too. These people are uneducated people who follow NRA and Rush for just being right and I am glad Piers confronting them. I could not believe Dana was laughing when parents lost their kids. To her, it was a joke and someone needs to let her know that she made a fool out of herself.... Good show Piers. Continue on and please do not give up until we get a law passed.
Oh, so the opposition should be sent to re-education camps because they are either uneducated or improperly educated? If you manage to convince your audience that your opponent in a debate as beneath your own intellect and education I guess that would make you the winner. I would say that you are pathetic but that would make me as ignorant as you so I won't.
You should probably talk to Piers then about being uneducated. The man didn't go to college and doesn't have degree.
Piers- You say I dont need an AR 15 or a high cap magazine, who are you to tell me what I need? I dont think you need to be taking a job in America from an American. I dont think you need a fancy suit to do your job. What you are not getting is that America was not built on telling its citizens what they need. If your going to use the "you don't need that" argument, then justify why you need to be in the US?
I am watching Piers Morgan with Dana Loesch and Scottie Hughes and I am discussed by the manor in which he is conducting himself. In case Piers Morgan has forgotten, media is about bringing both sides of an argument to the public and unfortunately all I have heard is Piers Morgan rudely interrupting and speaking over his guests. In my opinion, which I am sure is shared with many, Piers Morgan is not in any way qualified to fill Larry King's shoes. Piers, I suggest you take some time and watch some of Larry King's interviews. Hopefully this will remind you how to do your job.
The two ladies are idiots. Hard to Watch!!!
Send Morgan back to England!!!!
The second amendment was passed when firearms where limited to single shot weapons and would never be passed today with such rapid fire available.
They would have been tripping all over themselves to get their hands on a high powered weapon like we have today.
The second amendment at that time allowed Americans to have the most modern weapons of the time. Which for that period were highly deadly versus restricting the weapons to those of older designs. The British Monarchy tried to severely restrict the types and amounts of weapons the colonists could have fearing an uprisal and loss of their tax and resource base.
Piers, I have many educated comments I could state. But in my current emotion level watching your show, I think by sayng just get out of my country would be sufficient!
That's the ticket ...... "I'm mad and don't wanna talk to you , so get out!" .... real grown up .... wanna guess how many COUNTRIES are asking american's to GET OUT of their country while your showing off that superiority?? lol
Peirs Morgan, i applaud you for your continual fight against gun control in America. I have been doing the same on facebook with the same results. I have found that we are fighting against ignorance and fear, more than with people and guns. No one can answer our question on why Ar-15s and 30 round or more mags are needed. Guns only use besides killing and murdering is for hunting and as someone who grew up in Michigan and hunting my whole life, you are not going to get more than 2 shots off on a deer or other animal hunted. If I had my way we would get rid of all guns, we have enough stores to by food in this society and hunting is not even a necessity, it is an excuse people use to keep guns as a tool rather than an instrument for killing.
But please keep up the fight, even though it may be hard to make headway. God bless.
We need bans and regulations on guns period. The gun pros who are talking on your show are unintelligent and really need to learn how to communicate. Wait till one of their family members get shot by a mass murder and than tell me we shouldn't have a ban on them. When I was younger my neighbor down the street was shot by his brother; the gun was locked up and everything. You may be responsible, but it doesn't mean you should have one. People need to start thinking correctly and not selfishly. The people Piers has on his show that are pro for guns need to really learn how to communicate, and learn the facts. Guns kill and do not solve anything. He lets them talk and goes through correctly on what he sees and knows. Piers is intelligent (hence, why he has such a fantastic network and company). Some people need to get their stuff together and learn how to communicate. If you can't communicate; you should not own a gun! PERIOD. If you can't live with rules; you should not own a gun! It makes me so upset when I hear these gun pros talk. We are not under rule under NRA. NRA is not who I voted for to be apart of my government. They need to get out of our politics and we need to start caring for our children and our life in a better way. We need rules on guns. PERIOD. Get over it. It makes me sick to hear these people talk. Just sick to know I am a citizen with you. You shouldn't even be an American Citizen if you believe your 2nd Amendment gives you "a right" to own a gun. No, you have no right. We have no right period to own anything. Get over your egotistical self and learn how to make our America a better place and not a scary place. I don't want my kid going to school with people or teachers caring around guns! That is a learning ENVIRONMENT! We have other ways of solving problems instead of shooting each other. Get off your ego and learn how to understand and LEARN THE IMPORTANT OF EDUCATION! LEARN THE IMPORTANT OF COMMUNICATION! I am scared for how out country to moving towards. This is not an environment I want a child growing up in. Guns do NOT SOLVE ANYTHING!
Those are two of the most ignorant women I've ever heard or seen. They are just trying to look cute (which they are not) PLEASE do not give them anymore airtime. RUDE RUDE RUDE IGNORANT UNAMERICAN. Why are you giving them the time of day? Let alone being on your show. And that girl did not graduate from Harvard. If she did, Harvard should be ashamed.
Piers, PLEASE let your guests finish their answers. With all of the commotion, we can't tell what anyone is saying!!!
Piers needs to read the history of his country of origin and that of his adopted county. The reason there was an armed uprising that resulted in the formation of a new country was that a despotic government sought to force its ' will on unwilling people. The reason the Irish and Scots walked with quaint shillelaugh was that the government DISARMED THEM to prevent their reclaiming the lands the English stole from them. Like President Obama, the English "won". Until America was born. The Founding Fathers did not grant the right to hunt, but the right to keep and bear arms in order to prevent a future despot from imposing his will with the help his minions.
You need to study American history. The second Amendment was created to protect Southern slaveholders where the southern state militias were for the express purpose of protecting against slave uprisings. Learn your history. Without slavery there would be no 2nd Amerndment: http://truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery.
IMMA .... don't bother , around here you could actually have the people that drafted the 2nd amendment tell them the EXACT REASONS behind this one amendment and they will call them a liar also ..... interesting reading tho Thanks for the insight.
I believe the President had reasonable suggestions.
Those hiding behind the 2nd amendment do not acknowledge it was written hundreds of years ago, couldn't possibly have meant the literal meaning in this day and time that people are giving it. Yet there is such zealousness about taking the few words literally regarding every form of arms. ???
Personally you can have my 2nd amendment rights. I don't own any weapons and never will. I live in gun country and am constantly amazed at the way people feel the need to arm themselves to the teeth. It's ridiculous. To answer Piers' question there is no reason to own any type of military style weapon designed to kill people. If we put as much zeal into addressing mental health issues or crime issues that we put into filling the gun locker with unlimited firepower we might actually create a better nation for all of us.
Piers go back to your country UK you P......y!
In the gun control debate, I hear over and over an argument that everyone should have an assault weapon to be able to defend themselves against their enemies or government or their government that have the same weapon... based on that principle, I'd like to ask them if they think it's right for Iran and North Korea to have nuclear weapons since the US and Israel have them.
Morgan needs to shut his mouth! I don't know if its him or the show making him be such an idiot. Why can't he let his guests speak? No on is allowed to buy an automatic gun, but anyone can modify ANY gun, that simple. With a little knowledge and machining tools, you can create any modification. The bottom line is the government, police, etc. either cannot or will not be able to stop people, criminals, from obtaining whatever they want. Therefore all this nonsense is a waste of time..until there is a way to eliminate criminal activity. Oh yeah, and the fact that anybody is capable of becoming "evil" or whatever you call it and deciding to use a weapon of any kind or even his own hands to kill numerous people. There's too much to say on this subject. It's sad that our government can't figure this out after decades of continuous issues. Television has become clouded with corrupted shows, reporters, you name it. You can have the same argument abut drugs. We are free and life here in the US can be easy and great but don't be fooled, the people in power have to be questioned and evaluated just as any other questionable citizen.
Piers your "tank" theory is wrong, Yes i think people should be able to buy a tank!! WHY? when was the last time you heard of anyone causing mass murder with one they owned personally for one, but I have heard about someone arming a bulldozer and causing mass havoc and a few deaths, should they ban bulldozers also? see your argument is nothing but scripted fallacy also. Please tell me you are just here for show and not in charge of anything important in this country except ambush journalistic tactics.
I am not watching this show until he stops having complete idiots on the show, like these two gun loving, uneducated, loud mouth women tonight. I can't stand it anymore.
Piers Morgan needs the assistance of a well-informed American in framing his questions! For example, the question about tank ownership led no place. THE QUESTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN: WHY IS IT THAT NO AMERICAN OWNS OR CAN OWN A MACHINE GUN. (ANSWER: THEY WERE BANNED AFTER GANGSTERS USED THEM BACK IN THE 1930's. JUSTICE SCALIA LATER IMPLICITLY UPHELD THIS BAN WHEN HE SAID THAT UNDER THE SECOND AMENDMENT, UNUSUALLY DESTRUCTIVE WEAPONS COULD BE BANNED.)
I got a survey from the NRA too. I tore it up, sent it back and told them to stick it where the sun doesn't shine.
LOL.... I didn't answer it because it didn't allow me to really answer the questions I wanted to answer. I did answer the survey from the Gifford's.
Piers should read this: http://truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery
Piers don't invite guests to your show if you don't let them speak. Please do not put words in peoples mouths.
Piers has completely flipped out. Now he's talking about people buying tanks and the government is using nuclear weapons. He doesn't know squat about guns and probably needs some xanax. He's making a damn fool out of himself. Maybe he needs to go back to Britain. A 12ga shotgun loaded with #1 buckshot is much deadlier at 20yds than any ar15. Ea shotshell has 20 pellets any of which would kill.You can buy a 20 shot drum magazine and the shotgun is also a semi auto gun. Let Piers do the math.He'll forget the ar15 as a killing machine.
Finally, one Dana to another, the truth has been told , there is no such thing as a assault weapon, I love these girls, finally the truth has been told and they have both laughed in the face of the tv bafoon from england .
Piers acts nuts when he interviews people. Larry King would have never conducted an interview like that. I don't know why he doesn't go back to the UK. Let him argue over there. Get an American to take his place. He is just too mouthy. I believe in background checks and many other requirements concerning guns. Get him off the air.
you're a cheat Piers
Piers is just a nationalized scripted dis-informant agent working for the societies and against the humanity of man.
To Piers Morgan,
You keep saying no one has given you one single reason why a civilian would need an AR-15 weapon with the capability of 100+ ammo. To answer that would be to ask yourself why would anyone need a vehicle that has a speedometer of 100+ mph?
The vehicle comes equipped with the 100+ mph speedometer, but that does not mean that the civilians who own the vehicle drive that fast, but it still comes equipped that way for just in case.
You can still have the AR-15 with 100+ ammo and may never even have to use one bullet ever, but you never know what the future holds and you should have the right to keep it if you choose, just like if an emergency came up, you would be able to drive faster than the posted speed sign if you needed to. Basically, it is just a preference and convenience and one should have the right to choose their preference.
Why does Pierce Morgan on CNN allow people who speak in rude and disrespectful manner ,talk over others, refuse to give straight forward answers and play manipulative games talk? Pierce please turn off their microphones. I finally muted the television because i couldn't , no I would not ,cope with tier verbal assualts and barrages.
I love your show, I watch alot. I totally agree with you talk alot about gun control. In US, I want assault weapon should be BAN. if we want to protect ourself for self defense, we can use hand gun, no need for AR 15, that just kill people. I do respect the 2nd amendment, but the 2nd amendment was written back than, 200 years ago. 200 years ago we don't have assault weapon or semi automatic. that's was our founding father see that. if we follow the amendment, there is no assault weapon include in the paper. the white people are so sensentive about this issue and think that banning assault rifle will take away their right. I mean look at other country, like my country vietnam, you cannot even buy or own a gun. then there is no violence. too many people die in this country with gun violence and people just don't care. I don't own any weapon, I think that better. I mean if people want to go hunting, they don't need a 100 rounds ciff to shot. I have a suggestion, if we want use rifle, only shooting has it, and we can rent it over there. right. thanks for reading
When you understand the reason for the 2nd Amendment, you will understand why these weapons should not be banned. The founding fathers did not include this amendment to protect your right to hunt or target shoot. It was put in place to ensure Americans will always posses the ability protect themselves against a tyrannical government. This problem is much deeper than just banning a weapon. Timothy McVeigh used bomb to carry out his craziness. The better question to answer is What is wrong with our society that we seem to create a large number of people prepared to carry these acts out? The easy thing to attack is the gun argument. Much harder to have open dialogue about education, mental health, parenting styles, bullying and all the other things we are doing as a society to drive people crazy. To focus on the guns is to limit the disussion to methodology rather than causality. Piers, your lack of calm in discussing this is part of the problem. You were not listening (and neither were your guests). Discussion requires both sides to listen. If you are not prepared to listen then dont have guests on the show with different views. BTW, I see some real positives in some of what Pres Obama put on the table. I disagree with any ban on "assault rifles". Again, understand the reason for the amendment and you will understand the argument better.
hey piers,do you think those hostages in algeria would like to have a pistol or a rifle with a 30 round mag right now?
well well well and here I thought Alex Jones was crazy Piers is just like him saying Americans want to buy Tanks.
Piers-Why don't you go talk to Hannity and maybe you will finally get your facts straight!!!!!! Why don't you pack your bags and go back to Britian. Really don't appreciate YOU coming into the US and acting like you are an American citizen-YOU ARE NOT AN AMERICAN! GO HOME!!!!!
The other Barry here .......... LMAO if your not american get out??? seriously?? ... you went to school for a few yrs right?? enough to learn about "Plymouth Rock" and all right?? ... lmao .... wow .... nice one
Good Evening. I am an active duty officer in the United States Army and a student at the Command and General Staff College. In my studies I have been observing/analyzing critical thinking, argument construction, and bias within the media. While I am not going to offer my opinion on this evening's issue, I am going to comment on how Piers Morgan fails to represent himself as either a fair debate mediator and/or a strong-sense critical thinker (as defined by Dr. Richard Paul and Dr. Linda Elder in their publication "The Thinker's Guide To Fallicies: The Art of Mental Trickery and Manipulation"). While I would concede the notion that there are no prescribed ethics and standards with regards to journalism/media (freedom of press), I ask inquiring minds to take a look at this short publication and judge for yourselves whether or not Piers Morgan is in fact someone that should be taken serious when it comes to addressing/debating issues in this country. Applying these standards I am shocked that he is still receiving air time. As a final note, I apply this to all other "news" outlets – irrespective of their media political bias. This just happened to be the program I watched tonight.
The guests tonite explain what is wrong with America and why there needs to be GUN CONTROL.
Gun violence proves that the courts are not providing satisfactory dispute resolution to society. Everyone knows the courts are rotten. It would do more good to fix the courts (stop the judges with dirty tricks) than to make up more gun rules. Justice should be free not expensive.
During one of those storms, a Korean store owner fended off looters with an AR15. 2 or 3 or 4 looters with pistols would require an assault rifle with 100 round magazines for self defense.
You are very rude to talk at people and not give them a chance to answer. You are the only person I dislike on CNN, and I have been watching for years.
The intent of the 2nd Amendment was to insure that we would have the capability to defend ourselves from a corrupt government. Therefore, it is my belief just as I believe (it was there belief and intent), that we should have the ability to posses the same fire capability as the government does, to insure our freedom.
Sandra, are you so dillusional to really believe that? Please go and travel a little outside your county, state and country. Get a little bit of worldly perspective on things. You are way too paranoid, you think that the army or feds are going to take over your house, farm, land etc? Please...your military is filled with allot of decent and respectful professionals that would NEVER go down that road. Stop using this b.s. excuse for disarming your fellow idiots. Glad I dont live near you
The government from the governor all the way down to the cops are corrupt rotten people. I have absolute proof through personal experience and public record of this rotten-ness. I will be posting these cases on
They are rotten to the core...rotten to the core... I WILL BE TORTURING THESE ROTTEN PEOPLE THROUGH THIS WEBSITE FOR THE REST OF TIME AS THEY KNOW IT.
Mr Morgan is a very good entertainer. Not much of a journalist but an excellent entertainer. I was impressed this evening by how well Ms Loesch and Ms Hughes commanded the interview despite Mr Morgan's best efforts to distort and/or misrepresent their statements. Mr Morgan does make some good points however his laughable efforts to misrepresent data and antagonize his guests detract significantly from his message (whatever that happens to be.) I was however impressed when he basically admitted his limited knowledge of the subject (assault rifles) and that he was essentially clueless in his own right.
Once again, Pier's has an infantile tantrum when he doesn't get the answers he's looking for. This self-important, pontificating British school master scolding the kindergartener's. Go home shill!
Every time Morgan said the word "assult " ar 15 was sold .Every time hi said "military style " other hi capacity magasin was sold
Grate job !!!
It Obama really believes that high capacity magazines it the issue, why did he leave high capacity magazines on the streets? It is all just to look good and not really resolve anything. If you believe assault weapons are really the issue, why not really ban them? I don’t agree with New York City’s new laws, but at least they did something based on their beliefs.
I felt bad watching you tonite and last night trying to make any sense of the comments from the people against the ban on assault weapons..... you must know by now that americans are dumb and they are sttuborn and ignorants..... the second amendment was adopted on DEc 15, 1791... think about the types of arms that existed at that time and the reasons why this amendement was adopted.... how different is that from today..... but we americans still believe we live in 1781... how dumb we are..... good luck trying to get straight answers from this people...
What a cacophony! Good grief! As a woman and a mother, I am ashamed to listen to those two trying to outshout each other. There must be a more effective way to teach your sons that we are in the 21'st century. A more. Effective way to be heard!.
Piers. The leaders of Newtown have asked for calm, thoughtful debate regarding gun laws and I feel you should respect their wishes and stop loosing your temper on TV. I think that joining in with the argumentative retouric that is common on the evening news shows is not productive and demonstrates that a bad temper is ok. Back in the day when I was growing up people showed manners and temper control. I think that contributes to the poor behavior of the general public that we see today. By the way I am 53 years old, a nurse and live about 10 minutes from Newtown. The 26 people that were killed that day had far reaching connections to many of us in this area. You know the saying 6 degrees of separtation (I think that's right), it's true. Please calm down and maintain your cool with this very hot topic. Thanks, Barb, Brookfield.
I doubt if Piers even reads this, but:
You're right, should leave the kids out of it. So if Obama wants his kids left out, he should leave everyone else's out. Rich people pay others to carry their guns. You are rich in the terms of most Americans, bet you have armed security at CNN, and probably where you live. Blumenthal would be more believable if he wasn't surrounded by armed bodyguards. Rich people have guns, I want one, too.
To answer your "tank" argument, if you could BEAR a tank, you wouldn't hardly need one. Problem is, you are a non-technical person with demonstrably little knowledge of your topic, debating against other non-technical persons. Reductio Ad Absurdum works both ways, but you are in fact a master in it's use.
The 2nd amendment has not a damned thing to do with hunting, and little to do with self-defense, but rather the equipping of the populace to perform "levee en masse" (google it, its in the Geneva and Hague conventions) in order to resist a tyrannical government. Muskets were the "assault weapons" of their era, M4 variants are the assault weapons of this era, so really, we should have real assault weapons (automatic).
I lived a total of 17 years in the UK, so I can speak to this–you are less likely to get shot there. You are far more likely to get set upon by a gang of youths, stabbed,"bottled" and the like. You cannot carry a pocketknife to open a bag of crisps in the UK, nor buy an airsoft "weapon" (their term) without being a "registered enthusiast".
The reason I mention this is because I think you had something to do with it. Proud of yourself, are you, for helping bring down a proud people and bring abut the nanny state?
AMERICANS held hostage in algeria, should have had some military style assault weapons with very high capacity magazines to fight back with
This proves my point. Americans shouldnt be in Algeria to begin with. What the hell are they doing there? OH YAH you need the oil, money and want to control it. forgot ...stupid me
Now that is a total different subject. I don’t think our military should be in any city breaking down doors with an M-16 that shoots through walls. That is just a PR nightmare and when all is done, even the people you were there to help hate you and for good reason.
I can't understand how people can be so insensitive after that shooting in Conn. Maybe the only way they could have feelings would be for them to see pictures of slain children. Several years ago my 12 year old neigjhbor boy killed himself because he was bullied. The neighbor on the other side of me killed his girlfriend even though she had a restraining order against him and then killed himself. Their two little kids found them the next morning. GUNS DO KILL!!
Nope won't work. Believe me I know, I've lived in some tough neighborhoods and seen a lot of devastation by weapons, hell I've been shot at by RPG's and guess what I still disagree with Piers and I want an RPG too, LOL.
Can someone just ask the q. If you want to own a 100 round clip or a ak47 than you ( the owner) would or should be fully liable of it, even if there are stolen , borrowed , lost. YOU are going to be fully responsible of what happens to that gun for the life of ownership of it, And if someone take your gun uses it in a crime than you will pay the penilty of the lost gun. A simple paper that states all of the liabilities that you must sign before buying a gun/clip might change a few minds of owning one.
Ok then I'll just steal your car and when I wreck it and kill or maim someone you can be held responsible....man that just makes no sense!
Jay, I have never heard of such an stupid idea. I hope that this was just an question and not an suggestion. OH I know it is the magazines fault for being stolen and possibly being used in an crime, so the orginal owner is gully by association to the person who used it? This is one of the most non-intelligent concepts, outside of some of Pierce Morgans statements that I have ever heard.
Jay, I certainly agree with you. If a person desires to own these types of weapons they certainly should take complete resposnibility for ownership and the gun should be registered and to make sure it is secured at all times so it doesn't fall into the wrong hands. If it does a law should read that the owner should share in the penalty of the offense. If a person isn't willing to take the responsiblity of ownership then they shouldn't own that type of weapon.
Just to clarify, as i have seen the mental health community thrown under the bus by many, anyone who is seeing a doctor and are under care for mental health almost have no rights as it is. With a single phone call by a doctor, caseworker/socialworker, family, friend, psychiatrist, psychologist, counselor to law enforcement will result in immediate pick up and transfer to inpatient mental health and if their isnt room well off to jail u will go solitary confinement style. the reasoning for locking u up can be as simple as a psychiatrist wanting to change your medication and guess what when your a mental health patient no one listens to you, no one believes you, your crazy plain and simple so what we say is nonsense or a lie. No one wants to believe that u could be locked up for no real serious reason. about the only people who know this are those working in mental health facilities working directly with the patients 8 hrs a day 5 days a week. So please folks your wasting time focusing in on mental health patients cause if you go to a hospital and meet some patients you can see that what im saying is true in most of america that i know of. we have no privacy, we have no guarantee of our individual rights and liberties already so please just let us be and stop using the mentally ill as a place to lay blame as we have been stripped of everything already.
Peirs Morgan you should sit on your face because your show tonight showed how you are talking out your A$$. If you are going to have people on your show, which by the way CNN should cancel, let the people say what they have to say when you ask questions. Talk about bullying people ! If you are not going to listen to what the people have to say, do not invite them on the show. GO BACK TO, wait a minute, England does not want you back, Huh !
LOL @ you Lee ...... and yet .... you watched his show tonight ..... lol way to show your displeasure .... tff
DONT worry vk, this is america it will never happen here , they wont get our guns
Never say never. It can happen in the USA. I hope you never have to suffer and feel the pain and agony that these Families are.
What is with getting these innocent victims thrown in the face of every gun owner in America? We are not the bad guy here. Turn this all around and we can talk about the victims of crime that have been disarmed. Wait, that is already happening in the UK. We all hate what happened in Newtown and other places, but it isn’t the gun owners fault. It isn’t the guns fault either. It is the bad guy and rather you have a gun or not, the bad guy is the person we need to be looking for. If we didn’t have any weapons, the bad guy is still going to be there. Until you ban him, we haven’t solved anything.
the problem is there are 7 billion ppl and you wont be able to eliminate all the bad ppl or know who they are, the guy who shot up the school had no record, as some of the other mass killers, they can apprear very sane (and most are very intellegent) BUT we can eliminate guns! that part of the equation can be eliminated. And we are talking about every murder, of course we wont stop ALL murder, BUT guns make it fast and efficient and can kill hundreds in a minute.
Guns also save lives. Guns are a deterrent to crime.
WHY CAN'T AMERICANS OWN MACHINE GUNS? THEY HAVE BEEN BANNED FOR DECADES. WHY?
Because when the 2nd amendment was drafted the militia had more advanced weponry than the military (kentucky rifle vs the smooth bore musket) the elitists fear an armed mass because they can be held accountable
I think his guest should stop accepting invitations and whichever guest supports Piers should not show up after being invited because they would just look like another Piers Morgan trying to impose their views on others and get a bad rep, soon Morgan will have no one to interview and he will be talking by himself to himself which would be like his show has always been and no one will even notice.
Why does Piers obsess on guns, and spend no time taking on the culture of violence promoted by Hollywood? Not to mention the breakdown of the family. While guns kill people, we need to deal with why these lunatics pick up the gun in the first place.
Switzerland has tons of guns, so why is their gun murder rate so low?
"Switzerland has tons of guns, so why is their gun murder rate so low?" Seriously?? You actually researched that? You do know they have to army training as they grow up right? From Wiki "Compulsory military service concerns all male Swiss citizens, with women serving voluntarily. Males usually receive initial orders at the age of 18 for military conscription eligibility screening. " ....
THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU PIERS FOR YOUR UNWAVERING BRAVE WORK ON THIS ISSUE
The Psychological Reality of the use of guns -
As a former psychologist, I am amazed and devastated by the comments on this blog - of arguments of gun ownership. The reality is - that studies reveal owning a gun does not make you safer. As a matter of fact, pulling, or showing a weapon in a threatening environment escalates the environment to a 'charged' environment where the signal is given that 'anything goes, and therefore true harm is 97% MORE LIKELY to happen than if there was NOT a weapon on the scene. I am also shocked that people would actually build up arguments to own semi-automatic weapons in defense of their safety. Having a hunting rifle is one thing. I understand that. An automatic weapon or handgun is simply not necessary.
I worked in New York City and Newark, NJ for over 18 years in gang ridden urban envrironments where we launched many programs for healing those who had suffered from violence in their lives– including people in gangs and former prisoners. True safety is built from caring for one another and building a community where you take the EFFORT to reach out.
I believe that we have to take a very strong look at ourselves - – I you want to build safety - get to know your neighbors and reach out to those who may need care - All of these young men who have killed were young, white men who were very isolated and mentally not being cared for.
PIERS - I hope that you know that you are doing true work - work for the integrity of our lives - I AM SO HONORED that you are here - and I think it is amazing that you are a British citizen - fighting for us to open our eyes.
Our country is one of the most violent countries in the world
Actually Mary, the UK violent crime is 4 times HIGHER than ours...With LESS people...we have around 300 million, they have around 62 million. Get your facts straight. Of the roughly 11,000 gun deaths here, around 500 are "justifiable" homicides..
meaning, the bad guys would have KILLED the good guys, but they lost. Some were suicides, and most were done by drug dealing, gang bangers and repeat offenders that the courts let out early for "good behavior".
Piers Morgan is a PUTZ and needs to go back to "his country"....
I absolutely understand why Americans are so passionate about the Second Amendment. And I am open minded enough to see why they would want to protect their rights to bear arms. But I believe that when the Second Amendment was written, they did not foresee that firearms would have the capabilities that they have now. Although I would never own a gun, I am open minded enough to agree that a person has a right to own a gun for hunting or self defense. But what I can't understand is how certain gun owners cannot agree that the Second Amendment was not created in order to allow a person to "kill" someone for no reason whatsoever. When a person uses a gun to murder 20 young children, how can someone not agree that "something" has to be done? As Piers has asked hundreds of time, WHO needs a firearm with the capability of killing so many people in an instant? Who needs a firearm like that? I think all of the pro-gun owners that cannot see that side of the story are being close minded. How can they not understand that "times have changed". If those who wrote the Second Amendment were alive today, what would they think about gun control? What would they say about the massacre in Newtown? I personally believe that they would be disgusted and heartbroken that individuals are honestly saying that a weapon like the one used at Sandy Hook is a weapon that should be legal.
When the First Amendment was written, they didn't envision the internet, video games, violent movies from HOllywood. Is it time for restrictions on the First Amendment as well?
I see the point you are trying to make about First Amendment rights. My response though is...Does the internet "kill"? Do violent movies and video games "kill"? You may say that the internet, movies and video games may cause violence or violent thinking. Or that they would push someone to "kill". And that is probably right. But those things are not physical objects with an ability to murder someone.
I love how the 2nd is like the bible ... OPEN to ones own INTERPRETATION .... "The Right To Bear Arms" in my opinion , Protect our country both foreign and domestic , not carry and conceal , not buy the biggest , baddest , fastest killing machine I can , not I hate ________ so I am gonna kill anyone looking like them , not the guy that got to a parking spot before you , not the guy that was a under cover cop sneaking past you with his gun and your to stupid and UNTRAINED to know that and shoot him.
Your home is NOT a country , your home has TRAINED protection ( the Police) , you do not need to go hunting with a gun that shoots more than 10 bullets at a time ..... there is only one reason any kind of hand gun was made , to kill , nothing more ... black and white , having a semi-auto gun is made for one reason only , to kill , nothing more ... again ... black and while .... have some guns control laws? if your a responsible gun owner , why not? ... oh yea right .... money .... the money you shelled out just so you can have that semi-auto gun with a 20 round clip , seriously?? "The Right To Bear Arms" .... fine .... but as Dana said her interpretation it basically means that is possible , as Scott said "it does not say there is any limit or type in the 2nd" .... Good point she is so right ... legally ... yea she wins ...so hey ... give her what she wants .... "The Right To Bear Arms" ... but uh oh ... it does NOT say "Bear Arms AND BULLETS FOR THEM" ... legally ... it doesn't ,... give her the guns and take away all bullets and make the penalty so harsh people with think twice ... and Hey ... if the U.S gets invaded or they want to over throw the Gov to save human lives ... give them the guns AND bullets ..... it isn't hard ... get all the illegal guns from the "bad people" first ... then everyone else , I have never seen a "Sentence" have SO MANY opinions AND meanings as that one , OVER 300 million guns in one country ... really?? in the last yr TWO ... yes TWO people that were LEGAL registered RESTRICTED gun owners have gone out , thought about how to do , planned it out , and KILLED PEOPLE , for no reason , KILLED KIDS , FOR NO REASON .... really .... that's not enough reason to take away the problem? ... stupid ass thniking says "Hell no , give more people rights for guns and lets get armed guards to "protect" ... yea MAYBE scare the kids .. but for a good cause in the schools? ... wow ... I can't believe in this day and age 20 innocent CHILDREN get KILLED and you want to fight for a right to keep the same problem that KILLED them .... shame shame .... seriously ... SHAME ..... hold your heads up high .... you have a "Right To Bear Arms" ... just like the 2 idiots that KILLED all them INNOCENT people .... Hold Your Heads Up ......
Why are messages that mention the children killed via abortion deleted on this blog????
Looks like Dana tore Piers a new one tonight. It would have been even worse, if he had allowed her to answer more of the questions.
LMAO ... seriously that's what you seen?? LMAO ... simple "YES or NO" questions .. and never answered ... lol ... wow ..interpretation ....
Peirs keeps saying 90 to 100 rounds in a minute. Anyone own an AR-15? Will it really do that without overhead and failure?
No, it will not.
If Dana Loesch and Scottie Hughes kids were riddled to death with AR 15 bullets. Would they want them baned.
The chances of being "riddled with AR15 bullets" is minute. They are more likely to be killed by a car. Should we ban them?
NO. Cars are not designed to kill people.
Cars were not made to "kill". They were made to drive. Yes, they can cause death, but they were not made and intended for death. Guns are made to "kill". Yes, they were created to hunt and to protect, by killing.
Yea tell that to the parents of 20 children KILLED @ SandyHook ..... wow .... shame
You are comparing apples to oranges. Should we ban planes, trains, swimming pools, the list could go on and on. Get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is sad. Unfortunately, there are plenty of these people out there.
Dana Loesch admitted she owned an AR-15, and with a knowing gleam in her eye, asked Piers if he ever fired one. So, where does Dana exercise her right to bear this particular weapon, and what capacity of magazine would she engage? Where does she use this weapon, and how much training does she participate in? Does she have a clue of the weapons through target penetration power, and beyond? Is she capable of maintaining control and retention of this weapon from someone that would take it from her and use it violently? Where would she set it after she grows weary of toting it around? Or, does she just fondle it at home because to merely say she has one and has fired it, gives a certain pleasure?
So, I say if people that have a certain glint in their eye for the thrill of shooting and bearing a military style assault weapon and can carry it around as they see fi; then I must say I feel I should carry one too out of fear they are not stable. I frankly don't trust Dana's judgement nor other citizens to understand if a situation required them to unleash the deadly power of said weapon. I don't trust their judgement of targetting or efficiency – not to mention the possibility that they, like nearly any human being haves the potential to snap mentally and use that weapon in a reckless or hostile manner, no matter how remote that possibility may be. If we all begin to fear others who legally obtain deadly firearms and exercise their right to carry or bear them wherever and whenever, and do so collectively as an armed population; then at what point does one crazy occurence unleash a chain reaction of insanity, whereby all these legally armed people legally bearing arms become mass confused, hysterical, and unhinged in a pandimonium of vigliante militia cluster#*&^?
Entertaining post, i got a good laugh out of your BS. You talk about Dana Loesch knowledge of firearms but clearly point out she has more than Piers who has zero, how can a person who has zero knowledge about firearms go on tv and spew their bs about them? His one and only argument he ever has is that his country banned firearms and removed them from the citizens, which then led to criminals having free reign. I could take him a bit more serious if he came up with something other than that as his main point.
I wonder if Dana carries her AR-15 around for protection??
Very well said. I couldn't agree more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not support guns and I think it is a shame that are so violent and paranoid as a country that we feel the need to own more weapons that are society are handled to equip. That being said, I am interested in listening to those on the other side to have a pure debate. While I appreciate Piers pushing the debate, it is not a debate when he continues to interrupt and talk over people than has different opinions than his own. Disgraceful.
I like how people try and say the threat that our firearms are going to be taken away caused people to go out and buy AR15 rifles(they aren't technically assault weapons by definition without modifications) when it was the governments threat to ban caused people to go out and buy them before they could not buy them any longer. Also we don't live on an island like his home country, we have borders where criminals can easily smuggle illegal firearms into the country along with their drugs and humans, the bans only work on people who are willing to obey the law.
If we cared about the children we would stop killing our unborn. 1.2 million die each year. 1.2 million never make it out of the womb. 1.2 million never get to see their parents. 1.2 million never get to see their high school graduation. 1.2 million never get to offer their opinion. The liberals are the issue. The lax social standards they have imposed over the past 50 years has degraded our morals and values. Maybe bring back standards, that you just dont get a medal because you played a sport. That it is ok to flunk a class, that it is ok to not make the team. Then teach our kids while in their failures how to grow from the disappointment. Our kids dont know how to function or handle disappointment. We have a mental health issue that needs to be looked at from all angles to include the spiritual side too.
Please remember the 1.2 million unborn babies that probably would love to have had a gun when the doctor started sucking them up in the vacuum. Lack of self defense allows you to be killed.
I actually like Piers Morgan, which is why I watch his show. I'll admit he isn't giving his opponents a fair opportunity to respond to his questions. And I'll admit his knowledge of weaponry is not impressive. But what draws me to his show is his passion. If he would just admit that he has no clue about guns, would that make all of you happy? Those of you who apparently dislike Piers but still watch his show. I think his mission (which I love) is that he wants "something" to happen so that Sandy Hook does not happen again. If there were no mass shootings like Aurora and Sandy Hook, I doubt Piers would be devoting so much time to his gun control debates. But they DID happen and he is trying his best to make people aware that something needs to change. Piers is a father...What parent wouldn't agree that somethings needs to change for the safety of our children.
The peoples arguments are so far fetched they would make the Pope yell. Get real people, your 2nd Amendment is not in danger, just some restraints on what kind of weapon you can own. If the fore farthers could have looked into the future and saw the types of weapons that are available today, you can be sure the 2nd would have different wording. The arms they intended for people to own were black powder weapons, a far cry from what is availlable today.
youtube /watch?v=H6fvFVVEG5Q its interesting watching how the media has everyone fighting. guns/no guns. rep/dem, lib/con. gee dont you sheep see that this is what its designed to do???? you fail as long as you sit in that left/right, red/blue mindset!
Many of the assault weapons owner/ advocates claim it is their right under the second amendment to 1) own a weapon of their choice for the purpose to defend or protect their selves.their family and their property. My question for them would be, "what are the statistics for those type of gun owners who have actually defended their home, family or them selves using this particular type of gun" and 2) on the other end of the scale how many owners have used hand guns to comply with the 2nd amendment to achieve the same goal? I think the statistics on the use of assault weapons being used for protection of ones home, family and property is going to be extremely small compared to the number of those guns sold! So what are the owners using them for and what is their intention? I don't recall the 2nd amendment stating that you have the right to own a particular weapon of any type for the purpose of target shooting or hunting but I could be way out to lunch on that one. To suggest that they purchased these assault weapons to use them against their own government should the government turn against them and they purchased them now, tells me they assume that they believe the US government is going to turn on them in their lifetime. If they are saying that, in the same lifetime they are preparing to use these weapons against American citizens working for the government i.e. the military maybe we should stop worrying about interpreting the 2nd amendment and start worrying about acts of treason( treason.....according to the Oxford Dictionary) against the US Government and their employees/citizens. I watched an interview today with a man who not only is a gun advocate but is even against restricting clips to ten rounds. He went on to say that, he hadn't heard from anyone who was ever in a gun fight that they were carrying too much ammunition. My question to him would be, how many people do you know that were ever in a gun fight. Another thought, there is currently no ban on assault weapons but to limit the number of rounds per clip. I've got to ask, if one uses this type of weapon to defend a home or family and one appears brandishing such a weapon, do you think the assailant/burglar is going to check to see how big the clip is or do you think it is the gun itself that is the deterrent? I think it would be the exception rather than the rule where a clip holding more than 10 rounds would ever be needed in a home environment so why run the risk to to create carnage in the public arena and simply approve the ban on those types of clips. Certainly you couldn't classify shooting any kind of wild game as a sport if you are using a 100 round clip through an automatic or a converted semi-automatic weapon. Where's the sport?! The same applies to target shooting, certainly we can't be so lazy that we can't stop after 10 rounds and reload!?There is a fine line between wants and needs as I see it, your gun advocates needs are being met 100% and your wants over 90% in any other life situation this would be an absolute win win. What I think we can all agree on this, we need our children to be able to grow up in a safe environment and become law abiding adults and we don't want our children to grow up and act like kids, be selfish or take their ball and go home. May cool heads and good logic prevail to the benefit and well being of all.
Owner of 11 rifles and shoot guns
If an intruder breaks into my house and I have 30 round clip in my AR-15, I will shoot him 30 times. End of discussion.
Oh, your one of those people. I have this many guns , so my point is more valid. And if they get the ar's and when nothing gets better unless the economy does Then its your guns ,then will you care. Or that must just be some crazy talk. And by the way they are trying to pass many Bills. One would take away almost all semi-auto firearms. And rifles shooting farther than 100yards according to Feinstein. Hope none of those are yours.
Brian, where in the 2nd amend ant does it say we need muskets; really, u have never shot, hunted or lived in the country. You have no nderstanding of half the country, and should stay where u are
Nothing better than watch piers get his ass handed to him by two (2) educated women who answered his questions but spun him up when they didn't like his answer.
BTW Piers – You CAN buy a tank in America. You can't buy a tank in Briton becuase it ISN'T AMERICA. The cannon (which you can also buy in America) is de-miled, but with the proper paper work and fees from ATF youcan have a tank with a live cannon. Nuclear weapons you dolt are controled under U.S. Laws and international treaty.
I dont know what show you were watching but the one i was watching, he did not have nothing handed to him, these two 'educated' woman went on and made complete fools of themselves, they sounded retarded and did not make a single valid point, nor have a single ounce of common sense, I almost had to laugh at them except this is no laughing matter, and we the ppl are tired of all the senselss killing.
I used to watch Pierce regularly but I l don't any more because I am tired of him thinking England is so much superior to the US. I will never watch his show as long as he continues his talk about guns in the US. I support gun control but I don't want to hear it from someone who is not a US citizen. Gene Purser
First of all, Piers Morgan I will give you a reason why people "need" an AR-15. This is America, not Europe. The role that guns play in our civilization is strictly subjective from one person to the next: I especially understand that you Piers have a problem with this since you have an European accent. But let's focus on the objective, the second amendmant states our right to bear arms. Therefore, an American who is competant and capable has the right to subjectively "need" any gun they want with any clip or drum that they prefer. I have a question for you Piers, after 9/11 did America pass a law to make airplanes smaller? After O.J's case did we decide to make "glove" laws?
why do all you gun lovers sound retarded??? the 2nd admendment does not say you can have any gun you want, or you would have hand held missle launchers, m16s fully auto, and hand Grenades. but you dont, because the same admendment says 'well regulated' Society through its elected leaders decide how to 'well regulate' and america is speaking out and over 55% want more regulation, this is a demacracy so the will of the ppl is what is important, and 77% want banning of assult riffles and high volume mags. so let the will of the ppl be done!!!
And kamakaz68, no afence but when I was talking about doing things soley based on emotion you are doing just that. It is good to have a position on the matter , and to be passionate . But look at all the info at your finger tips, and not just google, fact check. the 2nd Amendment says we can have the tools that the Government would use on its citizens.Not nukes or anything ridiculous. I'm not even talking about automatic weapons. An ar-15 is weaker than a deer rifle. It looks evil to some I guess. But people only like it because it is so customizable, form person to person.
The M16A2, or AR-15, has a muzzle velocity of 975 meters per second. It shoots the 5.56x45mm NATO round
The M16 Assult riffle, Muzzle velocity: 2,800 feet (853 meters) per second
so you are wrong the ar-15 has basically the same velocity as a M16, and with just a little effort can be converted to full automatic, making it effectivly the same as a M16 ASSULT Riffle, the ar-15 is an attack riffle
AR-15 can shoot surplus NATO rounds and then you get the same terminal ballistics. The terminal ballistics of the M-16 is FAR below any standard hunting rifle. The only thing that makes an assault rifle is the number of rounds it can shoot without a reload. If they push a bill for magazines only, it might pass, but the assault weapons ban will not because it is stupid legislation.
You guys never post my stuff, perhaps make I make the most intelligent arguments that you can't bear for anyone to hear. But here goes anyway:
While these 2 women tried, their answers were not sufficient enough for me perhaps because Piers was talking over them. Here's the bottom line about his question which is: "If we truly want to fight our govt should it become tyrannical, why don't we demand tanks or nukes?"
Ok, here's the answer. Number 1: it's not that we are trying to deter a tyrannical regime by owning guns with the threat that we may someday fight against that regime. It's that by protecting ourselves with these guns, we are less inclined to delegate that protection to the govt. A 9/11 call is TOO late. If we delegate that protection to the govt, govt will have a tendency to abuse that control that you gave to them. THAT is what deters a tyrannical regime. Each time we delegate our protection to the govt, we incur a liberty lost. Case in point, the TSA groping us, the Patriot Act violating our privacy, the NDAA detaining you without due process...the list goes on and on. Take responsibility and defend yourself, and stop delegating to govt.
NUMBER 2: with regard to tanks and nukes. We have tanks and nukes, and the Iraqis had guns...and managed to drag out an insurgency for over 10 YEARS despite our vastly superior military. The bottomline is, if you have an armed populace you cannot easily gain control of them. Nuking them is not gaining control of them, it's killing all of them. A regime cannot exist without the participation of its people. If you kill everybody then where is your source of power? Hence, you will try to control them with guns, not tanks or nukes. And the rebuttal to that is for citizens to own guns, not tanks or nukes. Capice?
Your post did get posted although I see why they wouldnt. This is just as ignorant as any other gun lover post. It has no base in reality or common sense. You will not deter the best military in the world, not that it would come to that. They do not have to nuke you, they can attack with precision strikes as they did in irac, which I was there in active duty in the military. And the first golf war was over before you could blink an eye because of our vast superiority over their military, so all that is nonsense, that you are talking about, you are using a political more than military event which is why it dragged on.
Tell me sir how our you going to shoot a missile down with your little guns? Soldiers do not need to come to your door and fight gun vs gun with our military. So your ideas are not rooted in reality.
The question isn't about whether someone should have (or want) a Tank. The question is where to draw the line?
Clearly, I should be able to own a shot gun for duck hunting, and a rifle for deer hunting. I should be able to have a pistol for personal protection. But, should I be able to own a surface to air missile to shoot down a Russian spy plane (just defending my country)?
So, should I be able to buy a surface to air missile? If not, why not?
If the government allows anyone to buy a surface to air missile, that would certainly slow down commercial air travel. So, a reasonable person would likely conclude that sort of "arms" (second amendment term) should be restricted.
If a surface to air missile is banned for personal use, why not ban a semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round magazine?
I’m with Krombacher.
Somehow many of you think “fight against tyranny” only means an all-out war between the government and the citizenry... civilians are no longer any match for the military force even with assault weapons, what’s the point, eh? …Wrong! Tyrannical leaders do not want public outcry, much less International attention, if the International community notices what they’re doing, they have very little chance in succeeding. If any government (especially among major democratic countries) used a tank or bomb against their own people, you can imagine that other countries are going to know it almost immediately, right? (Even Communist China couldn’t hide it.) Do you think the government can give the world a persuadable enough justification for it? If something like that happened in the US, do you think England, France, Germany, Italy, India, South Korea, Canada, (not sure about Russia and China) will just stand idly by and watch?? So, unless the government can do it without other countries knowing, tyranny won’t stand a chance in succeeding. If the majority of the populace stands up with powerful firearms, there is no way for the government to suppress it without causing huge commotion. This would suffice to sound the alarm, letting the world know that we are in trouble and needing their help. This is why, still today, well-armed citizenry is a strong deterrence against tyranny.
Piers, as I watch your show I think to myself, "why invite people on the show and give them equal time to debate their thoughts when they don't share equal sentiments." They're there to blur the line and murk the waters with straw men and to distract people from the real argument. You would think that with their views they would be immediately discounted as narrow minded and I would think that too.......except...people that I know personally actually buy into this line of thought. Obama is compared to Hitler by people I'm personal friends with. Now what do I do? ...dig my heels in like they do? Sacrifice humans in the name of sport? ...Get rid of those friends? If I were you I'd be glad I wasn't part of this culture but somehow I commend you for thinking we're worth saving.
I have no sympathy for the NRA/Pro gun lobbyists that come on Piers' program. They know how they are going to be treated and they still show up in order to get some airtime to get a message out. After hearing them for a month it's time to turn off their mindless drivel, turn the tables and just have purely gun control advocates on to begin driving home the message of how the proliferation of weapons has made the country an increasingly dangerous place. To promote adding more rapid fire weapons as a counter action to rapid fire weapons is just a spiral of insanity .
so true not one gun lover has showed an ounce of intelligence or common sense, they had there time to speak and said nothing of any importance and are not even in the realm of reality, get them off the show!!
What a bunch of fools. If you disarm the citizens of this country, it will become wide open to foreign invasion and we will be absolutely helpless. It takes time to mobilize our military forces and civilians may be the only resistance regionally if we are attacked on all side. I, for one, refuse to be placed into a position of utter helplessness. I sleep very soundly at night knowing that I at least have a chance to defend myself. Yea... I may die during an attack, but at least I'll have a chance to protect my family. Get Piers Morgan off the airways. Who is this fool to promote his opinions about my country on a stage in a forum that I don't have access to. If Piers doesn't like the way this country is set up, let him leave. Try that crap in China or some other country Mr. Morgan but you won't because you know that you would be executed.
this sounds just as ignorant as all the other gun lovers rederic. IF americas forces are defeated then your little gun is not going to do nothing to save you. if our tanks and atk aircraft and missles do not deter and defeat our enemy what will your little ar15 do?? and when you run out of bullets? the movie red dawn is a make belive situation, no where close to reality. give me a break what a bunch of nonsense, does any gun lover, have a ounce of common sense? so far I have not seen any!
So, I should just raise my hands and surrender. If it's such a "little gun"... why is everyone worried about eliminating them? And whats "Red Dawn" got to do with it? Your the ignoramus!
Hey, Red Dawn was a good movie. When I heard what a little gun the AR-15 was, I ran out and got an AR-10. LOL
Sheer genius. Having Dana Loesch and Scottie Hughes to argue against stronger gun laws. You couldn't have picked two bigger idiots, except for that first lunatic Alex Jones; make a more directionless and defenseless argument on the subject. Keep up the good work Piers.
The President of the United States announced 23 Executive Orders pertaining to Gun Control/Violence while surrounded by Human Shields aka/ children, I find the following quote an appropriate analogy.
I don't care who it offends either since the truth often is offensive to certain groups of people.
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. " -Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Publ. Houghton Miflin, 1943, Page 403
in my opinion he did not do enough he should have doubled the # of exec orders and called for a ban of ALL guns. or at minimum, only allow one gun per household AND only a limited number of bullets a year, along with a complete ban on import and manufactuing of guns, and inact strict laws with harsh punishments for sales of guns are bullets.
Piers, You are the best ... keep continuing this debate untill we see meaning full gun control. All those people who propose armed guards at malls, restaurants, schools, community centers, Parks, government buildings have to explain how do we get funds to support this level of security in each and every township. At this rate at minimum we need 100 extra security personnel per town which cost $100,000*100=$10,000,000. Even after having this many security people it's not guarenteed incidents like sandy hook or colorado will not happen.The fact is 60% of the town in US are going bankrupt hence laying of Police and Fire personnel. We also carry 16 trillion debt. 48 million people are on food stamps. Taxes are at its highest. America has developed and is no1 in the world because of hard work and commitment.Even layman can understand the math here. Its not toudg to change. and My request to all conspiracy theorists Please do not change the public mind. I know you are funded by sick people to air your theories. I am telling you YOU are the loosers. Faith is most important for prosperity of any country. With out faith Its as good as living like a tree. Its as simple as banning assult wepons and controlling ammunition and strict background checks. which doesn't cost a penny to do it but firm commitment. Thich skulls Dana Loesch, Scottie Hughes and Alex are just anti social and their life is not worth living if they cannot think of society. Last but not the laeast A country is praised because of good people not because of the size of the land. If people start killing people we are all loosers including gun fanatics. Piers Please keep this debate alive.
very well stated, and control the bullets will control the crime rates. we need an immediate ban on importing bullets even online, and only sell a limited amount per family, and make it a crime with a harsh punishment to be caught selling any bullets. supply and demand will naturally cause blackmarket bullet prices to skyrocket and not be cost effiecient to kill in masses
For those of you condemning Piers Morgan because he is British and not an American citizen, please know that there are millions of us who 100% agree with Piers. We are beyond grateful that he is our voice on CNN. I know you would be condeming his thoughts even if he was an American. So stop using his British citizenship as an excuse. I would not care what nationality he was as long as he is putting up a fight for gun control. I hope he never stops.
i am one of them
Oh I don't think anyone is seriously angry with Mr Morgan because he is British. It is more a case wherein people find him laughable because he tends to distort and misrepresent facts, and when that will not fly, outright lie. Otherwise, he's an excellent, if not terribly serious, entertainer.
I am one of the "millions" that 100% agree with Piers as well.
2 or 3 looters after you because of weather would require an assault rifle with 100 round magazines for self defense.
Two or three looters who are after you because of a weather event would require an assault rifle for self defense. Who out there would skimp on equipment quality if someone were shooting at you?
Everyone who think Piers is right, as he does only on emotion and not on reason are a problem in this country. You should know violent crime and murder dropped from 1992 the last ban to this one they are trying to get. In 1992 violent crime went from 750 per 100,000 to 386 in 2011. That is a 50% drop. And murder went from 9.3 to 4.7 per 100,000. That is a drop of 54%. Why is this never talk about Piers? And you can look it up on FBI statistics. You can see that most of the crime/murder happens where there is more than 250,000 people. And that there it is double the average. Don't try the oh what about England or Austalia crap.We have 186 metro areas of over 250,000 population, England, only 32. Are stats have dropped 50% over the last 20 years , it's not getting worse it's getting better. So more guns= less crime , maybe. Are crime happens from felons or drug related. Not law abiding people. If the Government realy wanted to help , they could look at the stats and even brake it down to the level of neiborhoods. 3.5% of firearm crime was rifles and the ar-15 tiny part of that. You wanna fix this problem? Help the poor get jobs, fix the health care system the mental health. And leave the people doing things the right way the hell alone.
that is all nonsense, and it is not based solely on emotion but also common sense and truth, But at least he has emotioin over this terrible trend of tragedy and mass murder. The nra has no emotion at all !! none. they care more about gun sales than human lives, and that is fact. IT always comes down to money. The FACT is and is proven in stats, remove guns and crine rates drop drastically, will the go away competely? no. but even the lowering of one murder a year will save a family from greiving. If I were president, none of you would like me, i would ban ALL ALL ALL guns, if someone wanted to hunt, they would come to a government controled building check out a gun and a limited number of bullets and check it back in, so be glad I am not running this show,
look I'm not saying the NRA is made up of the best people in the world. But they do represent the views of the people that want there side heard, whether its told exactly or not. Im saying stop watching his show for all your info do what I did and look at it for yourself. we all care what happened to thoughs kids , i did not take a total pro gun view. I do not have a problem with background checks for all nor the info on mentaly ill or felons being updated. I unlike you would not impose my possibly wrong few on everyone. but I did try to say to check the facts for yourself.
Piers is not only A no talent hack that ran the National Enquierer and now is running bat boy stories on CNN. This is not news people its infotainment....REALITY TV TO THE HIGHEST DEGREE. And we all know reality tv is all scripted. Piers, you are not only an inept journalist by constantly misrepresenting facts and just plain downright manipulation. Everything you are is A sham. When people dont agree with you, immediately you get nasty and name call as well as harass your guests. Why dont you just go back to England? You serve no purpose here other than try to be the hatchet man for your eliteist pals. Take your smug and limey self back across the pond. You keep hiding behind the 1st amendment yet you arent A citizen. How dare you pontificate, berate and condescend to the american people while trying to subjugate them through fear mongering and falsity. You sir, should be ashamed of your actions. By blaming law abiding Americans and then trying to influence public policy through your anger fueled rants. You are not A journalist, you are an opportunist of the worst kind......just like Anton Geckas
Your comments are not exactly a lucid, well informed response to prior comments. It more like you're YELLING in the park at the pigeons. Try again with a more thoughtful position.
It was meant to be!..you got the point
my position is plain and simple and right,
I agree with yurgo.
Here’s the evidence that Piers is the worst kind of hack.
well I am an American and i think you sir are an idiot and just another part of the problem that is becoming to obvious that the whole world is seeing how bad it is getting in america. We no longer have the best education, our money is loosing value in the world market, we have no respect in the world, and we are one of the most dangereous nations with the highest crime rates. but you keep your gun and watch the country shoot it self to hell. Peirs is not the problem Americans are the problem for this American problem!!! it was not a person from England who went into the school and shot it up, or a person from England who went into the movie theater and shot it up, no it was Americans! get a life,
awakencitizens, the guy on tv representing the NRA does not care about the children, if he did he would have more respect when he talks, and show some sympothy rather than jump right into the poor gun owners being attacked, He does not even aknowledge them at all when he speaks. That is what I am talking about, not every nra member
Didn't your guy, Timothy McVey use plain old fertilizer to kill hundreds. Now there's a person who didn't want a gun at all. The futility of what this person, Morgan, has to say, smacks of agenda. He has the stage for now. Why does he hang onto his BROTHER, the military man so badly. You're joking right? The brother is in the MILITARY – hello?? Guns and War? and he cites his brother as being against gun ownership. OH right he's calmed down a bit towards just pistols now (so hypocritically). If he DOES have guards protecting him, he has NO room to talk at all. It means he and his family are safe and others should not be. See through this person please.
the new laws won't change a thing. The media and the politicicans are best salesman for guns and it is them spreading the fear and not the nra. these laws only make it harder and more expensive for the sportsman and the legal gun owners. The prices have gone up on the black market for guns. Most gun owners know if you have the money you can buy any weapon you want. Do you really think a person wanting to kill a lot of peaple is worried he has to many bullets in his magazine or if it is registered. Give me a break.
Wow I'm glad there are more people that get it. You are another breath of fresh air in this debate. You know that in 2008 the Government took 1.5 Billion out of the Mental Health Care System. They do everything to get the problem going. And our voilent crime and murder rate has gone down almost 54% 1992-2011. They don't want to see that though.
good I hope and pray bullets and guns get more expensive. Imagine if a bullet cost $1000 each, there would be a lot less murders! and probably no mass murders.
No lying Chas
About 1.4 million guns, or an annual average of 232,400, were stolen during burglaries and other property crimes in the six-year period from 2005 through 2010.
According to statistics from our Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report, January-June 2012, the number of violent crimes reported by law enforcement for the first six months of 2012 increased 1.9 percent over figures from the same period in 2011. Property crimes also rose 1.5 percent overall.
Not to mention we are one of the most violent nations in the world, and #1 in privite citizen owned guns. the # of guns corrolate with the % of violent crimes.
I did not write this although I wish i had. It was a mother from a site called Cafemom.com. I thought it was well written for the ridiculous "cars kill people analogy to guns":
With regard to the gun/car analogy, go ahead; let’s regulate guns in the same fashion that we regulate motor vehicles.
Before you can legally operate a motor vehicle you must pass a competence test. I can agree to a competence test before you can operate a gun.
There are proscribed actions that will revoke your ability to legally operate a motor vehicle should you demonstrate an inability to safely operate a vehicle. I can agree to a set process to have your access to guns restricted should you prove to be unsafe with a gun.
If you wish to operate a motor vehicle that is larger than a car (truck) or more maneuverable than a car (motorcycle) you must pass additional tests to legally operate these unique forms of transportation. I can agree to additional tests and checks if you wish to own a larger or faster gun.
Also, operators or larger vehicles such as trucks are held to a higher standard for sobriety and for how long they may legally operate their vehicle. I can agree to restrictions as to when and where you are allowed to operate specialized weapons. I can agree to higher penalties should you be found guilty of operating a weapon while under the influence of legal or illegal drugs. (Legal drugs include alcohol.)
If you wish to legally operate a motor vehicle on a public roadway you must register and pay fees to enjoy that privilege. These are often in the form or registration fees and roadway fuel taxes. I can agree to annual fees and registrations for each and every gun you own. I can also agree to fees and taxes on each individual bullet you wish to own. This could even be in the form of a stamp that could apply to a total number of live shells in your possession. That way when you use them you can transfer your tax stamp to apply to the new ammunition. If you buy enough tax stamps for 1000 shells, that is your personal limit. If you wish to have armor piercing teflon coated cop killers, the tax should be exponentially greater than the tax on a target round. Rounds purchased and used at a compliant shooting range would be tax exempt.
If you wish to operate your motor vehicle on a public roadway you need to either have valid insurance or post a bond (in some states) to reimburse a victim should your operation of a motor vehicle cause a loss to another individual or their property. I can agree to personal liability laws and mandatory insurance for each and every gun you wish to own or an umbrella policy that covers all of the guns you wish to own.
If you leave your keys in a vehicle and someone takes your vehicle and causes damage or injury, you are partially responsible for their actions because you failed to secure your vehicle. I can agree to individual liability should you fail to secure your firearms and the weapons end up in the hands of an individual who causes harm to people or property.
If a vehicle is deemed unsafe, there is a set process for forcing the manufacturer to correct that flaw and compensate those who suffered loss as a result of that flaw; it does involve the court system.
This process has guided vehicle manufacturers to constantly improve safety and crash survivability throughout the years. I can agree to a recall process for weapons that have proven unsafe in the hands of too many gun operators.
You are limited to how fast you are allowed to operate a motorized vehicle.
In some limited situations there are no speed limits.
I can go to a race driver fantasy camp and drive a formula one car if I can afford the cost of such an activity. I can agree to restrictions to how fast your weapon can fire live ammunition.
If you are at a designated facility, you should have the right to operate any capacity of gun you wish while under approved supervision.
There has been a significant amount of regulation to reduce the number of deaths as a result of the operation of motor vehicles.
We improve roads to reduce the mortality rate as a result of the operation of motor vehicles.
We restrict access to the operation of motor vehicles to reduce deaths and injuries.
If you're so attached to the car/gun analogy, fine, let's regulate them the same way!
Maybe I can agree with some of the gun regulations you suggest here, but the current administration is trying to BAN certain types of guns, so my question is, If a deranged individual steals his mother’s Porsche and drives at 150mph, collides with a school bus killing 20 children, are we gonna BAN sports cars ??? (or any car that can go faster than 80mph for that matter should be removed from the street, should they not?)
THINK THAT'S CALLED SPEED LIMITS.
But significant number of drivers fail to keep to speed limits, so we must not trust people and stop selling any fast cars, isn't that the anti-gun people' s logic? Oh, that's only about guns, but not about cars, because you don't like guns and don't need them. But you like cars and do need them. So a different set of rules apply...
Read this all you gun control folks: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/338261/do-gun-control-laws-control-guns-thomas-sowell#
The United States Of America need different personel in the street to fight this present violence that people are doing with hand guns without being a member of the law and for does people who are saying that a person have the right to defend them self with a gun without being a law personel you are 100% wrong because you are creating more of a mess by allowing that to happen now
Please do some research on "Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs)". There have been about 13 non-NRA studies on DGUs that estimate between 800,000 and 2,500,000 (depending on what study you read) instances occur each year where someone has stopped a criminal act, either from commencing or completing, with the threat of or actual use of a gun.
Why seems nobody to consider that especially in the cases where young folks run amok nearly all of them had or still have experiences with psycho active drugs that are given to so many children today when they are not children from the schoolbook? If a child today is »hyperactive« or does not pay strict attention to every word mommy says it is treated with drugs like Ritalin that have massive side effects – one of them being ANGER.
The Tories said Labour had presided over a decade of spiralling violence.
In the decade following the party's election in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77 per cent to 1.158million – or more than two every minute.
The figures, compiled from reports released by the European Commission and United Nations, also show:
The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
It has a higher homicide rate than most of our western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU.
It has the fourth highest burglary rate and the highest absolute number of burglaries in the EU, with double the number of offences than recorded in Germany and France.
But it is the naming of Britain as the most violent country in the EU that is most shocking. The analysis is based on the number of crimes per 100,000 residents.
In the UK, there are 2,034 offences per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-placed Austria with a rate of 1,677.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html#ixzz2IniThcCh
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
thank you Piers Morgan for keeping the heat on this issue.
Specially by showing how insidious their argument is by having them on and letting them talk. Last night that lady talked about arming anyone with a licsense!! Wow.
And you said it best last night. Why do we need automatic weapons that will rip a deer to shreds!! That's not hunting. Least the kind of hunting I've seen...............
Keep up the heat!!
People who may need high-capacity guns…
1. People who live near the Mexican border in order to protect themselves against Mexican gangs. Police often take more than a half hour to arrive, so how would you hold off with just 10 bullets, if there are multiple assailants?
2. People who want to be prepared if their town should go into anarchy after an atrocious disaster. We can’t always count on our government as we all saw in Katrina.
3. People who have a good sense to understand that guns are not all about killing dear.
3. People who have a good sense to understand that guns are not all about killing “deer”.
That would be "deer"
Well, if you are going to be politically correct, the should be harvesting deer. If you’re not careful, we will be banning deer hunting and some of us will go hungry.
kyackgal, Give us one good reason (logical one, I hope) why those people should't have high-capacity guns.
Once again Piers Morgan has been proceeding forward without the full amount of information. It now turns out the the Sandy Hook School shooter DID NOT have an AR15 assault rifle in the school, nor did he use the rifle at the school. All shooting was done with four hand guns according to NBC's news today. Information release by state and federal investigators. What you got to say now Piers? Go back across the pond, we have enough other liars in this country.
I watch his show for the first time and I could not believe the crap he said. He doesnt even have all the right information. I heard 3 times during his show saying a ASSAULT RIFLE WAS USED IN SANDY HOOK. HEY YOU IDIOT, DO SOME RESEARCH!!! IT WASNT USED. GO BACK TO THE UK!!!!
There should be a special tax for owning a weapon. If you choose to purchase a machine that has the potential to kill another human being, you should be charged a tax, just like car owners are charged every time they fill up and cigarette smokers are charged when they buy a pack. A tax of $1000 for a single-shooter weapon and $2500 for a multi-shooter (automatic) should be applied PER GUN PER YEAR. This will make it very expensive to own a gun or several guns. Part of the money can go into a special fund to help victims. In addition, every weapon needs to be registered and traceable back to the owner. If your gun is involved in a murder, whether you committed the crime or not, you are still responsible and you go to jail, minimum 10 years. This will make it a priority for gun owners to keep guns safely stored and out of the hands of children and those intending to do harm. Money and prison are powerful considerations to ponder when deciding to own a killing machine.
Piers Morgan grandstands about Assault Rifles even though ONLY hand Guns were used at Sandy Brook? Check the facts here is a link http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495 to the Today Show explaining just that, the AR type rifle at the school was left in the car... But as far as Piers is concerned TRUE FACTS ARE NOT NEEDED. If this is the type of reports that CNN supports they need to be put out of business!!!
So grateful for the way you are standing up to the gun people. Kudos to you for the way Newt came across. You had him flustered an d looking ridiculous.
it is time to ban CNN and this Awful show. it is not a true real discussion with your overtallking and cutting off the people you have on the show. I sometimes wonder while watching this show why you even invite people on, it you only want to rant your political in the presidents pockets views and never let the others speak. INSTEAD OF BANNING SEMI AUTOMATIC weapons maybe the PEOPLE should speak up and BAN YOU
the NRA's Wayne Lapier lied to us recently saying that back ground checks dont work and law enforcement isnt getting the criminals. Fact in last 10 years back groud checksred flaged and denied 2.5 million people from obtaining guns. in fact in 1994 congressional testifed staetment wayne Lapier said I quote " Back ground checks need to be imposed on all gun holders as a way for Law enforcement to weed out the criminals and allow every american the right to legally obtain a gun for defense against crime. Look it up on google, I seen it with my own eyes coming out of his mouth. And my does he look so much younger but just as ignorant . Type Lapiere 1994 congressional legislation hearing on gun reform and or gun back ground checks speech. what a hippocrit.
Guns don't kill people, Bullets do.
Let's take a step back look at this logically.
Gun's don't kill people, bullets do.
Without bullets a gun is just a fancy stick.
I have to provide my drivers license to get over the counter cold & sinus medication for my family to in order protect society from the possibility that this cold & sinus medication could potentially be used to convert Pseudoephedrine into methamphetamine;
Why shouldn't people who buy bullets need to provide their drivers license to protect the society from being killed with bullets?
Forget the NRA. Stop arguing over the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms. Stop talking about GUN control.
The US sells Pseudoephedrine only in pharmacies and Louisiana requires the purchaser to provide their Drivers License. This is done for a substance that can only cause harm in society if a rather arduous (and stinky) process is used to converted it to crystal meth.
So why not sell ammunition at registered locations (the equivalent of pharmacies) and require a Drivers License to buy the ammunition. All someone with a bullet has to do is put it in the gun; no processing required. And we know BULLETS KILL PEOPLE.
Notify me of new comments via email.