READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
On Tuesday evening, "Piers Morgan Tonight" welcomed a live studio audience along with a full collection of guests to discuss the most important topics on the mind of Americans as President Barack Obama begins his new term in office.
At the top of the program, Piers Morgan discussed the news of the day including a new school shooting, this time at the North Harris campus of Lone Star College where three people including a school maintenance worker were injured.
Morgan spoke to Lone Star college student and EMT trainee Mark Zaragoza who, while treating the injured, realized he was caring for one of the shooters.
"When we got to the front of the campus, I found out that one of the gentlemen that I was trying to treat wounds on was the suspected shooter," said Zaragoza.
Later, author Suzanna Hupp joined the program and voiced her staunch support for gun ownership by using the argument of suicide.
"You are not going to bring down suicide numbers by having less guns," said Hupp. And when Morgan pointed out the statistic that "in countries like Australia, where they brought in strict gun control the suicide rate involving guns plummeted," Hupp simply responded, "Well, suicide rate involving guns, yes. But not suicides."
Watch the clips and listen to the interview as Hupp argues that a gun is "something that puts me on equal footing with gang members."
» Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Twitter
» Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
Piers you continue to mislead your audience with statistics. Compared to its Western European neighbors gunless Britain has the highest murder rate. Globally the Swiiss, Germans and Fench are the 3rd, 4th and 5th largest gun owning nations in the world. The Swiss own on a pet capita basis nearly 8 times as many guns as your fellow countrymen, the British, and the Germans and French nearly 5 times as many, and yet the per capita homicide rates in these countries is nearly 40% lower. If we subscribe to your notion that more guns mean more crime these countries would have significantly higher homicide rates than Britain, but they don’t.
I thank you for your continuing effort to disclose Morgan's deliberately-misleading so-called "facts".
Ichiro, not Suzuki, the question is: "WHY DO WE CONTINUE TO HAVE TO RELY ON GUNS TO MAKE OUR POINTS FOR US? WHY DO WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO SLAUGHTER ONE ANOTHER? WE CAN GATHER GUNS AND BARRICADE OURSELVES IN LIKE SO MANY SURVIVORS IN ROAD WARRIORS, BECAUSE WE HAVE THE LAST OIL RESERVES, BUT WE PURPORT OURSELVES TO BE BETTER THAN THAT! SO WHY ARE WE ACTING LIKE WE "ARE" NO BETTER? AND WE CALL OURSELVES, "CIVILIZED"?
Eric, I have no idea what you are screaming about. Can you put together a bit more coherent statement?
Got to hand it to Piers Morgan for intelligantly unmasking Dane loesches fallacy and false intellegance about any issues in the american peoples agenda and News Worthy. ( my opinion ) Dana makes up and falsely twists the topic to anothertopic way out of outerspace , actually where her brain is. Lets put a listick comparment on a gun for her and a mirror for her forehead tokeep checking that smile of hers when we debate serious safety concerns for our children. Not that she can shoot a gun!
Really ol chap, you got your facts straight dont you! Pick any issue you can think of and i'll or anyone else can spin that topic of yours to make it sound good in our favor. Now put that topic with real commonsense and no Bull s*^t and real facts will trump both arguements and reveal the true answers that cant be denied. Keep up the Fallacies mate! bye CR
What's happening in Britain is not BS, it's widely reported in the British media and the statistics and numbers are available from a plethora of sources including the UN, Home Office for England and Wales and the respective reporting bodies for Scotland and NI. Google, UK named most violent country in the EU!
Gun Murders vs. Terrorism by the Numbers
Cost of the War on Terror since 9/11: $5 trillion
Number of Americans killed in domestic terrorist attacks, 2002-2011: 30
Number of Americans murdered by firearms, 2000-2011: 115,997
Wake up you morons.... You are your worst enemy.
Quite so but maybe you need to ask the question why are some countries more violent than others. Britain has a virtual gun ban and yet has one of the highest violent crime rates in the western world. In fact it's overall violent crime rate is higher than this country's.
oh, you missed one...
Number of Americans killed in CAR ACCIDENTS 1999-2010: 486,251
(data for 2011 was not yet available on the website of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, so I added the data from 1999 instead. )
Yes, we should wake up. Cars are much more dangerous than guns.
number of americans not killed during the same period 2000-2011: 3,432,000,000
Which translates into a .000034 % chance of you being murdered with a firearm, if you're wealthy and live on the good side of town you need to add 4 zeros to that. The chances you will be murdered with a assault rifle is 0.0000000323426573. You've got a better chance of being struck by lightening.
You basically want to disarm 60 million people because there is a .000034% that someone is going to get killed. You're willing to give government the total monopoly on violence, and rely soley on them to protect you. Where are the police in the aftermath of a disaster – ask the folks in NOLA.
Tell that to all the rich kids families who died in Connecticut, or over by columbine, or at that mall in Oregon. Clearly this is an issue that doesn't just affect the "bad parts of town". We've seen mass killings in every part of society now, including a movie theater.
eric, then please do tell me why we can’t protect ourselves against vicious gang members with powerful weapons.
what makes you say that
Hi cr, if we are talking about firearm related death wouldn't it make sense to compare stats for fire arm related deaths? UK is very low and USA is very high according to Wikipedia.
You have to look at the overall homicide rates. Homicide is homicide, whether it is by gun, knife or in Piers' case a cricket bat. Citing the gun murder rate is skewed because the Brits own very few guns. It's probably fair to say that more Brits have been killed by crickets bats than Americans. A better comparison is to look at some of Britain's Western European neighbors, many of whom are the largest gun owning nations on the planet. As I mentioned above the Swiss own nearly 8 times as many guns, on a per capita basis, than the Brits, and the Germans and French own nearly 5 times the number, but yet the overall homicide rates in these three countries is nearly 40% lower than the Brits. I reiterate this point, if we subscribe to the notion that more guns mean more crime these countries should have per capita homicide rates that are significantly higher than tha Brits, but they don't!
Yea, that’s like saying it doesn’t matter if you are knifed to death or clubbed to death, as long as you are not shot to death. That doesn’t make sense to me at all...
I didn't say anything of the sort. I think you need to re read my post.
No, cr, I said it to Ros, I'm agreeing with you.
Hi CR, so we can agree that UK stats are skewed as in the UK there are less firearms, which shows that less firearms means less firearm related death. I don't subscribe to there being a direct correlation between the number of firearms available and overall crime rates, there are way too many variables. The debate is about how to reduce deaths due to firearms and the answer may be to be to reduce the number of firearms available.
According to Wikipedia France, Switzerland and Germany have higher rates of firearm related death than UK too.
Do you think that a mass murderer would choose another weapon if there was no gun available? Do you think a murderer could kill more than 20 people with a cricket bat? I think guns are attractive to weak minds as a symbol of power and control over others.
I think that if a gun is used in a suicide, the victim thinks it will look "romantic" and be more accepted, also by him. Suicide by any other means seems more tragic or stupid or senseless. The gun makes it more acceptable, unfortunately, even the NRA encourages the view that the gun is macho, etc.
Where there are more tall buildings the rate of suicide doesn't go up, but the rate of suicide from tall buildings goes up.
Tall buildings have sealed windows airhead.
I very much appreciate that you have taken up the issue of guns. It's got me tuning in, but last night when you talked about climate change I was stunned to see your response and the response from most of the panel was that climate change is kind sorta happening, and I'm not sure how big of a problem it is. Piers you and your panel need to get with it! Climate change is here for sure, and a huge, huge problem. I hope you keep talking about guns, but I hope you can eventually take up the cause of climate change as it's truly the largest problem we all face in the U.S., and around the world. We are all individually the cause and the solution.
Sorry, but the economy (global, not just US) cannot currently afford to "go green".
As much as I'd like to see it happen so that our children and grandchildren can have a planet on which to live... It's just not going to happen.
Thanks for replying. I think for some reason people think climate change means this. If we don't address climate change it won't hurt the economy. Well the exact opposite is true if we don't do anything about climate change. It will cost us much much much more than not doing anything about it. The Sandy storm we now know was a climate change induced event as the oceans where it was birthed were 5 degrees warmer than normal. That energy helped to make Sandy the most energy intensive storm the US has ever seen, and the highest storm surge NYC had every seen was 7 feet, when Sandy hit it was 11feet. Sandy was a very expensive storm, and I think what most people fail to recognize is as climate change continues to get worse we'll have to invest more and more money into protecting areas that are at risk. The east coast, florida, and the gulf are especially at risk. So if you want the economy to do better in the future we need to start doing something about climate change. Thanks – e
I'm wondering if Piers will comment on the fact that a rifle was not used at Sandy Hook, even though most of us that cared to delve into the information ourselves knew this fact already. Seems like you and your team would be able to find this info too. Pushing our own agenda a bit?
what would you call that BushMiller/Meister rifle (previously sold at Walmart) that was used by the killer to execute those children (with so many shots that their little caskets could not be open for the parents to see them–geesh
Cat, I guess you, along with Mr Morgan, really need to update your information, here it is right from MSNBC news.
NO RIFLE WAS USE AS PER THE CORNER, ONLY PISTOLS
What I'd like to know is how is the administration going to accommodate legitimate competive shooting sportsmen and women in any new law?
Shooting sports are more than just hunting.
There isn't going to be any new laws. Look at the voting records of the current House and Senate. Not even close to getting any of these new bills passed. All for show.
The other week New York passed the most stringent laws in the nation and legislated many legimate competive shooting disciplines into extinction. The Governor and senate committee that brokered the deal didn't even bother to consult the various bodies that represent these shooting disciplines.
New York has always been way left and they keep electing those far left people. The people need to send those politicians home. If the majority of the people in New York agree with it, then relocation is the only option. I was talking about the federal government not doing anything. The Senate remembers the last time they voted a gun ban that also didn’t work. We sent them home. If the New York politicians have the support, good for them. If not? They will get a surprise. Truth is New York seems to favor gun control.
for the senator that was attacking Sec of State Clinton–think this over - a few weeks back all those children and adults were executed by a rampaging gunman that we couldn't stop here in the USA–how can we know everything about every U.S. Embassy office in each country? DUH DUH DUH
Maybe if the State Dept. would spend it's budget on embassy security instead of "greening" our embassies in Europe, we wouldn't be in this situation.
I'm wondering why Susan Rice, who Barack Obama claimed had nothing to do with Benghazi, appeared on all those Sunday shows. Where was Hillary? Did she not want to go on and spew those false talking points, as it might affect her run for the Presidency in 2016?
So Hillary wants us to look forward and not dwell on the past. She might want to talk to her buddy, Barack, about that. It's been 4 years, and he's still whining about George Bush. Dems also didn't want to look forward when it came to Iraq.
I so agree with Piers about gun control, BUT let others have their opinions. You cut off the lady who opposed your opinion last night. Hey, you cut Dan Rather off. When I I tune into CNN I expect to be able to hear differing opinions. I want my point of view to be challenged. I was so disappointed last night that I turned off my tv and went to bed. Hope you get over the flu soon!
Piers I saw your inauguration coverage. You were moving & dancing to Madonna's song "Everybody"! I thought you didn't like Madonna right? You're banning Madonna on your show correct? If so I don't think you should've danced to Madonna's song!
Please Republicans, stop trying to ambush the recent events by blaming Democrats. Reposition your party for 2016 and look realistically without party platforms to the problems that address America today: Newtown and reformed gun laws that will really make a difference, Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and her honesty in what she knows, Immigration reform, tax reform. Stop stonewalling America for your re-election interests. And, please CNN, give us informed objective guests who have remarks and commentary that fit the needs of America without their party interest.
Mom of 20 years in Newtown, CT
The will of the people MUST rise above the will of the NRA. Now is the time. I'm so sorry for the loss in your community Beth. We have the power to change things, the question is, have we elected anyone in Congress with enough backbone to stand up for the people instead of the gunmakers. I think the NRA has become a group of fantatics who could care less that these guns are being turned on our own citizens. 6 and 7 year olds will never be allowed to carry guns, so they are counting on us to protect them, preferably with laws that remove the 2nd amendment altogether. With the most powerful and expensive military in the world, we no longer have a need for it. And the "militia" that the 2nd amendement refers to is clearly not "well-regulated". You can't have a mass shooting without a gun. American citizens should not be required to give up our right to life or health care privacy so that people can have guns in this country.The guns need to go. All of them.
Okay… if you could instruct me as to how I should protect my family including a 5-year-old if two Mexican gang members should bust into my house, I would truly appreciate it.
Please give me a step-by-step foolproof instruction of how I should hold off two armed men until police arrive (in my area, sometimes it can take 30min.), I’ll forever be in your debt for your wisdom.
First of all, it's "fewer" guns. I'm a proponent of less ignorance. We've been a country for 237 years, and all I want to know is, "Why do we need so many guns to protect ourselves in the "best" country in the world, the one with the "best" form of government? Why are so many people being killed/ Why do we need these automatic weapons to "protect" ourselves if this is the best form of government? The answers are myriad. Can't we do better than this? The fact that we have so much going for us, yet choose settle for what we have to lose makes me ashamed of what we have chosen to be. I think we can do better.
Piers, why aren't you or anyone else asking the most obvious question – Where is the regulation of the "well-regulated militia" that is referred to in the 2nd Amendment? Who is doing the regulation? The 2nd Amendment doesn't hint at self-protection or hunting. It's about protecting our country. If everyone is going to walk around with a gun in their hand to protect the country, then I want my tax money returned since we obviously have no need for the US Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines or Coast Guard – all of which actually ARE well-regulated.
Quit lying Piers, the AR-15 wasn't even used:
Hi James, the officials advise that a bushmaster .223 rifle was used. I think I will take the word of the officials. You guys have no credibility.
James T: You must be a related to George Bush. Where is the WMD?
Hickory Dickory controdictory DANA LOESCH is with her positions on every answer or debate she speaks or tries to Defend. The Spawn of HItlers daughter ( my opinion, just sayin ) is so fake and manufactured form the doners of probably the NRA to her Radio show to insight hate and division ( again my opinion ) to all the live radio and TV interviews she says. I thought I might have lost a little respect for Piers wasting our time having her on the show intead of senator and congressmen of both sides, But thank you so much for the comical intertainment form Dana Loesch during the ppainful topic of slaughter of innocense by guns and the Way we pass new legislation to ban the semi-automatic weapons in america! Love to see her trip up every word and defense, No substance.
I would love to debate Piers Morgan about guns. Clearly he knows nothing about weaponry and the use of semi-automatic firearms. I have sold weapons, have friends who are in the business of manufacturing firearms, currently I sell tooling to firearms manufacturers, and am a semi-avid hunter. I am also not like some of the gun nut crazies he has had on his show and who cannot defend their positions without getting overly emotional. I realize this probably makes me exempt from talking with him, as he seems to like talking over guests with whom he disagrees. Mostly, I would like to educate him on why reasonable people have a legitimate reason to own the consumer versions of weapons fashioned after military type rifles.
I have not yet heard a convincing argument as to why the implementation of stricter traffic laws shouldn't take the precedence over that of stricter gun laws. It is surprising to me that the anti-gun people who are so concerned about public safety would turn a blind eye to the road safety issue. Car accidents kill over 30,000 people every year.
Perhaps we should lower speed limits by half and quadruple fines, ban eating behind the wheel, make anyone who knowingly lets drunk people drive be criminally charged, punish phone users just as severely as DUI drivers, etc…
It’s not fair to pick on responsible gun-owners as if they are selfish for not agreeing with new gun laws which may do more harm than good. Especially when we are willing to ignore automobile-related deaths and injuries because we don’t want stricter traffic laws imposed on ourselves even we may save thousands of lives. How’s that for being selfish?
It doesn't make me feel any better if my child was not gunned down, but killed by a careless driver. The latter possibility is 3 times higher, I, for one, want to see something gets done about it. Why on earth aren't we having heated national discussions over it? Why isn't Mr. Morgan hosting shows after shows after shows inviting traffic experts and talking about it??
I’m not a gun enthusiast. On the contrary, I've never owned a gun. But I strongly support the Second Amendment. Some people do need high capability guns to protect their lives.
Another thing a lot of people are missing is that the USA is the most heavily medicated nation on earth. There is a connection between these shootings and psychiatric precription drugs. Nobody seems to have the will to take on the powerful pharma industry over this.
Assault Weapons Ban
Q. Piers, do you know what targeting system the British regimes and Canada are using to target their citizens with focused radar and ultrasound in their own homes?
radioactive isotopes, thermal imaging, .. , ?
Piers, I agree with you on gun control, I record and watch your show every day. But, stop interrupting your guests every time you ask them a question! It is rude, embarrassing (for you) or it should be! You have experience, are a professional, so act like one! You interrupted Dan Rather for goodness sake! Show some respect, I appreciate that some of the individuals that are on your show are complete delusional idiots, and many don't want to hear their drivel, but non the less, let them hang themselves completely without interruption from you! you are afforded a great opportunity to discuss and debate serious issues, so do it.
Two or three nights ago you were talking to a lady who approved of guns, her parents ha been shot or some such. She said that there are more murders were guns were prohibited, these people believe the stories of the NRA so it is sort of unfair to get cross with them for their obtuseness in defending guns, they have swallowed a lot of false facts.
Recently, I was talking about how the financiers got us into the financial mess we are in to a taxi driver and he objected that financiers have been to universities, as if that made people infallible. It is hard for many people to disrespect the choices of those who have been to university and who wear suits, which is one good reason to educate everyone, when you have been to university your respect for other people who have got a degree too gets diminished. Also, people believe well heeled people in suits, it is not for nothing that the right wing all look so well heeled and well dressed.
When other groups of people, also with degrees, try to show up such as the NRA, then there starts to be a confusing exchange of opposing facts that does not clear up the case at all.
I used to think that people in suits could be believed because if they lied other dignataries would put things straight but I have learnt that when people try to point out that somone else is falsifying reality, then the falsifiers just say the person who is trying to put things straight is the lier and there is a back and forth that creates a tremendous muddle of information for non experts to try to navigate their way through.
I think the general public should be made aware of this so that they try to use their own heads and memories instead of trusting to the heads and memories of besuited people with university degrees. I dont mean to disrespect education, I totaly approve of masses of education but knowing facts does not make you a straight person or even, always, a sensible one.
Talking of how the financiers got us into this mess with the debt backed securities bubble, all debt, greek government debt and iclandic bank debt backed securities, student loans and credit card debt, not just mortgages, so not a housing bubble, as so many find it useful to pretend but a debt backed securites bubble in the bonds markets, the english priminister is calling for more freedom of the financial sector to allow them he says to make money unhampered. He is conveniantly forgetting that freedom of the financial sector allowed them to go crazy and pull our whole world down and their own except they cunningly got themselves bailed out. Incredible how good these big business men are at defending their position in all weathers, it reminds me of the whitch baba yaga who rode in a pestle and swept up her tracks with a bessum whatever that is and however its spelt, the whitchy and wizard like go along accompanied with an extremly skillful set of tactics for deflecting attention from their faults, sweeping up their tracks as they go, they bring down the world and then pretend it was too much help to the poor that broke us and we swallow it, at least half of them time, probably more like three quarters. rose macaskie madrid
Q. Piers, what do you know of criminal harassment networks, organized crime, assaulting citizens from neighbouring homes, public place, and at the court houses with energy assault weapons, powerful radar, aimed at inflicting deadly cancers through bone marrow damage, cell damage, leukemia, lung cancer, etc, in British regimes and Canada that advocate gun control and claim to have a low homicide rate?
And their links to the basic human rights violations in the criminal code and the British regime police, "secret police", ?
School Safety and Protecting Our Children
Q. Piers, organized crime has identified a vulnerability that they can attack through acts of terror, our child and schools. Do you believe that our children need to be protected from organized crime acts of terror?
Organized crime acts of terror to advocate gun control, a defenseless population.
Terrorism and Organized Crime Acts of Terror
Terrorists target planes and trains because they are a target that includes many people who are vulnerable, organized crime is targeting schools for the same reasons. The solution was not to ban air travel or trains, or disarm people from protecting themselves from terrorists, this would be what terror regimes do.
Hello colleagues, its fantastic piece of writing regarding educationand fully defined, keep it up all the time. pay chase health advance bill http://exloanmanager.com/choose-secured-loans-the-online-way/
Notify me of new comments via email.