READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
On the heels of the latest gun-related tragedy, as Saturday saw a 15-year-old New Mexico boy murder his parents and three of his siblings, on Thursday evening Piers Morgan welcomed back recurring guest Newt Gingrich, who joined the program live, bringing along his signature brand of candor and insight.
As the "gun debate" continues to pulse through the nation as one of America's most divisive and polarizing issues, the "Piers Morgan Tonight" host further explained his stance on precisely which type of firearms he finds to be most-concerning:
"It is the high-powered guns of any variety which can fire 30, or 40, or more rounds in less than a minute that can cause mass murder, that would be my primary concern," said Morgan.
Defending the views of those who oppose an increase in gun legislation, Gingrich detailed why Morgan is facing so much resistance:
"The reason you find so many of us very reluctant to go down this road is we believe each step down this road leads to the next step and the next step and the next step," said the former Speaker of the House. "We actually think the Second Amendment is central to our liberties, not just something there for hunters, not something there for target practice, but actually there because the Founding Fathers remembered that when your army tried to defeat us, luckily, our peasants weren't peasants. They were citizens. And as citizens, they were in fact armed. And that's the only reason we were able to win the Revolutionary War."
Noting Gingrich's reference to the framers of the Constitution, Morgan asked his guest how such a debate might have been viewed during those early American days. The former Republican presidential candidate suggested such a conversation would be rather confusing:
"I think the Founding Fathers would have found this entire debate strange because they actually believed in individual freedom and they were very suspicious of big government, and they would find the idea that you're going to permit, to use the word you kept using, you're going to permit us to have a few liberties right now, was the antithesis of the American experience."
Watch the clip, and listen to the interview, as Gingrich and Morgan go head-to-head on the gun debate, leaving Morgan to note that he'd forgotten how much he loved arguing with the former House Speaker.
» Follow Piers Morgan Tonight on Twitter
> Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
Thank you for taking on the idiots at the NRA. It boggles my mind that people have any position other than responsible gun control. Please keep fighting for all of the innocent victims who died from senseless gun violence. You Rock!
Just because you don't agree with someone or something is no reason to result in calling them idiots. The NRA provides scholarships for children for futher education along with many program teaching and promoting gun safety. I come from a long line of sportsmen, hunters and gun collectors and have never harmed anyone so why should I not have the right to enjoy firearms. I have taught my children to repsect firearms and showed them the correct way to handle them and now am teaching grandchildren. My 7yr old grandson uses my AR-15 to deer hunt due to the light recoil that it has since he only weighs 45 pounds. Why should I be denied the right to have them because of a very very small percentage (less that 1%) have been used as a tool to do evil? We need to address the problem and not the tool one uses to inflict such devastation, far less than drunk drivers or knives or even "blunt instruments" as reported by the FBI statistics.
Thats a lot of devastation on a deer! Good job....NOT
Zoey undoubtedly does not know ballistics, FYI a Ar-15 fires a .223 cal which is a 22 cal (very small) you want to see devastation shoot something with a .30 cal or better yet a .50 cal. But as usual is boils down to a battle of whits with a UNARMED PERSON!!!
I have several relatives that hunt with AR-15s, they are lightweight, capable, and suits their needs.
But beware, they are scary looking and not for the faint of heart.... (derision).
No, we need to address people with your mindset actually having and training our children.
To Yosemite Sam, There is no common sense in government or among American Liberals. You can't get it through your heads, inspite of mountains of evidence, that guns are not the problem. Study after study has proven that where guns are banned, violence goes up!! Guns are just a tool. But they are needful tools so, that we can defend ourselves from idiots, terrorists, cartels who come across the border, invading armies, tyrants and our own government should they ever try to make Marshall law semi-permanent!! I will not be under armed, going against modern weapons, just so some Liberal politician, can gloat about his growing government victory. This is real life, it's not a game. When anyone takes away our ability to protect ourselves and our families, it's time to step forward and make things right. Hey, life is tough and there are bad people out there so, now that being the case, the government wants to disarm us. There is an agenda working here. Why? Because the number of gun related deaths compared to say knives, cars, shovels does not justify this irrationale push to take away our 2nd ammendment rights. The government wants to disarm us so, they can exert greater control in our lives. Politicians need to be taken down a notch and realize they don't run our lives, they were elected to represent us in making society at large, run smoother. Just a few days ago, there were loads of Liberals saying, that Obama doesn't want to get rid of all guns, he just wants to get rid of AR's. But, when Feinstein's bill came out in the light of day for everyone to read, we could see that this was a lot more than the 94' gun ban. No, this bill includes handguns, shotguns and rifles. Huh, they LIED again!! Who would have thunk it?
Teaching my own grand daughter to shoot here too. Starting her out with a 4X32 Buriss scope mounted on a crossman 760 .177 pellet rifle on blackbirds and starlings. Fall of 2013 she will be using a Clark Custom Mini-14 that truly shoots "Minute of Angle" with a Tasco 3x9x50 scope. I told her, its not so much the MEDICINE you use , its the MARKSMANSHIP you supply by Diligent and correct practice. Best of luck to your grandchild Fall of 2013 ,,,,^5^5^5^5^5^5^5 UP -5
Case in point why we need regulations... You are admitting, in essence, to allowing a minor the use of a semiautomatic weapon. Supervised or not, that is the height of irresponsibility.
I agree with Johny Reb that just because someone disagrees with your argument, it doesn't mean they are stupid and idiots. PM is able to get away with such name calling only because he has the last word on his show unless the people he invites already know that he has that power of name calling to wield on live TV. So hopefully these speakers are not agreeing with that as you know they should be signing a lot of liability and defamation paperwork before they bring in someone. In any case, it is worth going out there and expressing your views against or for as the audience would decide who the real idiot is (which has nothing to do with gun control or advocacy). Sooner or later, his show wouldn't get invitees I suppose.
On your point, I see that yes you are able to discipline your children and that doesn't give us a direction on the people who abuse it. I know you are not saying that we should start a national program in educating parents on how to educate their children, although for the long term, it wouldn't be a bad idea, however, for the short term it has been shown that 79 % of deaths from guns is from stolen guns or illegal sale/purchases. Why isn't PM speaking on that aspect instead of focusing merely on a focused ban on assault weapons and the clips that go along with it?
Now it is obvious that you are an idiot, not because I disagree with you but because you let your seven year old grandson shoot at deer with and assault rifle. Does he drive your car too?? Perhaps you could give him a shot and a beer once in a while...since it would seem that the judgement it took to allow a seven year old to fire an assault rifle just seems to be hatched out of an alcohol soaked brain. God help that kid and forgive you and the poor grandchild's parents for blatant neglect.
Zoey, An AR-15 is not a big powerful weapon. It is a small caliber rifle and is small for deer hunting. It is a squirrel gun. I guess the media has given you a scary image of this tiny rifle.
I agree with you. Please read this article.
Sharon Thorpe needs to acknowledge that she is uneducated about guns and the NRA and to call someone an idiot certainly shows her ignorance. Also, piers needs to go back to his eastern country and live there under that tyranny. He is a fool and needs to be removed from this country as well as the air waves. He knows that by setting limits on gun control only leads to more limits. He and feinstein need to re-educate themselves and stop trying to make fools of the American public. Wake up America. More limits only lead to a path of more control until eventually we lose all rights. If anyone believes that gun limits will stop violence then they as well are not very intelligent.
My own opinion of Piers Morgan is he is anything but a fool,,he is an ACT,,as in show business. I heard he was Exiled From Britain for Computer Hacking for profit. I think they sent him here to undermine our Gun Laws as a SPY,,took me more than
3 weeks watching him to come to this conclusion. Piers Morgan = Expert Liar
Piers refers to Sandy Hook when it comes to the AR-15 when it wasn't even used. I realize he is goin to do everthing he can in power to get his own agenda across, but lying to people is not the way to do it. He loves to throw out stats. Show me some stats on crimes commited by those who grew up understanding, using and respecting firearms. Education, which something the boy in New Mexico was not taught, is key. Taking away our 2 amendment rights by banning high capcity mags and AR-15 "assult" rifles is not goin to change mass killings. Look at the OK city bombing. Crazy people will find a way. U.S. citizens have the right to protect themselves. My safe locked, because I am responsible. My hosehold is sound and secure. If the time comes, I will protect myself and my family. Piers, what type of guns are your body guards carrying? Oh, but it's ok. It's YOU. YOU are the exception.
Hi BOB, The officials say that a Bushmaster. 223 AR 15 was used at Sandy Hook. That's probably why Piers says it, he is reporting facts.
Intellectuals from other countries come to the US because of our first amendment. Criminals come here for the second amendment...our founding fathers got many things right, but this one was a big, big miss. US gun deaths since the founding of this country would reach genocide proportions. One cannot, on the one hand, say they are pro-life and yet claim pro-gun. The two are mutually exclusive and individuals like Newt are hypocrites who consult and and receive fat fees from the NRA and the gun manufacturers.
Criminals come here for the second amendment? Please tell me you're joking.
does piers morgan understand the volume of weapons that already exist in law-abiding citizens hands and criminals hands? the second amendment is the right to bear arms. responsible gun owners have to realize the term of breach and trigger locks and gun safes to keep them unaccessible to anyone but the eligible gun owners. i dont understand why this point hasn't even been mentioned before the talk of second amendment regulation.
Manny, Agreed with many of your points. Does this summarize all of them including some have here:
– Parental and Gun Owner Education on safety
– Gun safe are fire and explosion proof
– Trigger lock technology based on biosensors (or something relevant in case firearm is stolen
– Penalize gun theft and enforce ban on illegal sale of guns and ammo
– Increase awareness of the above constantly and report deaths or crime as a result of firearm use nationwide
– Make schools safer
– Check for criminal background or anything else on the universal check prior to issuing the license to own
– Pray that this will all happen and eventually work out without having to control guns
– The big government take over is unlikely, however, that can possibly not be an argument for gun advocacy or control.
Piers Morgan reminds me of his forrunners. Ferguson thought he could LORD over the patriots, but they defeated him in short time. WE ARE AMERICANS. LET PIERS MORGAN GO AND CONVINCE PARLIMENT, OF HIS DESIRES FOR HIS AND THEIR COUN TRY. LIFE LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS., INCLUDES ADULTS TEACHING PRINCIPLES AND AND BASIC RIGHTS OF OUR CITIZENREY TO NOT INFRINGE OUR FREEDOM UPON ANOTHER. lIBERTY IS SIMPLE, YET COMPLICATED. HUSH, PIERS mORGAN we can mke our decisions to run our country ourselves. cnn, LOOKS VERY SMALL RIGHT NOW TO ME. iT THINKS ITS RATINGS ARE IMPORTANT, WAIT FOR THE PEOPLE TO SEE POWER AND GREED, DOES NOT MAKE, THE PRINCLES, WE SHOULD LIVE BY AS CITIZENS! THANK FOR MY SOUNDING OFF. i AM NOT ALONE.
Piers Morgan did it again. If you don't agree with him, he is rude and interrupts you. He does this to all his guests that he disagrees with. He won't really let them speak or make their point. Why does he even have guests? He should just have a show where he tells us what HE thinks every week. He surely is no Larry King.
Yes, idiots indeed.
There is no point to taking the dialectic approach in the gun conversation. This is not a debate between two valid positions in a civilized society- guns just do not belong in it. If you are a gun proponent, you are an idiot. This is the short and the long version of it.
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 them off until police arrive (sometimes it can take 30min.), with only 10 bullets when they have more than 10 bullets in each gun (FYI: criminals don’t follow the law). If I can hold them off without a gun, that would be even SUPER.
For you to make such statement, you must have pretty brilliant ideas as to how we can prevent home invasion and being victimized without the use of a gun, you must be very very smart, so please enlighten us, I’ll forever be in your debt for your wisdom.
For all the people in favor of gun control..... please just move to another country that has gun control. It's really just that easy. Leave the United States Of America's Bill Of Rights ALONE!!!
First I am shocked and totally saddened by the recent mass shootings. I mean that sincerely. I am also a gun owner – Deer rifle, shotgun, .22 rifle, and a WWII Colt .45 US Government issue semi auto standard side arm – about 70 years old. My Dad brought it back from his tour in WWII – helping protect our Freedom of choice. I do not own anything close to an AR 15. I don’t want one. HOWEVER: As an American, I would never tell you that you cannot have the right to make that choice. That is what this is about – being free to choose.
The real issue is diseased and/or criminal minds using their tool of choice to carry out their madness or choosing a life of crime for a living. These AR 15's are SEMI automatics and that technology has been around since the 1930's. Ban AR's and then you can easily argue why you should then ban Semi automatic handguns, shotguns and rifles. After all, they use the same semi automatic technology as an AR, many can handle larger magazines than were originally made for them – the only real difference is that they don't have a pistol grip like an AR 15 – oh wait....ALL Pistols have a pistol grip – OK ban them now too…..
Uh oh – let’s thank about that, gun owners. My 70 year old .45 WWII pistol is a semi automatic, just like an ‘Assault Weapon”. That pistol can handle a custom made magazine full of 30 rounds – or more just like an “Assault Weapon’ – (even though it was originally designed for about 8 or 9 rounds I believe.) That pistol also has a pistol grip – just like an ‘Assault Weapon’ That pistol is also smaller, easier to conceal and easier aim in constricted places than an “Assault Weapon”. Uh oh – I just described the perfect “Assault Weapon”. Not much of a stretch is it ? ? ? Hmm my analogy also applies to your brand new Glock semi automatic pistol, doesn’t it ?
I don’t want an Assault Weapon. I might change my mind someday, if I do, I want my Freedom to choose – as an American.
This is actually a really good post on how to represent your position. I get that. I get everything you are saying. I'm a former gun owner who finally melted down his guns after the sandy hook shooting. I've owned a Ruger Semi auto 22 with a bull barrel, several rifles as well. You play on the nostalgia very well, and you make sense.
I naturally disagree not with your point, but with your views. Respectfully. It's time for all Semi's to be Banned. There I said it. I'll be honest about it. Nothing changes till the ownership of all semis, and any large capacity magazine's or extenders are strictly prohibited. Those who own them can turn them in for a tax credit or have the barrel's filled with lead if they are a family heirloom, or whatever, but they can't own one.
I know it's hard to give up something that you love. I get it. I love then engineering of them, the way the feel when you hold them, the sights the sounds. But I also know that there is a greater good that must be factored in to inclusion of these types of firearms in our society. They need to go just the way grenade launchers and tanks aren't allowed. Too Dangerous..
You melted down all of your guns because of the actions of a mentally deranged person? I suggest that the tragedy has actually clouded your thinking, and that you're subconsciously trying to do anything to lessen the sting of the tragedy. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm just not seeing logic in the decision, and I suspect you are a competent and thoughtful person.
I rarely use the word "hate", but I will use it now. I hate the fact that all these beautiful children were taken from us. I hate the fact that this galactically-stupid mom let her sociopath son have access to deadly weapons.
And I am disgusted that the talk shows and politicians are just using the tragedy to their advantage. I can't think of anything more stupid that Senator Feinstein scolding people who's rifles have folding stocks or pistol grips... like that makes any difference at all. And it's all the more stupid because when some nutjob shot up HER office, the first thing she did was buy a gun and carry it illegally in her purse.
Anyway, hope you're feeling better. Peace, bro.
piece morgan is constantly looking like an idiot Because he has no knowledge of fire arms aside from the fact that they go bang. AR type rifles are excellent rifles for hunting. they come in a variety of calibers for dear hunting to predator hunting to even varmint hunting. His own agenda to disarm the people of America is shocking an appalling. The NRA, and GOA are there to make sure foreigners like him cannot take away our right to bare arms. The American people will not be oppressed by governments foreign or domestic. (The armed citizen is oppression's worst nightmare).
If you hate the 2nd amendment why don't you move to north Korea.
Americans live in such fear....why so anxiety ridden?? Tyranny? home invasions? This fear just doesn't exist where I live
The fear is manufactured by the GOP and the NRA.
Must be nice to live in "Fairy Tale Land" but in the real world of drug dealers, car jacking, home invasions and muggings its not so nice. Just ask the little old lady that was attacked coming out of Walmart at 2pm and a armed citizen shows up and prevents her from harm whats does she fear?
Well, outside your perfect world there are real events with real criminals. In fact, here in Sacramento, literally right around the corner from my previous residence, a woman was held hostage by a felon that was fleeing police.
But that's okay. If that ever occurs to me, I'll tap my heels together and recite the "Zoey" philosophy that crimes doesn't take place and wish it all away...
I guess you are one of the lucky people. I totally respect your right to choose not to own a gun, now can you respect my right to choose to own a gun so I can protect my family?
What planet do you live on where "home invasions" don't exist? Did you ever stop to think maybe the reason you don't have to worry so much about these things is because there are so many people here that exercise their right to own a gun?
Newt should make a deal with CNN and do an hour show.
Bring some real brain power to the arena and you can pull viewershiip.
Not everyone is an idiot in this country. The gun nuts will be voted out of congress. If we can elect a black president fairly easily, we can do gun control.
With each election cycle the conservative vote will dwindle. Already happening.
I really hope you're right. I think the fear that people live in in your country stems from everyone having guns. It's a vicious circle really. Kind of like if I knew some of my crazy neighbors were freely allowed to own guns I suppose that would make me fearful and want a bigger more powerful gun then them....it's just .a fearful circle of gun ownership for civilians.
Why do you even concern yourself with MY country? Evidently you don't live here. Neither you or Piers Morgan are citizens of this country so please keep quiet regarding what we need to do in our country. If the United States is so bad then why is it millions of people try to come here legally and illegally every year?
I'm sure everyone's fear has nothing to do with the media sensationalizing gun violence, right?
I am sure this has all been said before. To anyone who cannot understand why these "gun-nuts" will simply not get on board with gun control: I encourage you to call the junk yard to have your Prius hauled away for scrap today, I promise you will be saving innocent lives. Just as Piers would say "What do you need it for?". Then when you get a chance go ahead and proudly post a "gun free home" sign outside of your home.
Which half are you referring to last I heard he was just and white and he is black? I think it's called interracial and just ask all of the Democrats that lost their seats after voting on the 1994 assault ban how much those "gun nuts" can do?
Even Bill Clinton warned current Democrats of what voting against the pro-gun and do for their future.
I'm surprised no one on your show is aware of the key difference in automatic weapons and semi-auto weapons.
The difference is INTENT. With an automatic weapon you only need to make the decision to pull the trigger once, but with a semi-automatic weapon you have to consciously make the decision each time to pull the trigger, and in between each shot you see, hear, and feel the impact of the bullet then have to make that decision to continue pulling the trigger.
Just an FYI Piers, fully automatic machine guns are NOT banned in this country. There are nearly 500 thousand in private circulation. They are known as Class 3 guns and are licensed tio individual through the ATF.
Furthermore you have to get away from the notion that you don't need an AR15 for hunting. Like those two girls on your show said hunters don't use them for deer hunting, but for varmints and fast moving predictors. You're going to have hard time taking an AR15 off a rancher who had a wolf or coyote problem.
Piers Morgan should be cancelled
The reason assault rifles are needed by the public is actually quite simple to understand. Home invasions are on the rise. Home invasions are most likely to involve 2-4 criminal intruders entering a home during the invasion. If each intruder has a pistol in their hand, then they have 2-4+ weapons to the home owners SINGLE weapon. Now, if we assume each of the invaders weapons holds a minimum of 6 bullets revolver/ 9 bullets semi auto pistol, then the bad guys have roughly 2-4 weapons times 6-9 bullets per weapon or 12 – 36 bullets on average when they enter your home in the middle of the night. If the homeowner has to chose which weapon is best for a typical home invasion with on average 3 bad guys, each carrying at least one loaded weapon, the the choice is clear...the homeowner wants the weapon with the greatest capacity to defend his family and home. A pistol has 6-9 bullets, a shotgun has 6-8 shells and an AR 15 has 36 rounds on average. I don't know anyone that would not want the AR 15 to defend themselves against a home invasion. Anyone that says differently is ignorant or lying. You cannot expect to "reload" your weapon under the distress of a gunfight with 2 or more invaders in your home.
As the economy gets worse and drug addiction grows, we will continue to see a major rise in home invasions and innocent people will get killed in their own homes unless they have a weapon to fight back and give themselves and their families a chance to live against a drug crazed invader you cannot reason with! After you fire off your 6-9 rounds from your pistol, you are going to wish you had an AR 15 with 36 rounds per magazine.
Imagine not even having to be worried about your scenario in a country with total gun ban. I have lived a full life in an European coyntry and only had to worry about intruders stealing my money and jewelry, perhaps with a knife in their hands. You Americans have to worry too much because everybody can have weapons. It is an escalation and viccious cycle spinning out of control. I pity you.
Yes because nobody has ever been killed with a knife before. We have a lot more issues in this country than crazy people and criminals getting their hands on firearms illegally, we have gang bangers and cartels running rampant here. This is something you people don't realize. Piers lives in a bubble, i would like to see him spend some time down south near the border to see what it is like or spend a week in Chicago with all the gang bangers running around with illegal firearms.
The reason behind the 2nd amendment is for the citizens to have the same quality firearms as the military's. Because governments have been known to turn into dictatorships. This being the reason our founding fathers fought and won our independence. You take them away we can't defend ourselves against a military under martial law. Look into history, countries banned firearms and then slaughtered millions. (Germany,Russia,Korea,and china) I would rather have a fighting chance with an ar15 then have to resort to fighting with a handgun against an m4 or bigger. Our government has turned the corner and head straight for dictatorship. If this keeps on I can see another revolution.
This is what the 2nd amendment was created to stop! Simply put simple enough.
Thank You Piers
the AR 15 is the most popular gun in America it is used for hunting and many other sporting events. As the civilian version is not suited for combat since it is not an automatic weapon. P. Morgan should not be in the middle of this debate since he is a British citizen with British sensibilities and I understand there are those in Britain that regard him as a crimminal, and are glad he is no longer there. Maybe P. Morgan should tell us why he is not wanted in England and why we are saddled with his opinions and lopsided showmanship.
Even up here in Canada I cannot agree with you more. The apparent "need" for these assault rifles is ridiculous and definitely NOT needed. We held a vigil here where I live for the 20 little children who were murdered in December. Just last night...not too far from here ...on the other side of Toronto, Ont...a 9 year old little boy sat in his living room watching tv and someone shot through the window, hitting him in the head...he died this morning. It is thought that his home was targeted. He had just moved in with his family last week and the previous residents evidently were into drugs. I actually don't see why anyone needs to have a gun at all....but I realize that opinion is not popular. I watch you every night and enjoy your opinions and your show very much. Take care.
I can run my own show and stop people from sharing their point. I could talk over you also Piers. But sorry i dont have my own show. Let them speak. For real. Cmon even if i didnt agree with them i'd still let them talk.
Ya thx Piers for makin us girls in the show seem like cretins since its yur show. Appreciate it. GJ!
There is another purpose that people favor assault weapons....about 2 months ago, I was at a family gathering and there was a discussion going on about guns....there was a lady involve in the discussion and she said it was very important to have a gun or guns and suggest to everyone to have a gun in order to go war someday in the future against the liberal US government, to take over the government. It then dawn on me that there is an element in society that is buying guns and assault weapons to take over the liberal US government........
Piers, You are not very well informed, There is a difference between automatic and simi-automatic weapons. You also are very rude to the people who come on your show.Just because they dont agree with you, you but in and dont let them speak or give you an answer, because they are telling you something or answering a question you have asked. You are not a very good person to host such a show. You need to get your facts straight before coming to america and try ;to do things you know nothing about.........
We need to under the framers real intent. I hope that Mr. Morgan corrects the inaccuracies in the debate.
Liberal drival. An "argument" put out by a left wing law professor, that many liberals are now stating as fact. I suppose you believe everything on the internet!
WOW.........There is another purpose that people favor assault weapons....about 2 months ago, I was at a family gathering and there was a discussion going on about guns....there was a lady involve in the discussion and she said it was very important to have a gun or guns and suggest to everyone to have a gun in order to go war someday in the future against the liberal US government, to take over the government. It then dawn on me that there is an element in society that is buying guns and assault weapons to take over the liberal US government........
Take over the Government???? And that’s why a person needs an assault weapons??? I don’t think I read that right…
That’s a lot of talk about weapons that will soon be obsolete. Our current Drones will be soon replaced with Smart Drones. (This we worked on in the 1980’s along with F-22’s, Advance Cruise Missiles and more.)
In the next 10+ years, you’ll see Smart Weapons – You point a conventional gun at me, fire and before the bullet gets to me, my smart weapon will eliminate the on-coming bullets, you and your weapon.
A little note: In late 1987, I set in on a demonstration of an un-manned aircraft that was capable of flying itself and was so smart that it knew its own geometry; could calculate it’s required maneuvers to track a target including finding and avoiding telephone wires, etc.
This aircraft first flew under a bridge and came out on the other side – no problem. The second test placed 2 vehicles under the bridge and the aircraft calculated all clearances, inverted (tail down) and came out the other side, went upright and on its way.
Think about…we have computers that can review billions of instructions in seconds – and I thought we were state-of-the art using the old Cray supercomputer at UCSD to crunch data.
I said this in one of my prior posting, but we, the USA, live in a giant bubble. Our defense systems are sophisticated well beyond most folk’s imaginations. We’re very close to star wars technology now.
Example: The TASER Gun Pistol M26C can disable a target at 15 feet. Now multiple that by 100 and at 1,500 feet, you could disable ground troops from a helicopter or unmanned drone – multiple that by 1,000 and you’re now talking about drones that are star wars like capable. (Science Fiction is the first step to reality.)
But that wasn’t the only technologies we were working on in the 1990s. Try vaporizing lab rats. – The guys called it disassembling. One of my coworkers joking told me “that we can disassemble them, but we just can’t put them back together – yet”.
Another weapon we experimented with was called signature technology – in simple terms, making an F-16 appear as the Queen Mary on radar.
There are technologies out there that now place us head-to-head with ethical and moral dilemmas. And some, amendments don’t exist as of yet. So, the 2nd amendment is only one needing 21st century updating.
I should have clarified…Tasers have a higher incapacitation rate than a 9mm hand gun. You can actually shoot an attacker with a 9mm hand gun and the attacker can still lunge toward you and attack you. If you shoot an attacker with a Taser, the attacker will not be able to move.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/6622949
Also, I would think future Taser style weapons would not require wires or darts.
In fact, the X12 Taser LLS (LLS stands for Less Lethal Shotgun), is able to fire an electrically-charged round from up to 88 feet away.
One of the many things Piers doesn't get is that when he calls for a ban on these types of firearms he thinks it's going to be just like jolly old England, where the state comes along and confiscates them all from its subjects. Well it doesn't work like that here, the state doesn't confiscate but grandfathers existing owners, similar to what happened with Class 3 full autos. So Piers is deluding himself if he thinks there will ever be an actual ban here.
/agree. Ya they are there they will be there. Do i agree that some of these people should have them. Of course not. But damage is done. If i had one and didnt believe that i you should take it. Good luck. Not helping our point but thats the way it is. Damage done. Control is key.
You're both right. No ban is likely to occur since our Legislators have been bnought and paid for by the NRA. Our only hope is for the people to speak up, which rarely happens.
The big evil NRA has congress shivering in their boots! Come on! The NRA supports those congressmen that are pro-gun/pro 2nd amendment. The liberals have demonized firearms, the NRA and any Congressman willing to stand up for our rights. There are certainly plenty of liberal lobbying groups in Washington working hard to take our 2nd amendment rights away. They are the ones that have all you believing the liberal line!
Who in their right mind would want to be interviewed by Piers Morgan and have an opposing view?
Talk about loaded questions and pushing interviewees into a corner.
And who does Piers think he is assuming the position to question the 2nd Amendment and not allowing one iota of objectivity. He incessantly labels pro-gun advocates as crazy and dismisses their perspectives on a continual basis. Good luck in the effort to define, redefine and label "assault" weapons and AR-15s.
I was a CNN watcher but this left leaning krap, I'm starting to be a non-watcher.
God freakin forbid
Go back to Fox News dude
Let's face the facts (statistics). There are 310,000,000 guns (all types) in this country. There are 124,000 licensed dealers and only 14,000 MacDonalds. There is very little chance that the 2nd Amendment will be rescinded. There is no way that guns will be turned in.
Let everyone exercise their 2nd Amendment "rights" however, each and every gun will have mandatory registration. The penalty for possession of non-registered gun is an automatic 1 year prison sentance. Use of a gun in a crime is an automatic 5 year prison term. A fatality by gun – automatic life in prison with no parole.
Civillians (non law enforcement) can only purchase/possess hand guns, rifles (non-semi or auto). Sale to civilians of restricted weapons is an automatic 5 year prison term.
If people want guns the must be ready to accept the consequences.
A side thought – a Miami concealed pistol licensing training course student asked the instructor whether he should have a pistol (6 shot) or automatic with 20 rounds. Response – if you have not shot your assailant within the first 6 rounds, you are probably dead.
Peirs – kudos for fighting the good fight.
Nice try, but a miss. I do agree that each and every firearm should be registered as well those with criminal records, mental instabilities, or on a watch list, should not be allowed a firearm.
But the limitations on which type of firearms civilians are allowed is excessive. I know M16/AR15s, was trained, safely handle the instruments, and I feel this will achieve the desired level to accommodate my sense of security.
Who are you or anyone else to dictate my level or sense of security? You, P. Morgan?
That's the real travesty.
I agree with you, Larry!
Many years I have agreed With Piers but I think there was no interview in this case. It was more of Mr. Morgans views and opions, he had no intention of letting any of his guests speak their beliefs. He constantly cut off every person he "interviewed", only giving them the chance to be seen on the show and not heard. YES, i was interested in what Newt had to say but he was not allowed to speak and constantly interupted. It seems you want to take away our rights to bear arms aswell as our right to speak freely. I understand you have your point of view, but it YOUR point of view, and until you allow others to express their points, this was NO interview and i was dissappointed and felt let down by Piers' rambling and rudeness.
Watching Newt smile and giggle while discussing this crucial discussion made ny stomach turn. How much compensation does he receive from the NRA? It's all about the money the Gun Industry stands to kose from this legislation. Assault weapons have no place in the hands of the average American.
Ditto for the Gun Girls. Cute, cute , cute....know nothing about the issue.
The only reason that Newt was laughing was for the same reason I was laughing. it was not because the topic was funny it was because Piers would ridiculously funny that he had Newt on the show for an interview and would not give him the chance to talk, only cutting him off EVERY time Newt tried to talk. there was no interview, just Mr. Morgans opinions thrown at him.
take a softer approach =l let' 'em talk into the absurdity of their argument – your toot down their throat – i get your Passion but remember are a foreigner and you need to draw the distinction of 37 gun deaths in UIK vs 12000 in the us bur the populace doesn't get it -these are super conservative people and they don't get the absurdity of assault weapons ban lett alone handguns
Once again, the main reason for the likely failure of this legislation is the huge amount of money the NRA pumps into our elected officials pockets. They are all afraid to do anything The only hope is that the People will speak up which is very unlikely.
Piers, you keep asking the question, "Why does anyone need an AR15?" Here's the answer. Because it's an effective close quarters personal home defense weapon, well put by the Department of Homeland Security! Why won't you acknowledge it? Because it doesn't suit your agenda? Stop lying to the American people!
I have my AR-15 version. I am a former SGT in the US Army. I use this for home defense aswell as sport shooting. I do not hunt with this as i do not hunt. I do not use hunting rifles as i am trained to use this type of rifle. I keep it locked up with all my other weapons. I know of Many hunting rifles that are semi automatic as is my AR15 that have larger magazines than my so called assult rifle. stop stereo typing my rilfe because it a pistol grip.
Here, here, Paul!
30 rounds fired from a AR-15 In Semi auto ( the only way civilian can purchase one) Ends in 30 pieces of lead that left the barrel of that weapon.. less than a hundred yards fired...(As trajic as this is these school killings were probably within that range) Lets think about this A Single 12 gauge round of #6shot can carry up to if not more than 30 projectiles in one round.ALL OF THOSE ARE CONSIDERD LIFE THREATENING... most SEMI automatic shotguns stock carry five rounds.. Assault is an action and it can be carried out with any type of weapon including your hands>> 5, 12 gauge rounds fired just as fast as 5 .223 or .556 (AR-15) rounds could carry up to 150 potential life threatening projectiles>> Thats 5 trigger pulls that equals 5 projectiles from a AR-15 Your so called ASSAULT WEAPON>>
5 trigger pulls from that 12 gauge with 6 shot up to 100 yards equals up to or more that 150 potential life threatening projectiles>>> ASSAULT is an action not a political debate>> My guns are my rights Piers Morgan you need to look up a machine gun>> An automatic rifle is just that automatic meaning it fires multiple bullets with one trigger pull but in fact an AR-15 works the same as a semi auto shot gun> one pull one boom > These AR-15 weapons are anything but machine guns!! STudy Some Weapons before u insult half of the country with your retarded babble>>>>
Thanks for all the technical spin. The fact is, there's still no real justification for the average person to own these except to kill, kill, kill
Infact the only facts here would be what was said...The only justification I need is my amendment..The technical stuff you call it... Is the science behind a weapon if you didnt know the so called(technical stuff ) Then maybe u ought not to be commenting on something thats clearly out of ur pariscope>>
The motive to Kill, kill, kill you say.. could be carried out with an assault handgun,assault chainsaw,assault hand,assault any thing you could pick up.....take away guns which will never happen>>> but say it did.. what do humans do when a situation changes humans adapt. Killers will adapt if they really want to kill somebody a weapons ban could merely push them into building a bomb>> Or mowing down 30 or more with a bus (ASSAULT BUS)...food for thought.. if u ban some weapons then the only people that will have these weapons would be the criminals>>
In your interview with Newt Gingrich, you let slip a couple of revealing comments. You say you wish to focus your attention on weapons which allow people to fire 30-45 rounds a minute. That is practically any double action revolver, pump action shotgun, lever action gun, and certainly any semi automatic with a detachable magazine. You also say you agree with Sen. Feinstein. Senator Feinstein is on the record during the last ban on "assault weapons" in a 1995 60 Minutes interview where she says "If I could've gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them - Mr. and Mrs. America turn 'em all in - I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here." Be honest about how far you wish gun control to be forced on Americans, when even most Americans do not support gun control that strict.
Despite her more recent public statements, Sen. Feinstein, with her concealed carry permit and personal firearms, is against private gun ownership. She and her billionaire husband can afford their own security that police are unable to provide the rest of Americans. Despite his own public statements intended to reassure gun owners that no one is trying to take away their guns, Prior to becoming President, Obama is on the record as supporting a ban on all semi automatic weapons, and all handguns.
The media also needs to practice more honesty in presenting the real face of gun violence in the US, which is not Sandy Hook or any other mass shooting, but suicides and more deaths every day than any US mass shooting in common street crimes, committed with handguns. According to the FBI, rifles of ALL types are used in less than 4% of all homicides by gun, or 323 deaths. "Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.)" were used in 728 homicides. "Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.)" killed 496. "Knives or cutting instruments" killed 1,694.
You and many others claim that "assault weapons" are only intended to kill. There are millions of semi automatic rifles in the US, just of the AR type, yet ALL rifles of all types kill approximately 300 in a year. That's a very poor job of killing, for something designed or intended only to kill. Feet and bare hands do a better job of killing in the US. Perhaps they should also be banned.
Lies and manipulation. That's all we get from Democrats and the liberal press. Piers doesn't know what he is talking about. Fully automatic guns have not been banded from Americans hands. If you have the money and can pass the background check. You can buy and legally own a fully automatic weapon. Yes, they are closely monitored by the ATF. But it is a lie to imply that Americans can't have automatic weapons. And you lie when you say that the NRA and republicans "don't want to do the right thing". They just want to do what is right. Grabbing guns will not stop any gun crimes. It is treating the symptoms of a cancer and not trying to kill the cancer. The guns are the tools of the diseased mind. Working on treating the diseased mind before it takes action. And stopping the diseased mind from getting the guns is the answer. Shame, I thought CNN had moved away from the far left, but I was wrong.
I actually agree with the positions that Piers is advocating with regard to assault weapons and the need to address gun violence. What troubles me with his interviewing style is the way he shows deference to people like Newt Gingrinch who is actually advocating the same views across the board as some of the wilder guests that he has had on over the last number of weeks. Gingrich"s arguments are little more articulate and have no more intellectual integrity. He tried to avoid most of Piers' direct questions. At the same time, Piers is often very impatient and rude to less celebrated guests. A good example was the two young women tonight. Gingrich grinned and laughed as much as those yoiung women, with no attempt on Pier's part to call out his behaviour. Piers seems to like power. It hurts his integrity as an interviewer.
Keep up the good fight Piers. Having mass shootings has become the norm and seems to be acceptable in U.S. society. Not one of your pro-gun guests has condemned the shooting at Sandy Hook elementary. Do we really want to raise our children to live in a world rampant with guns? Possession of a gun does not stop home invasions, just like the death penalty does not stop individuals from committing crimes. Like what Zoey said, should we live in fear? More cops are needed on the streets. We need to better parent children and teach children (out future citizens) to respect peers, adults and parents. We also need to teach children and teens how to solve problems rather than taking their problems out on others. I agree that universal criminal background checks should be the law. In addition, individuals should also be screened for mental health issues. Newt's stance is obvious, we should do nothing. We need to give the victims at Sandy Hook elementary a voice.
"Not one of your pro-gun guests has condemned the shooting at Sandy Hook elementary."
Seriously? Do you even hear what you're saying or really believe this? Do you even hear what both sides are saying? Do you think law abiding pro-gun citizens 'endorse' these murders? Everyone condemns them. Your statement is just clearly and purely indicative of how far off base you and liberals are. Unbelievable and unfathomable you could even make a statement of this caliber (pun intended).
Piers, on tonights show, you mentioned that AR15s are like Ferarris. Since cars and drunk drivers kill many more small innocent children every year than guns do, Do you think we could talk congress into banning Corvettes and forcing Americans to drive a crappy Toyota Prius with a governor on it to prevent people from going over 55mph?
By the way, what type of gun did Nehemiah Griego kill his mom and sisters with? I read that he killed his mom, and siblings with a 22LR hunting rifle. The same type that you use to go hunt squirrels with.
Let's be HONEST with each other here, and stop trying to push an agenda. If someone is intent on killing someone, they are going to kill someone whether it be from an AR15 with a 100 round drum, or a pistol with ten 10 round magazines (which take just a second to change out a magazine) or a 22LR rifle. Heck, He drove to the church, and im sure if he was motivated enough he could have used the car as a TOOL to commit his crime.
Wake up people – stop being retarded!!
Right on man – the issue is diseased and/or criminal minds using their tool of choice to carry out their madness or choosing a life of crime for a living. These AR 15's are SEMI automatics and that technology has been around since the 1930's. Ban AR's and then you can ban Semi automatic handguns, shotguns and rifles. After all, they use the same technology, many can handle larger magazines than were originally made for them – the only real difference is that they don't have a pistol grip like an AR 15 – oh wait....Pistols have a pistol grip – OK ban them now too.
Fully automatic assault rifles are not illegal to own in the U.S. Manufacturing new weapons is banned using the commerce clause authority of Congress. Local and state laws vary.
Piers has lost it. Watching the guests on his show laugh at him because he was out of control. He would not let Mr Gingrich or the "gun girls" speak, Telling them that this is not a funny topic. It is not a funny topic as the girls said but it was almost hilarious watching Piers lose his cool through all of these interviews, not letting anyone speak. He was told they were not being allowed to speak and he blew it off. I am done with Piers, He has now lost my repsect and me as a viewer, since he only cares about HIS opinion and noone elses.
OK, Crawl back into your tunnel
Great logical and cohesive argument, G! You are clearly the 'problem' with this country's direction. What are you afraid of? People that are willing to invest and be confident in the security of themselves, their families and communities? What problem do you have with people in rural areas, hunters, people in high crime areas and x-servicemen and women being able to protect themselves with their own choice of reasonable weapon? How do the law abiding citizens hurt you? (Please provide us with a personal account of how you've been harmed by a law abiding citizen, much like Piers asks the converse)
G...you as an American I have the right freedom of speach...as do the people being put on this show. It is People like you that give Americans a bad name. If you do not want to be part of america, Then leave it! you can Take your anti american self and find that Hole you were so inspired to talk about.
Piers, you're a fool. You keep asking the same questions and refusing to listen to the answers. If we showed you an individual that could fire a standard Pistol with 10 Round Magazines, and could interchange 10 of them efficiently enough to fire 100 Rounds in 1 Minute, it would nullify your argument about Magazine Capacity's relation to Fire Rate. It would nullify any arguments about AR15s and "High Capacity Magazines" immediately. I'm dumbfounded how none of your guests are able to answer your simplistic questions sufficiently and eloquently. However, I'm sure you're unwilling to accept that challenge, because it doens't support your rhetoric. Am I wrong, or will you take that challenge? Of course not, because you're not an uneducated fool, you're an evil person, who's unwilling to expose his own personal agenda, along with that of many other liberals. You can only fool so many.
Piers where is your outrage towards abortion; 55 million aborted children and you think guns kill too many children? You are out of your mind your priorities are misguided be a real man and stand up to your bosses and tell them you aren't their propaganda tool. Remember America's guns saved your countries ass during WW II. Gee I can't remember when America was invaded last was it 150 years ago or more?
Remember those who forget history are destined to repeat it.
Don't forget we sacrificed a lot of soldiers in WW I for England as well. We have a different culture – apples and oranges
Piers get your facts straight. Although, Assault Rifles can shoot more than 100 roundsa a minute or as fast as you can pull the trigger, The Newtown killer, did not have a 100 round clip, as you told Newt Gingrich. He had a 30 round clip which is standard for an AR. Next, you said, hunters do not use AR's for hunting which, is a total lie. First, you don't hunt deer with an AR which only has a .223Rem. bullet. It's not humane. It may eventually kill the deer but it could be hours or days and the hunter may never recover the animal. I would probably never use less than a .270 Win. cartridge. What hunters use AR's for is varmint hunting like Coyotes, Bobcats and\. Fox. You act as, if you need more than three shots your not a hunter. That was an idiot that told you that. Try to shoot a Coyote going fiull speed (about 45 mph) at a 100 yards with a bolt-action!! Good luck with that. Since 2008 just about every hunting publication has been creating articles about the trend moving to AR hunting. If your hunting deer you would move up to a AR-10 instead of an AR-15. The AR-10 typically shoots a .308Win. bullet which, will bring down a deer. Do I need all those rounds? No but, it's nice to know I have them if, I need them. But, the truth is that you know nothing about hunting, except for what you have been told. so for you to tell us, how and why it should be done is ludicrous!!! Stick to what you know. You kept saying, do you think we should be allowed to have automatics? Hell yes, here is why. No, our founding Fathers did not envision automatic or even semi-auto weapons. But they did want the civilian populace to be just as well armed as the military!!! 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. Here is the rub, bub, there can be no Militia unless there are a free people, who are allowed to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!!! Being the Militia was to protect this nation from ALL enemies foreign and DOMESTIC, the civilian citizen should be allowed to own all the latest and greatest weapons, to protect this nation. The freedom to own any gun we want, shall not be INFRINGED. Now, I am not asking that the laws on automatic guns be changed, I'm just trying to push you back over the sanity line so, that you will be rationale about Law abiding gun owners. In actuality we should be able to own any weapon we want but, due to collateral damage, I agree that it might be best to not change the current laws. However, unlike England, we Americans have the right to protect ourselves, even from our own government, if the need should arise. The very idea, that if the government overstepped it's authority, it could and would be dealt with a most severe punishment, is what I believe keeps this country free and Democratic. There was an FBI case in 1986 in Florida. There were two crminals that got into a shootout with the FBI. The criminals had assault rifles and the FBI had .38 Special revolvers and shotguns. Two FBI agents died and 5 more were wounded. The FBI didn't look to ban all guns from Americans, they simply had to rethink how they would protect themselves and modernize the way they armed themselves. Now transfer that to the American people. Should there ever come a time,GOD forbid, that America should have to protect itself from an invading force, a hostile cartel, a country, terrorists or worst of all, our own government, I do not want to be fighting to save my families life with a ,22LR, a shotgun, a revolver or a bolt-action deer rifle. I at least want a semi-automatic weapon so, that I may defend those that I love. How in the hell are we supposed to defend ourselves if only the bad guys, have all the best weapons? Our government is far to big right now and they do not care about the individual citizen. That is why we need the right to take care of ourselves, by any means necessary. Please, get your facts straight!! The CookieMonsta P.S. Wouldn't it be something if one night you were dining at a restaurant with your family and a crazed gunmen came into the restaurant with guns blazing and suddenly he noticed you and your family. However, before he can swing his gun around, a citizen who is legally liscensed to carry a concealed weapon, fires upon the killer, effectively saving you and your familes life. How would you feel then? Grateful? Or would you have rather waited for the police after the deed had been done? Just something to chew on.
Why the 2nd Amendment will be repealed in the next 50 years:
1. War does not need guns like 100 yrs ago. Gun companies will go out of biz.
2. Crime will become cyber crime. Guns can't combat cybercrime.
3. Electronic games will displace gun-sports: they are more fun and cheaper + safer.
Gun ownership in the US has dropped from 50% to 30% in the last 40 years. This trend will continue. Guns are fast becoming obsolete; but the NRA and gun companies are desperately trying to keep them relevant through fear. NRA knows that video games are its biggest threat – so they are trying to criticize them as well as trying to get into video game business. Beyond the politics, it is a reality that 2nd Am will not survive another 50 yrs.
You don’t know anything about how this country was founded. You can’t understand the American revolution, yet you insult our Founding Fathers and the Second Amendment. Please go back to wherever you came from.
Really!!! Hey clearvoyant! How bout you give me the winner of the Super Bowl so I can make a few bucks! IDIOT
Get your facts straight sandy hook shooter did not use an AR 15 he used hand guns please explain your self if you can
PIERS, Why dont you show pictures of shooting victims to your guests and then ask them why they need assault-type rifles. I think most people have no idea what these guns do. It's just an abstract argument to them without pics.
Dear Piers Morgan, BOOK: " How To Start Your Own Country",,by Erwin Strauss. Order # 17028 $12.95
Loompanics Unlimited;P.O. Box 1197, Port Townsend, WA 98368 The Book Contains Information about how to really make the world your own and its all legal,,examples include the following list of countries formed by just such methods
1. The inside story on Sealand, Operation Atlantis, Minerva and other recent new countries.
2. obtaining sovereignty the single greatest obstacle for new countries.
3. Ships under flags of convenience- as good as a new country.
I have no ill feelings toward you what so ever,,dissent is part of the deal here in the U.S.A and I must say don't think its fair business practice to not write you a commission check for all your World Class Guiness Book of World Records Gun salesmanship. Winchester, Remington, Colt, Smith&Wesson,Ruger all owe you plenty sir. They would pay for your armed guards if they thought you were in any danger in all this. You keep talking and guns and ammo keep flying off the shelves and since I grew up shooting Trap / Clay Target Tournaments starting at age 10 , I am a More The Merrier kind of guy. The more Americans with guns,the better I feel. Must be my father was an Army Sergeant who joined at age 16 because he had family members back him up changing the date on his birth certificate. He raised me right, and you don't bother me at all. I've convinced the wife that due to all this GUN BAN scare stuff I really need another pistol to carry,,I'm a Marksman,,not a Gun Man. And that Smith & Wesson Model 29-2 in .44 Magnum caliber is as good as mine come tax return day. Watch the movie "Dirty Harry" if you want to see one in action. Truly Randall Mosley...Trapshooter
ATA Member # 4046233,,joined at age 12 in 1978 Amateur Trapshooting Association who hold the Grand American Tournament in August in of all places Sparta ILLlinois.
Really, how much more do we need to hear about the guns? I would like to know more about "why"
There is more to these killings then the weapons used. Lets see if we can fight the terror from all angles
so sick of hearing band guns, blah blah blah we get it. what else? "WHY"
I still do not understand why nobody has mentioned trigger locks,breach locks or gun safes for no access to the guns that should not be unsecured while the gun owner is not in charge?
Every good question deserves an answer,,WHY ?? seeing as I am a Semi-Proffesional shooter, ATA Member #4046233
and started shooting at age 12 in 1975. My Idea is that Adam Lanza was a V I R G I N at age 20..this is no normal man in the way of average joe. I take it your a woman ?? if so a man is the only person to answer the pressures cause by that 1 thing in life.
Piers, Please keep up your fight to reason with the gun lovers; hopefully, one day they will see your point! How many more citizens need to die before they realize that assault type guns are a problem? Add a gun to a conflict and it is an invitation for a deadly outcome. Subtract a gun from a conflict and it is an invitation to a peaceful outcome. Our North American society does not need assault type weapons in the hands of ordinary citizens! Unfortunately, more unpredictable and unthinkable scenarios where innocent citizens are massacred will continue to make the headlines and it's sad to know that it all could have been avoided or minimized. I wonder what it is going to take before we say enough is enough! An armed guard in school is a bandaid solution. Do we really want to continue transforming into a military state? What an ugly thought.
If so called "Military style weapons" could in fact fire at a higher rate then other semi-automatic handguns produced over the last 150 years I might agree with you. If most of the death and destruction from mass shootings came from so called "military style weapons" instead of common handguns, again I would agree with you. However the AR-15 fires no faster than any other semi- automatic self defense handgun and handguns NOT AR-15s have been the primary cause of death in nearly all mass shootings. Of the 16 biggest mass shootings only 4 involved an "assault rifle" and in 3 of those 4 handguns killed more than the AW.
Also make your self aware the the Democrats are not even trying to ban weapons like the AR-15, you will STILL be able to purchase an AR-15 it the Fienstein ban passes and in NY after the NY SAFE act, however the vast majority of pistol magazines will be confiscated by the government or sold out of state in NY so the are really banning pistols by making the magazines that go in them illegal. Again you might be cool with that but be aware that it is an outright lie that ANY of the legislation being purposed by democrats will make buying a brand new AR-15 or any other "military style" weapon illegal. The AWB is pure politics where liberals are trying to push a wedge issue and convince low information voters that Republicans will allow their children to be slaughtered if we don't pass their bill. Too be fair most gun owners do not realize that they can still obtain an AR-15 or mini-14 if this AWB goes through and their are more than enough grandfathered magazines to last 100 years so they get duped as well. However the NY SAFE act does disarm law abiders while criminals can buy 100 rd drums in nearby states people who follow the law are not allowed to have more than 7 bullets in their gun even if that gun can hold more!
25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'
In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw (north of Atlanta) – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance "requiring" each head of household to own and maintain a gun.
Since then, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.
Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a crime rate of 4,332 per 100,000 (pretty high).
The national average at that time was 3,899 per 100,000.
For the year 2005 (latest statistics available), the rate was 2,027 per 100,000 (very low).
For the year 2005 the national average was 3,907 per 100,000.
The population has skyrocketed from 5,242 (1982) to 28,189.
By comparison, the city of Morton Grove (first city in Illinois to adopt a gun ban), saw it's crime rate "increased" by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban.
For the year 2005 (latest statistics available), the rate stands at 2,268 per 100,000 (about 10% higher than Kennesaw).
The national average for the year 2005 was only 3,907 per 100,000.
The population has actually dropped slightly to 22,202 (now 21% "less" than Kennesaw).
Kennesaw Police Lt. Craig Graydon said: “When the Kennesaw law was passed in 1982 there was a substantial drop in crime … and we have maintained a really low crime rate since then. We are sure it is one of the lowest (crime) towns in the metro area.”
While I support gun ownership for citizens, I also support "Obama's 23".
While I am uncomfortable with the high rate of gun ownership, I am in favour of "evidence" based decision making.
My question is: "Given the above, does Kennesaw have it right".
Why give a left-over like Newt any air-time at all? This only takes you out of the mainstream. I agree with you about AR/AK 47's, etc; I agree this lawlessness w/ regard to guns needs to be reined-in. Thank you for these shows/discussions–keep pressing on the topic/debate, and use all your skills. Thanks.
Why give a hack like Morgan a show, he was kicked out of Britain for the same thing he's doing here! He wants to make you very afraid and it appears he's doing a good job.
Piers, ok I get it. You're supposed to be CNN's version of Bill O'Reilly. Next time you invite a guest, give them a chance to speak. Looks like you were just having a Rush Limbaugh chat with yourself. I turned off and didn't learn anything.
Pierce. Thank you for keeping the issue alive. Gingrich's guns need to be confiscated. The man suffers mental problems and is a felon.
so is Pierce Morgan why do you think he was kicked out of Britain ? False reports Phone hacking and endangering british soldiers. He's a Hack, a tabloid journalist of the worst kind.
All of Obama's associates in Chicago are felons. Let's take their guns, too. Oh, right. There are no guns in Chicago. They are banned.
What Gingrich doesn't understand about his position, is that The Founding Fathers were talking about a mass of individuals defending themselves against tyranny with firepower. What military style arms, with multiple magazine clips do, is provide one individuals with the firepower of many. It's one thing to have millions of people with rifles and revolvers, unified, taking a stand against tyranny vs. one lone, paranoid individual, wielding the power of one hundred.
That is the difference. That's the logic that allows most Americans to see how there is a difference between individuals owning assault rifles, vs. simple rifles and revolvers.
An AR-15 is not an assault rifle.
A semi automatic will NOT provide the power of 100 get real, it's a matter of proportional response, a home invasion by 2 or 3 with handguns (30 bullets) can not be defended with a revolver (6 shots)
Supreme court precedents disagree with your interpretation of what the founding fathers were "talking about" but thanks for playing.
I have been following your Guns in America series over the last few weeks. I have found that some of your arguments are flawed or misinformed.
1) There are people who do hunt with AR type rifles. People use them to hunt the wild pigs, which are destroying farm lands and infecting livestock herds with many diseases. They are a nuisance animal and there is no limit to shooting them, therefore having 30 rounds in your magazine is beneficial to helping to erradicate many of them at a single time.
2) Machine guns or automatic rifles are not illegal in the United States. A citizen must go through an extensive background check, pay taxes and fees and wait a period of time to be cleared to own them. On another point, there has not been murders by legally owned automatic rifles, just those that modify semi-automatics.
3) As has been stated by many guests and you fail to see, the 2nd Amendment is not there to protect sportsmen and hunters. You say you support the 2nd Amendment right to protect themselves but fail to see that is not the intended purpose of the 2nd Amendment and choose to try and make a mockery out possible government over reach. Even though there have been many governments in the last few years that have taken arms up against their citizens.
4) You also keep touting that the AR has been used in the last X amount of mass shootings. Even saying that the AR was responsible for the New Mexico shooting, when the teen killed all but one of his family with a .22 rifle. Also, there is new coming out of Newtown, as noted on the Today Show, that it was handguns, not the AR that were used. You also feel the need to leave out the Wisconsin Skih Temple shooting, where only a pistol was used. Please change your information as new information is available and present all information, not just that which supports your position.
I do agree with you that there do need to be better background checks and that we need to do all we can to stop the senseless violence. Unfortunately it's a complicated solution, but there only appears to be one political solution.
If the gov. would use the background checks they do have it would make a difference.
Last year 77,000 were denied guns with background checks, but only 7,000 were prosecuted 70,000 criminals were not pursued.
I wonder if Piers is worried that Scotland is thinking about separating from his country because the English treat them so badly. They are supposed to vote on it in the next year or so. Maybe he should go back and work on an issue and injustice he knows more about.
No one talks about the number of people who have guns in the home to protect their homes and whether these same people have multiple layers of security to keep uninvited guests out, or whether they rely only on their guns, which should used as a LAST resort. This brings me to the point that there are too many people who have not thought their rescue fantasy through. Remember when you blow a hole in someone it is not like Hollywood. If their heart is still beating while they are dying, in the next scene YOU will have to clean it up, your family will probably know too much, and NO ONE will ever sleep the same again. Instead if you had more security, would the criminal have moved on?
Piers was wrong when he said a AR-15 had never been used in self defense. About 2 weeks ago, a 15 year used one to protect himself and his 12 year old sister from two home invaders. This week, one was used in Rochester, NY to prevent a mugging and the gun was not even loaded. http://freedomslighthouse.net/2013/01/10/texas-15-year-old-protects-himself-and-his-sister-from-home-intruders-with-his-dads-ar-15-rifle-video-report/ and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2981324/posts) It happens more than it is reported. Mr. Morgan needs to either be honest or know what he is talking about.
The media generally don't like to cover these stories because they don't suit their liberal gun banning agenda and they don't sell newspapers and advertising airtime like mass shooting tragedies do.
To Phil Davis, where are you from? You obviously don't know American History, at all!!! The North was made up of Republicans, fighting under our first Republican President, in Abraham Lincoln. The Democrats were on the side of the Confederates. After the war, disgruntled Democrats created the KKK. Furthermore, the Democrats were responcible for Segregation in the South. Last but not least, Democrats A.K.A. Liberals voted down every single Civil Rights legislation introduced until, 1968, when Lyndon Baines Johnson supported Civil Rights legislation. However, he did so, not out of concern for African-Americans but, purely for political reasons only. That is why it is utter irony, that African-Americans whole heartedly support Liberals, who so vehemently fought against them getting their equal rights!! It's all there in the history books for anyone to read. But, that's the rub isn't it, people don't read history anymore, that is why they are repeating it. That and the snow job the media is doing on the American people. Naive, ignorant people watch channels like NBC. MSNBC, CNN, CBS, ABC and NPR and just gulp down everything they say, as absolute truth. How can anyone with a straight face, even attempt to say these are legitimate news organizations, when they are openly biased for one party over another, openly campaign for one candidate over another, refuse to report on news that puts their party in a bad light and finally outright LIE to the American people!!! There can be no credibility, when there is no objectivity!!! The 2000 election where Bush defeated Gore, was the worst thing to happen to this country. That is when Democrats and the media sold their souls to the devil and now take a win at all cost approach to politics. Remember the good old days, when Democrats told the truth and had integrity? Remember when acting in a deplorable manner caused one to have shame? Democrats have lost their shame. Now, they want to change our country into something else, other than a Democracy. How utterly sad. One day the Consequences of your parties actions, will catch up with you and leave you filled with regret. When did we start letting fools, like Piers Morgan, dictate to us, about what is right and wrong with our country? How dare him act like an authority, on the 2nd ammendment!!! The grand old party has lost it's soul and until they start telling the truth, they will never get it back again. Open your eyes and see the reality of life as it realy is and not how you wish it to be. The whole gun ban issue is just another Obama diversionary tactic. Want to be scared? Look up Executive Order 211 signed by Obama. That gives him the authority to take all that we possess and give it to those who he thinks needs it most, in the event of a catastrophe or disaster. Funny thing is, he called the Fort Hood shooting a man made disaster. That being the case, would he take all that you have if, another mass shooting were to occur? Chew on that, before you drink the same old Kool-Aid!!!
It is the high-powered guns of any variety which can fire 30, or 40, or more rounds in less than a minute that can cause mass murder, that would be my primary concern," – So Peirs is really saying that nearly every handgun made since the Antebellum period (1850's) should be illegal since you can achieve the same rate of fire with ANY semi automatic. The millitary version of the AR-15 can fire 100 rounds in under 12 seconds but the civilian version fires no faster (40-100 rounds per minute according to Piers) than any semi-auto handgun produced in the last 150 years.
The Fienstien AWB will NOT make AR-15s illegal but will ban cosmetic features on them, even a one characteristic test will not stop new ARs from being built because a traditional stock to replace the pistol grip has already been invented and used in CA.
I feel sorry for liberals who think AR-15s are the reason these mass shootings take place and then get lied to by people like Peirs and think that their politicians are making AR-15s illegal when they are really just banning cosmetics. Of course the vast majority of mass shooting deaths are from handguns, if in fact most of the deaths at Newton are from the AR-15 it will be the FIRST major shooting where an AR-15 was the primary killing weapon. In ALL other mass shootings such as Aurora most of the death came from the handguns even if an AR was present. It is so sad that we waste all our time and money on wedge political issues instead of focusing on the real killer: gang violence.
This is a simple, clear and absolute moral argument. The lives of 11,000 people who die each year through gun violence outweighs the moral right of gun owners to own guns. Self Defense can be addressed in non-lethal ways, the desire to hunt deer can be addressed through hunting rifle rentals at sporting good stores and the need to protect us from tyranny is a ridiculous argument – AR-15's do not stand up to tanks and planes. The rest is just foam and thunder. To engage in a debate with paranoid, borderline psychotic gun proponents is like trying to argue that the ficticious monster someone is hallucinating is only 4 feet high. Stop enabling the NRA and arguing on their terms – there is only one response and that is to ban all guns.
We should also ban cars... the lives of 40,000 people who die in car crashes a year outweigh the right for people to own cars. The government should have a buy back program to remove all cars from the streets! People who have a long commute to work could rent cars from the government to drive to work. These rentat cars would also be regulated by the government so that they could not exceed the 65-70mph speed limit. There is no way our founders thought that there would be motorized vehicles that can drive over 100mph! If you have conscience you cannot argue against measures like these, which would save thousands of lives per year.
Yeah! I see that. But here you have to be extend this to ALL tools where human life is lost. Not only dangerous mashines or semiautomatic assault hand guns. What about knives? there are more than 16,000 aggregated killings in the USA per year. Do you think those people have a lesser right to live and be protected? We must extend the ban to all killing tools. Nobody should own a knife with any metal blades and they should not be allowed to be sold to our children. The government should have a buy back program to remove all Knives from the streets! People who still cook at home or have breakfast should use plastic knives or rent metal blades from the government. These rentat knives would also be regulated by the government so that they could not exceed a 10 lbs/inbreaking force, also known as the "Cut Throat" threshold. There is no way our founders thought that there would be stainless steel blades that can kill people in an instant! If you have conscience you cannot argue against measures like these, which would save thousands of lives per year.
This is the worst show on CNN, he Reality TV News Cast Show.
Nothing you propagate here shed any new light on any new thought. Every time I want to listen to one of your guest You runt and cut them off when they don’t agree with you. What kind of moderation is this??? Your are more talking and repeating your points than your guests. Is CNN now the propaganda platform of Piers Morgan? Are we not allowed to listen to your guest? Are they your puppets? Is it the Piers Morgan Puppet Show?
I always had the illusion news moderators should bring different opinion to the audience. I always thought this is what America is great at: Promoting different opinions. Your show reminds me on States TV to present guests in a democratic farce.
Even Anderson always let his guests speak and make their point. Even he doesn’t agree. That is professional. Piers is a bully.
All the talk is cosmetic talk. Is Piers suggesting that with the ban of semiautomatic rifles there will be no more school shooting? Was about the semiautomatic assault hand guns? I can switch a magazine within 2 seconds. Now what Piers?
Lets introduce a legislation that requires the shooter to count to 30 before he is alowed to reload. That would give people enough time to run off.
Or a legislation to permit only have one firearm at hand so that wackoes could not use multiple guns for their goal?
Does that make any sense? NO, why? Better doing something than nothing.
We should also introduce legislation to make it illegal to bring guns into places like malls, schools and movie theaters.
School Safety and Protecting Our Children
Q. Piers, organized crime has identified a vulnerability that they can attack through acts of terror, our children 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
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.
Q. Piers, how will this limit on ammunition clips, 10 bullets, prevent organized crime from targeting schools again to commit acts of terror, and more gun control?
Q. Piers, the 2nd Amendment is to deter and prevent tyrannical governments, dictators, etc. How do semi-automatics deter tyrannical governments or dictators?
Q. Piers, how did Kings, Queens, and Dictators manage to stay in power for so long?
Cigarettes to lung cancer like guns to gun violence?
This comparison is incorrect. It took years for the medical community to prove the negative health effects of cigarettes, cancer. It has taken years to prove or show that gun violence is not only linked to organized crime, gangs, mobbing, but that organized crime is also committing acts of terror to advocate gun control, a defenseless population.
Freedom of Expression vs. Right to Bear Arms – (news flash)
In Canada they use to say we had the freedom of expression, "the free press", to protect us from tyrannical governments and didn't need to be armed. Now freedom of expression violations are not reported by the Canadian "free press" and people who criticize or vilify the Canadian regime or British regimes by saying that they are tyrannical are censored.
Q. Piers, do you believe that the freedom of expression is what protects a free society from subjugation and tyranny?
Canadian Judicial System Broken Through Organized Crime
Q. Piers, I was unable to address Charter of Rights violations in the criminal code, 20 year old basic human rights violations, due to organized crime. Do you have any idea why the Canadian Judicial System is a broken system through organized crime?
Non-criminal responsibility before trial in CDN CC 672.12 (1)(3) violates Right to Trial when successful, a human rights violation.
Allegations of Uttering Threats 264.1 (1) in published articles are not protect by freedom of expression 2(b), goes to trial. (false alleg.)
Assault Weapons Ban
Q. Piers, do you deny that the British regimes, the Royal Kingdom, are use energy assault weapons, powerful radar, on targeted citizens from neighboring homes, public places, and at their court houses in attempts to inflict deadly cancers link leukemia and lung cancer on a long term, hidden homicides linked to their claim of a low homicide rate?
Q. Piers, what do you know of criminal harassment networks, organized crime, assaulting citizens from neighboring homes, .. , 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 that advocate gun control, a low homicide rate? - And links to basic human rights violations in the criminal code, British regime police, "secret police",?
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?
A. radioactive isotopes, thermal imaging, .. , ?
"The reason you find so many of us very reluctant to go down this road is we believe each step down this road leads to the next step and the next step and the next step," said the former Speaker of the House. "We actually think the Second Amendment is central to our liberties, .. "
Piers, I think he's on to the British.
Mobbing and Organized Crime
Q. Piers, how long do you think it will be before the mob abuses another citizen, tries to corner him through homelessness, and manipulates him to "hit back at society" through a rage shooting or massacre to advocate gun control?
Q. Piers, how long before the mob targets another citizen, abuses him with energy assault weapons, powerful radar aimed at inflicting deadly cancers through bone marrow damage, cell damage, inflammation, lung scars, etc. and manipulate him into killing another Federal judge and Senator to advocate gun control?
Q. Piers, how long before the mob targets another citizen, convinces him that people are on the Hook in New Jersey following Hurricane Sandy and ignored while they suffer in the cold, and that if he commits a massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary with his brothers license from New Jersey it will make this injustice visible, to advocate gun control?
Mobbing, Organized Crime, British Regimes
Q. Piers, the mob in British regimes and Canada are using energy assault weapons, powerful radar, from neighboring homes, public places, and at the court house ... aimed at inflicting physical damage and cancer. Can you tell be why the authorities deny that this exists, and advocate gun control?
The U.S. 2nd Amendment
Q. Piers, I don't understand why you don't understand the U.S. 2nd Amendment, I would like to know what part that you don't understand.
In Canada they use to tell use that the "free press" and freedom of expression protects use from subjugation and tyranny. I know that this is false, the Canadian press is controlled and censored, and all Charter of Rights can be easily dismissed in court or weakened with time, like the 2nd Amendment. Kings, Queens, Dictators stayed in power for hundreds of years until they were removed through war, gun violence. Many regimes, including British regimes subjugate the population through organized crime, homelessness, and murder, they are currently using cancer and their medical system to hide these. How did the East Germany police control the population?
I believe the founding fathers would be shocked that some future Americans would feel a need to become armed to protect themselves from the very government the founding fathers themselves gave birth to.
Obviously you are unfamiliar with our founding fathers viewpoints. Another ignorant self-centered liberal that is clueless!
OH MY LORD...
If you listen carefully, you can hear Our Founding Fathers rolling over in their graves...
What happened to our education system.... do they not teach history anymore...?????
I am really frustrated by the lack of knowledge of everyone involved in the gun control debate on your show. I admire the passion that Piers Morgan directs towards his ideas and his intentions are good. Here are some of the facts that be floated around that are not true.
Machine guns are legal for civilian ownership in the United States. If they were not it would be a violation of the seconded amendment. The government deiced to discontinue manufacturer of machine guns for civilian ownership in 1986. Congress just recently looked into adding more weapons to the NFA list(Machine Gun List). The cost to own a machine gun is very high because a lack of guns to buy in the legal list and ownership is left up to your local sheriff or chef of police.
AR-15 are used for hunting! They come in many more calibers than .223 such as 6.5 grendel, 6.8spc, .50 BEOWOLF. Two of the calibers listed were invented by an Englishman man that had to leave England to pursue his carrier in firearms design because of the rules in acted in his home country. Ar-15's are used for feral hog hunting, deer, elk, pronghorn and many other types of game.
I would just like to have people read the two points and think about the wonderful country we have and the very balanced gun laws that we currently have. There are a few small changes that would make a very big difference. There is a simple balanced way for right and left to get what they want and the seconded amendment to continue its existence in its original intent. Make ar-15's an NFA item just like machine guns. Remove the law enforcement signoff and create a more streamlined background check system with the BATFE. All citizens would be able to purchase assault rifle's as they were original intended as full automatic weapons and have them regulated by the government! The court system has quit clearly said that the government cannot violate the seconded amendment but does have the ability to regulate. The government can keep gun out of the hands of non citizens and dangerous people and the gun owner gets his seconded amendment privileges back.
In 1860 in the South, Southern Conservatives used the "rights" under the 2nd ammendment to act against the "oppressive" Federal Govt who wanted to have a severe affect on the labor used in the farming industry, the
primary industry of the Southern States. Commonly called the American Civil War. Under the "protection" of
the second amendment, they got out their guns, cannons and ships to fight this American Federal Govt heading by
the primary "oppressor" Abe Lincoln. After four years of war and over 500,000 americans killed by means
of the second amendment..the war by these Southern Conservatives who relied on the 2nd Amendment
WAS LOST....unfortunately do to old age, Newt Gingrich has no memory of this event in US history and
Piers Morgan, a British National has no knowledge either...SO MUCH FOR TALKING HEAD EXPERTS ON TV
I have yet to see Piers Morgan get a REAl gun expert on his show,all of these anti gun people have never owned a gun much less know anything about them and they want to ban something they have no idea about,a AR-15 is a semi-automatic and it has alot of fancy plastic bells and whistles on it but it is no different than a "Hunting" semi automatic gun the only difference is ARs can except larger mags, I understand the argument about banning large magazines but not the gun itself because ARs are no different than any other semi automatics, so why would you want to ban some semi autos but not others it makes no sense, and if you knew anything about guns you would know that you could have a semi auto and bring alot of ten round mags that Obama wants to limit too and do the same amount of damage
CNN get REAL GUN EXPERTS on the Piers Morgan show,Piers Morgan does not speak for the rest of us,he lies every night with his propaganda
I agree! Last night he was trying to tell everyone fully automatic machine guns are banned in this country. He was trying to trip Newt Gingrich up on this point. Full autos are NOT banned, there are nearly 500 thousand in private circulation. In fact one of the gun girls interviewed on the show was shooting a Class 3 gun at the range. CNN's producers probably had her do that as part of their continued manipulation of the facts.
I am a citizen of the USA and support the 2nd admendment (the right to bear arms) I disagree with Morgan on his views.
Pier's guests made him look like a fool last night. He thought he would be able to outwit the pretty girls with AR15s but even they made him looks like a dunce. I loved it when one of them did know of an incident when an AR15 was used for self defense. The only point he thought he had was his argument that if it was ok to ban machine guns then the AR15 should be banned because it was too lethal as well. His arguments all come for the viewpoint of what damage these weapons can do in the hands of a lunatic. He refuses to acknowledge the other side of how effective they are for self defense and that we have the right to have them. He thinks it's okay to limit the effectiveness of weapons used for self defense in order to hopefully keep them out of the hands of mass murderers. That argument is sheer nonsense unless guns completely eradicated from society, which is his real agenda.
Notice to Piers, yes we want most effective, most lethal, largest magazine we can get to defend ourselves from crazed killers. More is better when you're the victim! Piers, you are completely ignorant of ballistics and guns and probably don't have the guts to use a gun to defend yourself or your family. That's your problem! Why are you being paid full pay to report half of the story? Why do you refuse to acknowledge that firearms stop more violent crime that is committed with them? Why don't you report the increase in violent crime and murders in countries that have confiscated all firearms from law abiding citizens? Who are you to decide what is sufficient for my self defense. I'll tell you what is sufficient when I am the victim – it's far more firepower than the perpetrator who's trying to kill me or my family. Is that so hard to understand or has your nanny state homeland sucked the notion of self defense out of you? Is it the states job to wipe your butt and protect you and your family? You make me sick!
Keep up the good fight Piers! I think you are dead on in asking Newt and others if 2,200 weapons sitll being allowed by Feinstein's bill is enought to protect oneselft and their family and to hunt with. I think the answer to all this is to require Insurance for every gun owned. If guns were simply treated like cars the easy access and proliferation of guns of mass murder would vanish. Gun owners, and their insurance companies, would be held liable for what is done with them. With rights come responsibility. Guns, all guns, assault of otherwise, need to be treated for what they are, tools that can be used to kill. To buy a gun maybe one could be required to take classes and training on it before they are allowed to have it. Meanwhile extensive background checks could be done to help prevent those who shouldn't have one from gettting easy access to it. Gun shows in which any Tom, Dick, or Harry can buy them need to be stopped until they can prove they will do the background checks, etc.
BTW, Piers, you exposed Newt for what he is, a paid tool of the NRA who oppose any common sense regulation of the out of control gun industry. You flatly stated that you respect the 2nd Amendment's right to own and bear arms, within common sense and reason, yet your detractors want to brand you as a foreign nutcase hellbent on taking every American's firearms away from them. I think that public opinion will sway Congress to actuall put some teeth into legislation that will over time bring some sanity to the escaling situation with weapons of mass murder being used heinously nearly eekly.
Ok Sam, Let's just start where all the action happens. Let's start with the military, Full auto "assault" rifles. What do they really need these for? Oh, those are the small arms They could kill us all in the pust of a button. That is what you call INSANITY! What does the military "need" these weapons for if not to kill people and how are the people they are going to kill "inferior" to you and I, because the first thing they will do before they kill them is dehumanize them. What is our military afraid of that they "need" all of these weapons? Come on what are they atraid of? They are afraid of humans, human tyrants, dictators and madmen. who will kill for profit or sport. They are afraid and so should you. And no I don't trust a bunch of "public servants" gone psycho rogue with my life and liberties.
Piers is a traitor and subversive a "Tokyo Rose" and you would say. Reasonable limitations is B.S. and just the nose of the camel getting in the tent Because those who want all the power and control want you to have none.
The Bankers have already invaded and conquered your country. And when those stock certificates you call "dollars" revert to their true value you can add ruin you country
Hey Piers: The first thing the Foundign Fathers would do is through everyone out of the country who has a British accent.
Funny... he would "permit" guns... because his "small" government would not dare interfere in people lives... but his government would not "permit" gay marriage or abortion... because that's clearly where government needs to interfere, where people stick their c&%$, not their guns! Hate ignorant one track minded self interest hypocrites, liberal or conservative,
Ian, you may have a point about gay marriage but those that oppose abortion do so because they believe it's taking a life (murder). Whether you agree or not, abortion is not an apples to apples case. Regardless, abortion is legal and the Obama administration has decided not to enforce laws on gay marriage just because they don't agree with them and are above the law.
Pierce, I hope you don't consider yourself a fair talk show host. You interrupt your guests before they give their views. You quote twisted facts to try to support your views and never listen to your guests trying to answer your very one sided questions. You were crying that your guests don't answer the questions you want so to make the show flow better just put a picture of your guest on the screen, ask your questions and then you can answer your question the way you want to hear it answered or better yet just not have guest on the show and then you can have a hour to babble away at how you think everyone else should live. Try reading more, you might actually find the real facts out there about guns and gun bans but I doubt that because we know there is only one side to this, the Pierce side. Thanks for letting me make a statement but I look forward to you answering my post because I cant be right because its not your way. Thanks for helping all of us that are not thinking the way you do.
I loved the way Newt laugh at Piers. Seem his o'll Buddy Ronald Reagan sign the Brady Bill banning assault weapons. I believe Newt sign on board with that piece of Legislation. Also Reagan ban concealed weapons in Calif. I didn't hear such an out cry from the Republicans when it was there own doing this. Hippocrates. You say liberal like you have a turd in your mouth. I thought it was we the people not we the nut jobs.
Anyone else have a thought about Mr. Morgan stranger than mine ?? I thibk he would KILL as a guest Character
on THE SIMPSONS ,,with HOMER SIMPSON NRA PATRIOT and allaround nice idiot,,It WOULD SELL MAN, MATT GROHNER
would love it. You ???
This post is just a test, my computer is acting strange. REBOOT
Why doesn't Piers point out that rights are already limited and have always been, as they should be. Two clear examples – our first amendment right isn't absolute – I can't yell "fire" in a crowded place. Our second amendment right isn't absolute either – I can't buy nukes and chemical weapons. The myth that some gun propagators are promoting, i.e., rights must be absolute, is already debunked. They aren't, and never have been. The entire issue is about WHERE to draw the line, and which side assault weapons should fall on. Our founding fathers did not have anything to say on this particular issue, so referring to them constantly is not going to serve any purpose.
Why a 100 Rounds for Hunting
Piers, I was told the 2nd Amendment was not about hunting but you seem to be stuck on hunting and 100 rounds, so here is why you need a 100 hundred rounds when hunting.
Imagine this Piers, you are out hunting little birds, missing a lot, you are down to two bullets because of a 10 round limit, and a big grizzly bear comes out and instead of having 90 rounds left you only have two. The grizzly bear eats two bullets instead of 90 and bites your head off.
Imagine this Piers, you are hunting again, missing these little birds a lot, bird hunting, down to three bullets this time due to the 10 round limit, and all of sudden a pack of wolves comes out, you miss twice, hit one with one bullet, instead of having 90 bullets left, and the others tear you to shreds.
Why don't we get rid of cars and alcohol? They kill more people than guns.
So....the trend for violent crime is decreasing........it lower than it was 19 years ago........but that doesnt matter because you want a "gun ban".
Really....So this has NOTHING to do with "Crime" or "Murder" at all......its about taking away someones ability to protect themselves.
Seriously???......NRA here I come
"A crime puzzle: Violent crime declines in America"
Claude Fischer, professor of sociology | 6/16/10
May 25, 2010 8:23am
"In Crime, a Remarkable Trend"
"Preliminary FBI data released yesterday indicate a remarkable decline in reported crime in this country – one that, contrary to some expectations, accelerated last year despite the deep recession. If the results hold steady in a final assessment next fall, the violent crime rate will have fallen by 44 percent from its recent peak in 1991. That’s our own figure, based on an extrapolation of the preliminary FBI figures. It suggests we could see a final estimate next fall of 425 violent crimes per 100,000 people – down from 758 per 100,000 at its recent high 19 years ago, and its lowest since 1973"
Rage Shooting Factors
Human Right Defenders in Canada
Piers, here are 3 things that Human Right Defenders need in Canada.
1. Secure Income: They need a secure income, the mob always tries to eliminate the means of subsistence of those it targets.
2. Gun: A side arm, semi-automatic, or shot gun, the mob uses threats that they will send organized crime members to shoot unarmed citizens or human right defenders.
3. Faraday Cage: Human right defenders and citizens who are targeted by the mob in Canada need a faraday cage, the mob is using energy assault weapons, powerful radar, to inflict different deadly cancers.
LarryF..."they suit their needs"...what do they actually do what a weapon like that, not hunting I presume...they would have not trophy left. So please tell us exactly what they used them for. thanks
The BS cliff-notes
– Guns don't kill people, people kill people: BS! People who use force kill people. The more efficient the means of the force, the more easy it becomes to kill.... ie. a gun. It's not that complicated.
– 2nd Amendment should not be regulated: BS! We have evolved since our forefathers. It's not about muskets and knives anymore, it's about conventional, tactical, mass damage weaponry. I seriously doubt they would've drafted the amendment much the same way today. Plus, the independence war is over... way over. And if you think Obama wants to take over, you are not well at all. Get checked. But let's say he does... Even if nothing gets changed regulation wise, you think an ar15 will be the difference between averting a govt. take over? Seriously, if you have automatic or semiautomatic weapons you will fare better, vs. tanks, air support, artillery, explosives, tactical bombs... not to mention nukes?... Simply put, the argument to averting a gvt. take over is the most BS of all.
The truth, no BS. I like my guns too much, Im selfish and I dont care that they are a risk, just dont mess with my guns.
The best posting I have read.
Your pretty funny, Hate and Anger? Amazing how you can read peoplles minds then disqualify them and their imput on their stance "All my types"? I don;t think there is any one "type" We are all different and you are doing nothing different than what your military does before they go on a killing rampage. Yes weapons do kill people. I am anti- war, so much so that my next order of business next week will be to change my voter registration from Republican to Independant. I no longer want to belong to a Party than trives on war. That being said, I believe those who hold the same views as I simply believe that history shows that man has killed man long before the Gun. Sad as it is, this is a violent, a ultra violent world. Humans need little reason to kill others , Aliens from another planet would hardly be worse. I think you need to inject a little reason and historical perspective into your outlook and quit stereotyping people to gain an advantage.
OOPS, replied to the wrong person, Above was for Geximus
The most ridiculously ignorant posting I have read. How to say nothing with a lot of emotional ranting. "people who use force kill people" maybe you meant to say people kill people with force. How about people have killed people with force from the beginning of recored history. Yes todaysre weapons are better and more efficient, no we have not "evolved", most likely devolved if anything. Yes it is about tactical mass damage, which our goverment spends 53cents on the dollar to facilitate. How do you draft an amendment retaining the right for the public to be armed in a "different" way. "The independence war is over" well yeah like 1783, so . Oama take over, not the point. . did you take history in school can you say democide. " an ar-15 will make the difference" as opposed to nothing, just laying down as they herd you off. Does 60,000,000 people sould like a large number to you. Would you really believe that many people could die at the hands of goverment if it had not happened? You think they will use nukes against us, and you blame us for wanting to defend ourselves as unreasonable? We like our guns too much are selfish? Glad you have the all knowing eye and judgement. Truth is if I could get on a rocket ship and leave this insane planet where humans with nuclear weapons think this is rational, nations dehumanizing other nations then killing 100, 000 . a planet where klling another in war is glorified, where we torture, find violence entertaining be it gladiatora or video games. I hink you need to get perspective before you rant. Quit passing judgement on people you don't even know
Case in point. Mince my grammar how ever you want to justify your response. Your hate and anger is the only base for your responses. That is all your types can do... hate and rant. How ever you put it, People who "use", "apply", "impose", "exhert", unlawful force, with malicious intent, kill people. People who are sane will not kill others. Now if someone who's malicious has a gun vs. a knife, it will be easier for him to kill others. Am I saying ban guns? No. That should not be the solution. I am saying, people who say "Guns dont kill people, people kill people" have to suspend disbelief to defend their argument. It's not a smart or real way to have this discussion. So simmer down Clint.
I not sure the war for independence really did end. It is all about power and control not necessarily killing people. Perhaps it only just took another form. What I think is that they just sent over their "bankers" to do what their armies did not achieve, and they suceeded. Because most Americans don't know what money really is, a placed to store your productivity(time and energy) for later use. So when Ben B. gets up in front of Congress and says that gold is "not money" and that inflation is only barely above 2 % This does not make headlines and he is not laughed out of town. Most of our congressmen are economically illiterate or wouldn't care anyway.
if you would stop trying to sterotype everyone we might find some common ground. Even though I see history shaped by one thing – War and humans as animals capable of pretty much anything.I still want to be able to defend myself with somethimg more than a slingshot or bow and arrow. Because I am forced to live on this planet and the "gun" is the Modern weapon, untlil they come out with star Wars laser rifles and make bullets obsolete, may be sooner than you think. Why am I unreasonable or selfish in your view. I don't understand . Can you imagine a Species so stupid as to wage Nuclear war and destroy everything, Yet unbelievably that is where we are.
Let me try this again... I am talking about an argument point of view. Not speaking to anyone. The "Guns dont kill people argument"... That is all. You can have your guns to defend yourself from a criminal or what ever. Never said anything about taking away your gun. Yet you go on this elaborate rant, and blame me for ranting... funny. You stereotype me and others with my POV and blame me for setreotyping... look in the mirror bro.
Bro, I never told you you were selfish or hate filled. I only said that you make no sense. "Guns don't kill people, people do" that is the question. My only point is that people have killed people in mass for any ol reason since the beginning of recorded time. This might as well be "Rocks don't kill people, peope kill people" or "swords don't kill people, people kill people" or longbows etc etc. The point is 800,000 people died with machetes in the hutu, tutsi violence. I'm just saying, transport us all back to 800 b.c. and people will be killing people. Yes guns kill more people at a faster pace, But then transportation is better. and the press is more developed. (what little good that seems to do). I guess in 800 bc you had months to watch the siege progress before they killed you all. I could say "Goverments don't kill people, people kill people" but then I'm confusing even myself.
Read your responses... and you will understand my point about the hate spin. It kinda sounds like it from the way you originally responded... Don't play dum. Anyways. You seem pretty set in your ways, so I will just leave you with this.
To me it's simple, to prevent mass shootings by ONE man, take away the weapons which make it possible for ONE man to kill tens of people at a time. Especially when it happens more than once during a year. I mean, not to sound insensitive, but if it wouldve been just one shooting, we would not be having this discussion. But it's not, it's kind of a recent TREND. And when trends are so destructive, you need to address them. When ONE man with ONE machete, knife or blunt object goes somewhere and commits mass murder, then I will listen to your argument. But pls dont insult my intelligence by comparing the atrocities done by hate groups, to the actions one man with the right weapon can do. It actually plays even MORE to my argument.
Geximus, I will give you this as a consesion. What I think is that in 800 BC or 800 Ad people knew violence and death as a aspect of life, maybe took It for granted. I suppose and I wish it was so as I am sure you do, that in this age of "advancement" when we can send men to the moon and talk around the world with a handheld device that, we could rise above it all, the violence and killing. I only wish. Then I look at modern weapons and think we have not learned anything. I am afraid believe me on that. Peace to you
I do agree with that, I do wish we were more peace loving. But heq... look at you and me right now. We are wired to win as humans. You and me, we know not to take it to stupid levels, but some folks out there, having this conversation; would pull guns on one another. The laws should play to protect them from themselves, and us from them. In the mean time, the law should not be so over reaching that it limits our freedom because of them... but it's not black and white. And simplistic statements like, "People kill people", or the "2nd Ammendment is meant to avert govt. oppression, so let's spin this as if Barack is comin for us"... just make the conversation worse; because we are not dealing with the REAL issue. Real issue: In an increasingly violent, technologically advanced world, how do we best update our laws and standards so that they keep up to speed with the criminal minds and their ever increasing technological ability to do harm, while not limiting our freedom as a whole because of them? That is the question. Something needs to be done. "Sticking to our guns" won't work... And completely banning them is not the answer either. Now if only politicians could keep it real... but hey, ironically, that would NOT be a real expectation.
Hey Geximus, This may sound crazy but after watching the drama for so many years it is all I can come up with. I think what needs to happen is we as a species need to catch up to our technology. I view it this way, people are computers brains wihich come to conclusions formed from experience etc. The problem is we don't always come to the same conclusion also we try to gain advantage by deception. What we need is to marry modern electronics with ancient reasoning. If you have the time look up Epistemology and Fallacy. If we could somehow reason together without all the baggage each person tends to bring maybe we could come to "better" conclusions and do so in a more peacefull manner, Take Care
Not to be insensitive, but if you added up all the deaths from these school shootings in ths last ten years it would not equal the deaths 250-300 caused in one year on the roads from people not wanting to be molested by the tsa. Alcohold kills 70 people per day on the road. What you must remember is that these crazies have a short life span. What you need to fear is one of these nutcases from getting elected to goverment. As tragic as these deaths are they are are no less terrible than innocents (collateral deaths) which happen every day overseas. 500,000 orphans in Irap. Hey Stalin said "one man with a gun can control 100 without" My point is you can't pick and choose in a world awash in weapons and death. World democide totals over 150,000,000 in last century. Even if it is only 100,000,000 goverments seem to be a great thing for population control.
Reading posts from several different threads, I get the impression that somehow many people 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, so what’s the point of having them, 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 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. If the majority of the populace stands up with powerful firearms, there is no way for the government to be able to suppress them without causing massive commotion, ‘CAUSE WE WILL NOT GO QUIETLY INTO THE NIGHT WITHOUT A FIGHT!! We still way outnumber them. We can give them a heck of a hard time. Even after the government got the control over the media, if tenacious insurgencies occur here and there, it would suffice to sound the alarm to the world that our liberty is being threatened, so is the liberty of the entire world.
By the way, tyrants know that too (they are crazy but not stupid), so they won’t do a thing until they can relatively disarm the populace and make them controllable. Thus, as long as we are well-armed, we are safe. As long as the government fears the people, we are safe. This is why, still today, the Second Amendment is a strong deterrence against tyranny.
50 years ago there was a brainless TV show called Dragnet. It was a soap box from which Jack Webb could beat the public with his message of "stay between the lines", "drugs are bad", "the Watts Towers could fall down any moment"... Watching the reruns is an exercise in dark comedy because the guy reduced EVERYTHING to simplistic notions and jingos.
In the episode in which some agitated redneck complains about gun registration, Jack Webb spoke pretty much the same thing you just said: "in this age of tanks and nuclear weapons..." (facepalm) Let me ask you, though, if the government started rounding up Jews, though they're more likely to start rounding up Republicans, are you going to sit around and let them do it? And if Civil Disobedience doesn't work, are you going to feel better going into battle with a 22 revolver instead of a semiautomatic rifle?
Under current law ordinary citizens can own a machine gun.
Under current law, the machine gun you can own does have restrictions.
Thanks for opening the door Steve, I might add in Kentucky We Shoot Machine Guns To. Open To The Public at West Point Kentucky We have The Machine Gun Shoot Twice a year. In April-2013 The dates are the 12th-13th & 14th then in October of 2013 the shoot will be held on the 1th-12th- & 13th – Open to the public means you show up..walk shooting station to shooting station, follow the shoot rules, pay your fee and shoot any gun you want. The Shoot scheduale for 2014 will be April 11th, 12th, & 13th and October- 10th, 11th, & 12th. Will the 2014 shoot take place ? Absolutely unless Barrack Hussein Obama declares Marshall law and disarms all gun owners by then ..
Guns: It is better to have one and not need one, then to need one and not have one. Remember that my freinds.
Piers is still sore about losing the revolution.
The civilian AR-15 is a terrible CQB weapon, for one it’s a long gun as such weapon retention and manipulation is difficult, you be better off with a handgun. To be realistic the pump action 12ga shotguns would produce far more damage with the ability to strip meat off bone at up to 25 yards, not to mention someone like me who know how to work a pump action can more lead down range than a machine gun. Throw in some breaching shells and you got a master key in you hands, go to steel slugs and you can punch a hole in an engine block and defeat any body armor out there, and to keep retention of your weapon slap on a bayonet.
Well put by Newt. If Piers wants to live in a society that gave up liberty, he can buy a plane ticket back to the turd pit he came from.
I agree with Fubarack! In my opinion, just because once in a while one daft Tw@ decides to shoot people, we have to punish the millions of others who don't go out and murder with sporting rifles aka 'assault rifles' ; shall we give the spotlight to the victims instead of the evil person?
1. England is a cool place.
2. Why would you send Piers back to England? England hasn't done anything mean to us.
3. What ID10T gave Piers a news show? The guy is a moron. I would love to have an opportunity to debate him.
I believe in gun control, it's the best thing in the world. When I pick up a gun and control it with my hands, there's nothing quite like it. Gun control – Holding a gun the right way. There's too many guns and not enough people are using them.
I understand that you are not an American so it is hard for you to understand the right to be free. You have been brought up believing that weapons are bad and that only the people in charge should be the ones carrying one. Which kinda reminds me of the Water Boy when he repeats "Well MOMMA said that was the debel". So I forgive you of your upbringing. What I don't forgive you of is your attack of my freedom. Your attack of what my upbringing was. Your total disreguard for facts (which is shared by all media). Although to someone who has never fired a weapon or has little to no CORRECT knowledge of a firearm. I'm sure the big bad evil looking AR-15 could be a little intimidating. I have watched your attack on th AR-15 over the past few months and your kinda just throwing stuff out there. In almost all of your name calling arguments with every guest that doesn't agree with you. You tell how it is the AR-15 that has caused every mass shooting. You say" from Gabby Giffords shooting until now" First let me state the obvious, not one of those weapons in ANY of these shootings fired themselves! There was a sick an demented person behind each and every one. These people was ignored to begin with and was allowed to folow through with their actions. They seek attention and no one shows them any until they commit these horrible acts. Then mainstream media and you give them thier fame for weeks somtime months depending on their kill numbers. Maybe if YOU and the mainstream media would not give them their notoriety and plaster their photos all over your newscast and programs. Maybe the next guy wouldn't think he too could become a legend. So I hold YOU just as responsible for the culture of violence in this country as much as a video game or movie. Then to top it all off YOU shift the blame NOT to the person but to the weapon. WAY TO GO! Next to your attack to the AR-15 and clips and drums. Giffords was shot with a pistol. Which by the way is the weapon that is used in over 90% of murders by guns. Which you endorse. I have heard you several times say that you have no problem with someone owning a pistol. So your not against the main weapon of murder? Makes no sense to me but hey there again I won't fault you to your upbringing. You keep bringing the shooting in Aurora into your arguement. You have a problem with someone being able to puchase 6000 rounds of ammo on-line and a AR-15 and going and killling Americans in a movie theater. Well I have a problem with a school That cuts loose a student that they are affraid of without alerting of their behavior. Knowing before hand that they are mentally unstable and capable of such actions. I have a problem with the FACT that after planning for months he can still claim insanity and that lawyers will be able to give him a defense of such. The FACT that those very same lawyers can flaunt the fact that he could walk due to that defense to his victims. But, I have a problem with you pushing down everyones throats that this man walked into a theater and sprayed hundreds of rounds out of a AR-15 in a minute. And if it were not for the AR-15 countless lives wouldn't have been lost. I dont' know if you are aware of the I DEMAND A PLAN campaign. But here is another one of those little FACTS. I demand a plan STEVEN B Aurora survivor states in his video at the one minute mark that it was a SHOTGUN blast that hit him. That the DR. pulled 25 SHOTGUN PELLETS from him. Even goes on to show the scars from the 25 pellets. But your rants never include that FACT. Its all about the evil AR-15. How about the Sandy Hook shooting. For days they reported that the gunman entered into the school with 2 handguns and that when they found him he had 2 handguns. That the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the car. The video of them stating this is all over the internet. There are several videos showing the recovery of the weapon from the back of the car. When that didn't quite fit in to the agenda of banning "assualt weapons" the story changed. Now every shot fired was out of an A-15. I've noticed that every news headline now carries an assualt weapon. I find it odd that out of every crime committed now it is always with an assualt weapon. Yet the FBI shows that only a little over 3% of all murders are committed with a rifle. NOT just and AR-15 BUT ALL TYPES of RIFLES. Today yahoo carried a story about the murder rate in Chicago. I guess they wanted to celebrate the fact that they hit number 40 already for Jan. this year. First they talked about their gang problem. Which usually means repeat offenders that get let out early for good behavior, plea bargins, over crowding. But then they talked about how it had the toughest gun laws in the country. Then blamed their issue on surrounding areas for the number of guns in their city. But the craziest thing was they showed a picture of a table in front of all these proud city officals showing all the guns they have taken off the street. You know the illegal ones, the cause of all their crime. Would you believe that not a single one was an AR-15! NOT ONE most was shotguns. They had one pistol. Now I know you will never admit to being wrong. It takes a real man to do that. I know that me writing this will not change your mind on your fight to rid this country(which you left home to come to)of its wicked ways. However I just wished you took a less passionate look at the problem. If the assualt weapon ban passes. What that tells me is that you all have decided that you wanted to go after 3% of the crime. Not that it will stop a criminal cause they don't worry about laws anyway. But I think that is beating a dead horse. So in 2 years the number hasn't dropped noticably, why because you only tried reducing 3% of it to begin with. You say hell that didn't work, next we feel like this gun or type of gun is the true issue. I use the word feel because it is clear that you don't use any data other than how you feel for your reasoning. Have you ever heard of root cause analysis? I have been taught that if you don't fix the root of the problem you are only band-aiding it and the problem is reoccuring. It only makes sense to me that if you want to make a dent you go after true causes. I have also learned that making up numbers to fit your story only hurts your results. If you hide from your true data your outcome is not what you need and only will cause a failure in your attemps to solve or fix your problem. So STOP reporting fictious data and numbers trying to tell the poeple you have it all figured out. SIR, you have not dug deep enough into our culture or the problems to possibly have the answer! You have stopped at the surface and due to your upbringing and laid blame on something you know little to nothing about. I am 40 years old and have owned a gun since I was in the second grade. I was taught what a gun was capable of and how to use it from a very early age. I was taught how to handle it safely. But more importantly I was taught there is a high value to a human life. I can tell you the no one should fear any weapon that I may or may not have in my home. My neighbors need not to fear me nor the community I live in. Only the people who feel the need to try and tread on me! Then the only thing I warn them of is that I am a very capable person and it's one hell of a roll of the dice.
Well said, bro!
It seems as thought Piers Morgan is ignorant of federal gun laws on the books that are not vigorusly prosocuted. I shall enlighten him with afew.
The Natiioal firearms Act of 1934, Which regulates class III weapons ( machineguns, sawed-off shotguns, short barreled rifles, silencers, Yes ,you can privately own a machine -gun if your local allows it.
The 1938 Firearms act deals with licencing of gun dealers
The 1968 Gun Control Act wich deals with record keeping and prohibited persons.
The 1986 Armed Career Crimanal Act, deals with increased penalties.
The Enforcement Officer Act 1986, 99-408, bullets that can defeat body armor (armour piercing bullets)
The Crime Control Act of 1990, has to do withthe importatio of semi-automatic assault type weapons and creats gun-free zones.
The Brady Violence Act of 1994, 103-159 , which was the Clinton assault weapons ban which expired in 2004.
1998 The National Instant Crimanal Backround Check (NICS).
That,s not all of them ,I just touched base on tha major ones. So do some research on the subject before you go running off at the mouth.
Perhaps a few years im the Military can get Mr Morgans act together.
I've got to say that this Piers Morgan founds his every word on fallacy and emotion... a very weak decision if one is after solutions, absolutely wonderful if one is after web hits. Hey Piers, if the next mental patient uses a revolver and murders a dozen instead of a score, are you going to pat yourself on the back for saving ten lives? I claim that a thoughtful person should be using this time to fix the big picture of public safety, which includes ending drug gangs and putting mental patients where they belong.
As far as politicians who think that a pistol grip on a rifle is causing the problem, I suggest that they are deliberately using the recent tragedy for political gain, and anybody short-sighted enough to not see that is helping to perpetuate the problem.
1) To reduce assault style rifle violence mandate that owners must keep their weapons away from minors and disturbed individuals in the home or face severe civil and criminal consequences with mandatory prison time. Let your son go to school with your AR-10, AR-15, high capacity assault styled weapon because you didn't lock it away from him then lose your savings, your home and your freedom. If you locked it up and he stole it, then you are not culpable. But you run the risk to trust him or not. This would not include handguns.
2) To reduce handgun related violence declare the Bloods, Crips, MS13, Hells Angels, mafia, .... demonstrably violent gangs.... as TERRORISTS. Treat them like enemy combatants. Use the NDAA 2012 and extended Patriot Act against them. Sure we have too many people in prison and yet our crime rates are down – go figure. Just being in a demonstrably violent gang should make it illegal to own a gun. When you are a member of a gang you are forswearing your primary secular allegiance to the U.S.
Notify me of new comments via email.