READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
As much of the nation continues to debate the polarizing topic of guns, and firearm legislation, on Tuesday evening "Piers Morgan Tonight" invited Robert Zimmerman Jr. back to the program to discuss the stand-your-ground law in relation to gun control. The brother of the man who shot Trayvon Martin, spoke out against any ban on firearms, noting that when it comes to gun laws, "the reality is criminals don't care."
"Very restrictive gun laws, they don't matter in the hands of a madman." said Zimmerman. "I mean, guns don't fire themselves. And unfortunately I think what we need to ban is turning a blind eye on the mental health crisis that we have in this country. That's what really needed to be banned."
Also on the program, Daniel Hernandez, the former intern who helped to save the life of Gabby Giffords after she was shot at a constituent event in 2011 sat down with Piers Morgan and gave his insight on gun control and the gun culture in America. "I come from Arizona. It's a place that has a shooting culture," said Hernandez. "I've gone hunting with my dad. I had my own weapon when I was younger. But it's a part of our culture that we don't like to talk about and we don't like to really take it head-on."
"And that's - I think - the serious conversation that needs to happen in D.C. now," continued Hernandez. "And I'm hoping that with the new group that the congresswoman has started and with so many other groups like the Brady Campaign and the Mayors Against Illegal Guns working on this issue that we'll have more brave members of Congress and more brave senators saying, 'you know what, I'm not going to keep passing the buck and I'm going to take this issue head-on.'"
Watch the clips and listen to the interviews as Hernandez tells Morgan how if the shooter in Arizona had an AR-15 rifle and "if it didn't jam he could have blasted everybody."
» Follow Piers Morgan Tonight on Twitter
> Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
If you want America to be a carbon-copy of Great Britain, then GO THE HELL BACK THERE AND MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS!
Jim, this is a typical Americans answer you people refuse to take the good things out of this world and learn from
them you just keep rolling down the road of stupidity. Americans are trained by the military to kill, when they develop
a disorder where do they go? straight for their guns. Strict Canadian or British gun laws and Dorner's 2 young kids
would have a father and the other 3 would be alive. You have to start by changing the mind set of Americans to
the point where they realize there are solutions to problems other than with a fire arm.
Until you change the idiotic mind set of LaPierre and the NRA and the hopeless statements that Robert Zimmerman Jr. came up with and you ! the daily slaughter of American citizens will continue.
which americans go around solving problems with a gun? ive never seen this & i know tons of Americans. i know there are a couple maniacs & some criminals who whose guns but thats barely anybody at all.
i was attacked violently by a group of guys so i started carrying a gun. a member of my family was recieving death threats so the police told him to get a gun.
other then those type of problems, that i dont see how can be solved withou guns, i dont know what you are referring to & seems like your full of BS
are you completely one minded?? sure there are in some cases other options than a firearm, but you wouldnt be saying there are other options for every scenario if you came face to face with an individual coming at you with a knife, or an individual that is killing you with their bare hands... what would you do then? defend your self, although not all scenarios would require the use of a firearm, I assure you there are situations where one is needed, that is what your NRA people and individuals are fighting for, the right to bear arms.. "it is better to have one and not need it than to need one and not have one" there is no logical way you can dispute that quote.
Strong words, but you’re still missing something…. Um let me think… The fact that all the recent mass shootings all involved mentally ill people, now am I saying that all mentally ill people are evil? No, but what is (evil) is the fact that there has been almost no talk at all about helping those who are mentally ill. The News and Media is making it seem as if all gun owners are straight from Hell.
This is supposed to be a debate, but how is that when you’re only hearing one side. If anything the Government should be talking about the mental health of people. By the way depression has risen in freighting numbers, which means there are more people willing to either kill themselves or look for attention negatively.
This negative attention could be cutting their wrist, displaying publicly their hate for a certain person or a group of people, isolating myself from family /friends for days or months, and simply just feeling sorry for themselves. Also young people are the one’s doing most of these killings. I would most likely suggest that parents should and always be held accountable.
It is the job/duty as parents to make sure their children understand the law and how to appropriately behave in society. There’s too many parents who let their kids do whatever they want, parents need to set more rules and boundaries. Parents are NOT their kid’s friend; they are the guardians of their child. I’m not saying that parents can’t be friendly to their children; I’m saying there’s a limit to how much the parent should allow their child to do.
Also parents shouldn’t be worried that their kid will hate them just think of it this way, it’ll be better that you punish them instead of the law doing it for you. Parents are forgiving the law isn’t.
Ok When you inter the armed service you are treated like a family member, ie Told of great things that you can do for your family and Country, Get an education in what field you want, Then you sign up next thing you know the field you wanted is not available, Then you are stuck where they say is best for you " What" and than they train you to kill !, Send you to another Country and drop you off in a situation that politically motivated nothing else, After you serve your term they bring you home and "KICK YOU OFF THE BUS" and tell you have a nice day, Unless you are completely out there. Now what do you do ? How do you readjust to civilization ? any answers ?......... Another thing "GUN CONTROL" isn't the answer, Think about this " How many Law Enforcement Officers are on the job in any City or Town at any given time and how many people live in each city or town, Then multiply the number it amounts to about 1 officer per 8'000 people depending on the city and about 1 officer per 250 people depending on the town. So instead of GUN CONTROL and cutting budgets work on the solution ?
A 72-year-old homeowner immediately retrieved his handgun when he heard several home intruders attempting to gain entry to his Las Vegas residence early Monday morning. And when the criminals entered his bedroom, he opened fire, killing one of the suspects and sending the rest fleeing, KLAS-TV reports.
“Several intruders, had gotten into the home, entered his bedroom and he fired at least one shot, and they fled,” Metro Police Officer Bill Cassell said. “It is unusual, first of all, to have multiple people burglarizing a residence, especially when they are carrying weapons.”
When police eventually arrived at the Las Vegas home, they found one of the intruders trying to escape in a car. The car hit a patrol car and then the suspect attempted to flee on foot, however, police were able to take the man into custody.
A second suspect, described as a Latin male, was last seen running from the neighborhood where the attempted robbery took place. He remains at large. Police found a third male, armed with a handgun, dead in the homeowner’s backyard. The cause of death was determined to be a gunshot wound.
The incident was the second time in three days that a homeowner in Las Vegas had used a firearm during an attempted burglary and fired at an intruder.
Who cares about Robert Zimmerman Jr's opinion on the matter? oh right, nobody does.
BY: CJ Ciaramella
January 11, 2013 6:03 pm
The NBC Sports Network, a subsidiary of the communications giant Comcast, is helping to sponsor the largest gun trade show in the country despite anti-gun rhetoric on the NBC family of television networks, including a controversial monologue by one of its sports announcers.
NBC Sports is listed as one of the primary sponsors of the 2013 SHOT Show, which takes place Jan. 15 to18 in Las Vegas and bills itself “the world’s premier exposition of combined firearms.”
NBC commentator Bob Costas made national headlines when he launched into a pro-gun control speech during halftime at a December football game between the Philadelphia Eagles and Dallas Cowboys. The speech came in the wake of a tragic murder-suicide by Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher.
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/nbc/2013/01/11/nbc-sponsors-biggest-gun-show-us#ixzz2K9Ue7ZDy
How much freedom do you have, when people have guns to protect their family?
Please Google Vancouver West-end Stabbings, wondering what the outcome could have been if this person had got his hands on any gun, I don't want to think what the outcome could have been if an AK5 had been in this person's possession.
If one or a few of the residents had a gun, the attacker with a knife could have been stopped before he was able to stab a dozen people... Can we deny that possibility with 100% certainty?
100% agree with you there!
A 70-year-old women’s high school basketball coach shot and killed one would-be mugger and injured another while walking two players to their cars Friday night in Detroit, WXYZ-TV reported.
Police said the coach, who has not been named, was approached by two teens who tried to rob him in the parking lot of Martin Luther King High School as he walked with two girls around 7:30 p.m, WDIV-TV reported. One of the attackers died and the other was taken to the hospital in serious condition.
Sources told WXYZ the coach was also a reserve police office with a license to carry a concealed pistol. One of the teens was also armed with a gun.
According to WDIV, both teens were students at the high school, though the one who died had recently been expelled.
Authorities have not confirmed whether the two kids that were shot were actually armed. This may be another disgusting case of excessive force.
Jenny until you come become a victim of violence yourself, you are in no position to comment. In Britain the police have the sole monopoly in protecting people from acts of violent crime. At least in this country we have freedom to act without having to wait for the police to arrive, which is often to late.
“There were 12,664 homicides in the U.S. Of those 8,583 were caused by firearms,” he explained in a video posted on WXIX-TV’s web site. “But of those, 400 are listed as justifiable homicide by law enforcement — 260 justifiable homicide by private citizens.”
"Based on this analysis, Morgan’s claim that 11,000 people died needlessly in the U.S. as a result of poor gun control measures seems to fall flat (the number is lower, however it is still higher than Great Britain’s — so, on that point, Morgan has some standing). Swann continued, noting that the CNN host is also wrong about his claim that only 35 firearm deaths unfolded in Great Britain — a figure which is actually closer to 59, the reporter alleged."
“While people like Morgan insist that the U.S. can learn from Great Britain — well maybe we can,” Swann concluded. “What we might learn is that violent crime is not the result of a gun or any tool — it is the result of the heart of men and women.”
That means Mr. Morgan that where there are people there will be those that will harm others.
Good points Debby. Also what Morgan doesn't point out when he boasts about Britain's low gun murder rate is that Britain is surrounded by some of the world's largest gun own nations. The Swiss, Germans and French, respectively are ranked on per capita basis as the 3rd, 4th and 5th largest gun owning countries on the planet, and have homicide rates that are 40% lower than gunless Britain's. Most of the firearms owned in Swiss homes are automatic assault weapons and they have one of the lowest homicide rates in world.
Here's my point. Yes, madmen are responsible for killings. But sane today, doesn't mean sane tomorrow. ie: Yes, I am of sound mind and I promise to be a responsible gun owner. And then one day, I snap... that promise is now worthless. So the argument is not that it is the mentally ill that are perpetrating these violent acts... but that anyone can lose it... and not just people with a history of mental health. We all have the propensity to lose our tempers, become unstable (for a myriad of reasons... ) and there in lies the inherent danger of owning a weapon.
Have you gotten rid of your hammer? The FBI has a recent study that proves more people are killed with hammers than a gun. So please get rid of your gun before you get angry and hit someone with it. And start a campaign to rid the country of all hammers. Because we don't want millions of Americans killed with them.
Oh and how about how many are killed with cars. That will be next.
Please provide the source for the FBI study regarding hammers. As for the car comment, of course you know automobiles are already one of the most highly regulated industries on the planet.
I found the FBI study you referenced: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11
Total murders by firearm: 8,583
Blunt objects (including hammers): 496
Personal weapons (hands, fists): 726
Number of people killed in CAR ACCIDENTS per year : 37,631
(data for 2011 was not yet available on the website of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, so I used the data from 2006-2010 and calculated the annual average instead. )
Cars are much more dangerous than guns, and current regulations are far from good enough. Road safety issue should have the precedence over gun-control, if we really want to SAVE LIVES...
So, an airplane crashes and 200+ people are killed. The investigators arrive on the scene, look around for a bit, then they have a discussion about what had happened. In the end they come to the conclusion that the statistics for deaths caused by airplane crashes is still far lower than that caused by traffic accidents. So they put their hands in their pockets and walk away. Is this the correct approach to take? I think not! Nor would any reasonable, logical person.
But yet when it comes to the gun control issue and massacres caused by gun violence, this is exactly what you guys are doing by making these inane comparisons between totally unrelated subjects. We are talking specifically about gun control and gun violence here. The issue of SAVING LIVES is a very, very, very, very broad subject category, don't you think? Do you also want to talk about the latest in cancer research here? Or how about stem cell research? And what about Occupational Health & Safety issues (i.e. industrial diseases caused by exposure to chemicals, of which there are dozens). They're all important issues in their own right and I could go on and on. There are many more I could cite, that would fall under the broad category of SAVING LIVES. But talking about those would have absolutely nothing to do with gun control, so why are we going there at all. Studying those issues will offer no insight whatsoever into the gun control issue.
We can't just look at this on a statistical basis either. To just sweep these massacres under the rug, by considering them as just a statistical anomaly, would be doing a grave injustice to all those lives that were lost. We must do better than this!
well clyde, you seem to be missing 1 very important thing. this is america, the land of the free. with that comes responsibilities & sacrifices. the reason we dont ban everything that cold possible save 1 life is because it takes away peoples freedoms.
we could ban a million things like dogs, skiis, skateboards, swimming pools, knives,i dont know what else causes atleast 1 death?
the thing about guns is that there are soooo many violent crimes that are stopped each year because people have all types of guns. there are way more lives saved then lost.
its also very important to stop teaching kids that guns are dangerous murder machines like piers is doing. guns are actually made to stop murders. they are made for protection. even if a violent criminal tries to strangle you with their hands, you can use a gun to save your life.
until a better self defense weapon is invented, guns are very important & a basic neccesity.
there is barely anybody who has a gun that uses it for crime. almost all of them are used to deter crime.
First of all, airplane crashes are rarely caused by passengers. There’s nothing we, as no-experts, can do about it nor would it be our place to discuss the prevention methods without having sufficient technical and engineering knowledge. The exception being 9/11, those crashes were caused by certain deranged individuals, and yes 3,000 lives were lost. Yet, do any of us want to propose that we ban airplanes? Yes, we have much stricter security procedures now, because we are trying to identify “deranged individuals” who wish to cause harm to others. Taking guns away from law-abiding gun owners is similar to telling the Middle-Eastern people they shouldn’t fly, because we just don’t know who the deranged ones are among them. And we all object to that notion, don’t we?
Secondly, cancer and other health issues are totally different, because most of us die from some kind of illnesses due to the deterioration of our mortal bodies even if we don’t get shot with a gun or hit by a car. Our deaths in that term are not avoidable. Also, prevention of illnesses mainly falls on each individual’s responsibility. Well, we could say, ban sugary food, ban fatty food, ban salty food… do we want to go that route? Most illnesses occur due to the person’s genetics and/or lifestyle choices, they are not inflicted upon us by others actions. So it’s very different from guns and cars. Also, doctors and chemists are best equipped to discuss prevention and cure, not us, and I’m sure they are already making vigorous efforts in their fields of expertise, so I have no complaints there.
But in regards to guns and cars…, “avoidable deaths and injuries” can be inflicted upon us by others’ actions that are reckless, irresponsible, or plain mad. Both are disasters caused by “our behaviors” where “we” can do something about reducing those occurrences. And which occurs more? By far, car-related incidents. So the road safety issue should take the precedence. Am I being illogical here?
Also, there are not many negative consequences from having stricter traffic laws, I can’t think of anyone’s life being threatened by severely punishing tailgaters, quadrupling fines for all offenses, or prohibiting the usage of cell phones. But if we implement stricter gun laws blindly, despite the truth that “guns also protect”, there are going to be people who will be harmed or even killed due to the lack of deterrent and defense methods. Since gun laws only affect law-abiding good people, and not criminals who are not going to give up their guns, should we really tell responsible gun owners to give up theirs?
Please do some research on "Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs)". There have been about 13 non-NRA studies on DGUs that estimate between 800,000 and 2,500,000 (depending on what study you read) instances occur each year where someone has stopped a criminal act, either from commencing or completing, with the threat of or actual use of a gun. And I’m sure there are many more “unreported cases” as well. Shouldn’t Defensive Gun Uses be given due consideration when talking about gun-control?
If the investigators put their hands in their pockets and walked away, airline industries will simply lose customers and that will hurt their business. If planes stated crashing over populated areas too often, the govt could decide to ban planes altogether, and they’ll be out of business.
“sweep these massacres under the rug”... no gun-advocates suggest that. They are talking about how we can make schools safer, how we should look into mental health issues and take care of the mentally-ill better, and many would agree on tighter background checks...
On the other hand, most of us, including you, “sweep the car accident victims under the rug”(about 2000 of them annually are “children” by the way), because we don’t want to give up the convenience of driving, don’t we? You are doing grave injustice to all those lives that were lost by not addressing the awareness of road safety. You should take a good hard look at yourself before you accuse gun owners of not caring enough.
By far the most common type of injury accident involving children are those that also involve motor vehicle collisions. According to the National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA), nearly 250,000 children are injured every year in car accidents. This means that on any given day nearly 700 children are harmed due to accidents on our roadways. Of the 250,000 kids injured each year, approximately 2,000 die from their injuries. Children make up about 5% of total fatalities due to car accidents. In fact, for children between the ages of 2 and 14, “motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death.” Car accidents are also the leading cause of acquired disability (e.g., brain injury, paralysis, etc.) for children nationwide. And approximately 20% of the children who die in a car accident each year are killed in accidents involving a driver who is legally intoxicated. Nearly half of these children were killed while riding as passengers in an automobile driven by an intoxicated driver.
There's no talking sense to you people. It's like they're trying to take away something more precious than life. Well stop and think. Comparing car accidents to gun murders is like comparing apples to tomatoes. You'll still have your guns but you'll only be able to kill a few people at a time instead of hundreds at once. Boo-Hoo. Are we supposed to feel sorry for you? I don't think so. The cowboy days are over. Grow up!
“There’s no talking sense to you people.”... Margaret, I could say exactly the same to you. Your argument is all about hysteria, nothing logical, nothing rational. You really think gun owners want to kill people?? Are you for real...??
I never said the guns are more precious than human lives. We need guns to “protect human lives". I believe our guns used for self-defense have prevented many more deaths than they have caused. We live in the world where some people do commit evil or crazy acts against others. If we diminish the individuals’ ability to defend him/herself, there would be more victims.
By the way, we are not giving up driving despite the 30000-35000 human lives we lose every year, is that because, according to your theory, we, including you (you drive, right?), think cars are more precious than human lives??
You say gun victims and car accident victims are totally different, like apples and tomatoes. Could you explain why and how they are different? A friend of mine’s 7 years old daughter was killed by a reckless driver and the family’s grief was unbearable for me to watch... so please explain why his daughter’s life is “different” from that of Sandy Hook victims... Your heart bleeds for the 20 children who died in the shooting, but you won’t shed a tear for the 2000 children that die in automobile incidents every year? Because their deaths are “different” from gun victims’ and don’t deserve our attention?? Did you even read what I posted??? ...“for children between the ages of 2 and 14, motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death.”
Nae, you are correct.
the injuries & deaths that are cause by anything in this country like swimming pools, dogs, cars, skiis, guns, the list goes on & on, are a price we pay for having freedoms.
also guns are for protection & to stop murders. thats why there are something like 80 million gun owners & only about 10,000 gun murders a year.. committed by criminals... who usually dont even own the gun they are committing the crime with.
there are 800000- 2500000 violents crimes stopped each year by gun owners.
I as well as any reasonable person can see your point, but looking at the history of not just America but any other country gun free or not, can you honestly say not allowing firearms would make any individual more safe against any type of violent crime? the answer I hope you have in your head is no because that is the correct answer. Possessing a firearm is only one on millions possibly countless ways to commit a violent crime. I am a veteran and through my training I am very aware that anything even down to a pen is a weapon of opportunity used to kill someone or commit a violent crime... this is not disputable, it is fact, controlling firearms will not change the outcome, in fact through the control of firearms the likelihood becomes greater that a violent crime will become successful.
Hey Debb this is Will, that's not always the case people don't just suddenly become crazy it's a process overtime. Just constantly thinking about people suddenly going crazy will make you paranoid. Also you’re acting as if the only way people die is because of guns. People die for many different reasons, taking away an object like guns won’t stop crime completely. If anything criminals will have more creative ways to inflict harm on people. This is because it’s not the object they use it’s them, and if they want to kill someone they’ll do whatever it takes. Not to mention it’s not like they’ll follow this law anyways. They’re criminals not good guys not you not me it’s what they do you a living.
A great piece on gun control – finding a middle ground.
I think we all need to boycott cnn and any of thier sponsors until they take Piers Morgan off
I agree with the statement that we all need to boycott CNN and any of their sponsors until they take Piers Morgan off the air. Piers is one of the worst for asking the question and then answering his own question and then will ask the individual who he is interviewing, (who cannot get a word in edge wise), well explain it to me! Then Piers continues to talk over and belittle his guests. Basically, Piers doesn't need any one to interview, he likes the sound of his own voice. It is time to say goodbye Piers. Goodbye Piers.
Yep, good-bye, Piers.
CNN, Get It Together Already!!!!!
Since Piers has all the answers, maybe he should be interviewed.
Piers Morgan is a nasty individual as we all got to see tonight with the Morris segment. What an ungracious man. He is certainly not an asset to CNN. Morris handled himself with dignity in the face of the nastyness.
I take issue with a lot of stuff coming out of Mr. Morgan's mouth these days, especially in regards to gun control. and especially his angst against the AR15. HIs tactics during these interviews seems always to simply talk over his guests to get his point over and it seems that he isn't above telling a little white lie here and there to confuse the issue. On this evening show he made the statement about how AR 15 bullets will go thru walls. I would recommend that Mr. Morgan check out the following article. Real World .223 Testing at http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=26 – 32k – Cached
So the AR15 is so powerful it can rip through concrete. Wow I want one!.Piers is so full of BS his back teeth are swimming!
No way, Piers. A rifle? You mean the bullets can actually go through walls? Wow!!! You only know what you read. It's a lifestyle where I'm from. Chances are, if it won't go through a wall or concrete, it ain't much of a gun at all. Good thing these guys don't have a fact sheet about my 30-06. He would be rambling about it tomorrow. lmao.
I am so glad that Piers Morgan is pushing the issue on gun control. I won't even visit the United States because of the violence. Here in Canada we have very strict gun laws. We are not even allowed to own a hand gun. Why would one need a hand gun for hunting. We have background checks and our long guns must be locked. The illegal guns that do come in are largely from the United States., and I resent that. Right to bear arms is an old law since gunslinging was allowed. Those laws need to be updated. Get with it Americans and stop killing each other. Your the laughing stock of Canada.
Margaret Albert, I am sorry but you need to shut up and learn a couple of things. You made a stupid comment that you don't need a hand gun to hunt? You lack common sense. Hunters use rifles to hunt. Have some common sense.
When will Piers Morgan actully debate someone instead of talking over them? When will Piers Morgan mention the boy in Houston using an AR 15 to defend his home.http://www.khou.com/news/crime/Burglary-suspect-shot-by-15-year-old-son-of-deputy-97430719.html
But you are allowed to own handguns, AR15s, and other types of assault weapons in Canada! Full auto machine guns are still legally owned.
No you are wrong. We are not allowed to own handguns or any kind of assault rifle in Canada. A handgun permit is very difficult to get in Canada except in very rare and specific cases.
Yes with a permit you can own handguns in Canada, as long you haven't committed any crimes and are not mentally ill, obtaining a permit is very straight forward and easy to get.
Furthermore, AR15s are not banned in Canada you can legally buy them, I'm not making this up.
Morgan may be right about his stand on gun violence in America. The problem is he is not an American citizen. To use a prime time TV show on CNN to ' wrong" America's policy and insult American is not appropriate especially when he brings up UK. He is very arrogant. I do not know who he thinks he is in his mind. That is why so many American would love to deport him . We do not need him to remind us that American has gun problem. Can he help us solve the problem? The answer is NO. So please shut up your big, fat mouth.
Well said Margaret. I am from Canada and you are so right. The NRA and the idiots fighting this gun control measure being presented are making big fools of themselves on TV and around the world. Some of them worry me that they may have a mental health problem (which is what they keep harping about) and they own guns!! There is a reason for the gun laws in Canada and we respect them and don't have to worry about someone living next door that may have a large collection of assaut weapons and semi-automatic handguns. Good for Canada, wake up U.S. citizens. How many more children have to die? Keep up the good work Piers but please don't put those stupid women on anymore that have to protect themselves with AR15's , they make me sick.....just looking for their 5 mins. of fame . They could put on their tombstones that "They had the RIGHT to carry firearms but so did the guy who SHOT them"
Thank GOD you are not an American.
well everyone knows that when people have guns for protection then violent crime decreases. we also know that its America & we have freedom. we also can handle protecting ourselves without relying on the government & we have the right to do that. also we know its never smart to trust politicians.
canada is a soft country , America is not a soft country & we will never be soft targets for any attackers like canada is. canada is very vunerable to any type of attack, you should thank us for being the deterent that stops any would-be attacker because canada is very weak.
what are you going to do if you attacked? just give up without a fight or call someone to help? weeeeaaaakkk
Notice how everyone praising mr. morgan are not US citizen's?
Margaret I am still laughing.. "America is the laughing stock of Canada". I am so ashamed!!! Let's talk about Canada. When I was deployed overseas in Combat. I worked alongside some of you Canadians. You guys are scared of your own shadows. Of course you folks will have strict gun laws. You have the U.S. protecting you like our 14 year old little sister.
ill say it in a nicer way. the USA is not that violent of a place. piers morgan & other news outlets try to portray it that way to push an agenda.
its really not like that. if you stay away from cities that have strict gun laws & crazy politicians like chicago & washington dc, then you will be ok.
however, it is a free country so there are risks that come with that. people have access to almost anything they want so you need to be aware of your surroundings & make sure you dont do things to make yourself vunerable, like walking around by yourself late at night.
however if you lived here & you learned how to carry & use a gun, then you could take care of yourself .
I do own guns but before owning them I had to pass a gun safety check and a background check. Do you have those in the USA? I don't think so. You can't even bring your child to a McDonalds restaurant and be safe. Half the people there are carrying guns. How safe is that? Someone drops a tray and some nervous twit starts shooting. My point is that you don't need assault rifles to protect yourself. Nobody's trying to take all your guns away.
I'm sorry but you're paranoid where were you when people in the hood or ghetto were getting shot at by a drive by. That drive by would also kill children that just happen to be playing basketball or just playing at the playground. As well as innocent citizens that just happen to be walking by. The reason is simple because no one truly cares for African American or Latino Hispanic people. But suddenly when the shooting is in our backyard then you want to get rid of guns. America really? What a joke.
Margaret, Please destroy your guns immediately and start working on convincing other Canadians to do just the same. I live in one of those gun-free countries where guns are almost non-existent among civilians. I’ve never met anyone who owns a gun in my country other than police officers... And OMG!!! I was so surprised that you own guns!!! Obviously I don’t know much about Canada or its culture, but I can try to change “your country” just the way “I want”, right?? you know, just in case I want to visit Canada someday...
Why should we change how our country (America) is ran ? Why should we be like your country? Stop trying to make us like you. America was given these rights, by our founders. This is the greatest country in the world if anything you should be trying to be like us rather than the other way around. If they ever did ban the guns we would fight back. And what makes me upset is the fact the you don't even live in this country. Yet you feel like your opinion will shape the way our country came up to be. With all do respect stay in your country if you don't agree with our laws.
Will, just to be sure... you are saying that to Margaret, even though you responded to my comment, am I right? I was telling Margaret to destroy her guns to give her a taste of her own medicine, she and some other Canadians have been meddling into America’s business with blatant ignorance and arrogance and that got on my nerves (even though I’m not an American), so I pretended to be a nosy foreigner myself trying to make her understand what she is doing. I’m 100% with you on the gun-rights in America, though my country has a completely different stance on guns (’cause it’s a completely different culture). I sometimes wonder if our citizens were armed, we may have been able to stop our military from going so awry, brainwashing us to believe dying for the emperor is the highest honor, pushing our young boys into doing kamikaze... what a shameful, regretful, painful mistake our country committed... We are very sorry that our country’s mistake has claimed so many lives all over the world.
Thank you M. Albert, for your opinion, as welll as your decision to steer clear of America. We have freedoms which are enjoyed by ouir citizens with respect to guns, and most gun owners use them responsibly. We do not rely on our government to make decisions to ban our use of handguns. The fact that you fear for your life in America, while acknowledging that illegal guns make their way into Canada, negates the idea that government involvement keeps you safer up north. Background checks should be required, and ongoing for gun ownership, especially in light of the episode in Connecticut, in which I lost a high school friend, one of the devoted teachers who stood to protect her students against a person who should have never had access to guns. His mother had her doubts about his fitness for service, and therefore should have been more vigilant about monitoring him, and keeping her weapons secure. As for your statement about gunslingers, we don't live in a Wild West martial law environment here. When people go off and decide to take lives indiscriminantly, no legislation will stop them more than intervention and rehabilitation of their criminal thoughts, and a return to preventive positive help, rather than punitive and prohibitive measures taken out on society, rather than the problem individual. Your issue with American guns in Canadian hands lends the call for border security and mail order changes that allow the guns to be transported internationally, not a knee jerk reaction to impose your fears upon the rights of every American to own a gun, be proficient and knowledgeable of its' use, and educated on gun safety and personal responsibility. My family has been involved in law enforcement, public service, and as such, we respect not only responsible gun ownership, but also the value of personal freedoms of others, even when it goes against the sensibilities of those with differing viewpoints and values. My father and brother used firearms in the course of their duties, and we learned that there are extreme dangers and responsibilities associated with firearms, whether a cap gun for a child, or a rifle for hunting, or a hand gun for personal protection and safety.
I respect your values and your fears, but I do not accept that our country should be limited by your personal biases.
Mr. Morgan, On the issue of gun control and the second amendment, please refrain from infringing on your guests first amendment rights by continuously speaking over them if they don't share your views. We want to hear everyone's opinion on this important issue.
No hand guns of any sort (excepting shotguns for hunting) allowed in Ireland. Result? A few deaths annually caused by criminals who have illegal guns.
Gun owners think they are invincible and this inevitably leads to confrontations which end in injury and death. They think gun ownership gives them the right to shoot first and ask questions later. Guns impart a false sense of security. Young people in particular believe that a gun gives them status and believe that they will always win an argument if they brandish their weapons. They are too young to consider the tragic consequences because they have no life experiences. No one under the age of 25 should be allowed to own a handgun. Older gun owners should be screened regularly for drug, alcohol and mental capacity, their weapons should be stored securely, ammo usage monitored and submit to regular gun use proficiency testing. Guns used in any crime should be traced back to the legitimate owner and that owner jailed as a co-conspirator in the crime.
So what about the IRA and the atrocities they cause, don't they use guns? You can still legally own and acquire handguns in Northern Ireland. When the British government banned handguns, NI, the Isle of Man, and the two Channel Islands, Guernsey and Jersey were exempt.
They get their false sense of security from watching too many video 'games' and TV shows, where the bad guys can't hit the broad side of a barn and the good guys always hit their target on the 1st or 2nd shot! It's called the first person shooter scenario, and it's far from realistic.
guns are some of the easiest things to use ever. you point at something like you do with your finger, & it hits that spot.
of corse if you get a gun, you should train with it & become a good shot . its even required to pass a shooting test to get your permit to carry in most places.
but really, guns have been around forever & barely anybody is so uncoordinated that they cant learn how to aim a gun & how to practice proper gun safety.
1. never point it at anything you arent going to destroy.
2. keep the trigger covered so it doesnt get pulled by accident.
pretty basic stuff, even little kids & eldery people do it. its also why there is hundreds of millions of guns & barely anybody has any accidents with them.
You are missing something big... you said accidents my child. However, humans had gained a reputation of doing bad things without them being an accident. The human mind is a complex one. We are not perfect. A child might get angry and decide to shoot its mother. The husband may get jealous and decide to shoot the wife. They don't have to be mentally ill to that this. They need only to be human. Anything is possible. Read a book.
there are 80 million guns owners & none of them ever do anything bad with their guns. you have a messed up view of the world to say most people ar bad & will do bad things.
most people who are taught about guns at a young age learn how precious life is & to respect the firearm & to never use it any situation unless their life is threatened.
there are some people who cant handle them & that is never a reason to limit everybody else's freedom because of a handful of nuts.
we also need to be able to protect ourselves from those nuts.
The Second Amendment gives every American the right to have a gun, so having a gun is not a crime in itself. It's only when it is used in a criminal offense does it become a problem, right? But by then it is too late. The damage is already done!
You go to a gun show to buy your guns. There are hundreds more people there doing the same thing. Can you guarantee to me that everyone there is a law abiding citizen with no harmful intentions? Are not some of them buying guns with the intention of reselling them for a profit, through a private sale which doesn't require any background check and there is no record of who has those guns now? This is how most of the criminals are getting their hands on guns, even when they have been prohibited from having them because of prior convictions. A loophole big enough to drive a tank through!
Furthermore, you can do as much target practicing you want, because the criminals will be doing the same thing I'm sure. So it doesn't guarantee that you will get him before he gets you. Remember, he will have the advantage of surprise, and that's an important advantage. Just because you have the means to defend yourself doesn't mean you will be able to in time. Remember December 7, 1941! Pearl Harbour certainly had the means to defend itself, had the warning signs been heeded in time. But we all know what happened there, don't we!
there are always people who use products for other reasons then they are intended. its the price we pay for freedom. only until recently, it seems, people now think that price wasnt worth the freedoms & now want to start taking away freedoms.
bizare stuff since they get these ideas from politicians who just want more power
“Can you guarantee to me that everyone there is a law abiding citizen with no harmful intentions?”
Can you guarantee to me every teenager I see at the DMV getting a license is a responsible discreet driver with no flippant personality?
that is not true in the least. there are over 80 million gun owners & they never brandish their guns in an arguement or use them in a threating manner. we dont own guns to feel powerful. we have them because there are people in this world who wish to harm others & guns are used to stop that from happening.
there is almost nobody in this country who uses guns to harm others. very small amount of criminals do that. guns are actually for stopping murders & stopping crime. thats what they have always been used for by most people.
you cant just live in a fantasy world & teach kids things that arent true. its like saying just put on a superman costume & everything will be just fine.
the sad truth is that there are some people who want to hurt others. they are cowards that go to places they know are gun free zones & attack helpless women & children. its very dangerous to act like the world is a safe place when we all know its not.
Piers go home. Your an idiot and one of many reason I dont watch CNN
There are a few things that bother me about these so called "sporting rifles".
If they are really sporting rifles then why is a human silhouette the preferred target?
Why is it "sporting" to shoot at a human being?
Ok ... so let's call them "personal defence rifles" ......
How is one to easily handle a long barrelled weapon in the close quarters of a home?
This also bothers me .... the idea that having a gun on your person is somehow going to be effective.
Perhaps the gun advocates should watch the old cowboy movies a bit more closely.
When someone has "the drop" on you all you are doing is giving them another gun.
And when police etc are responding to an incident .... how do you tell the bad guys from the good guys when everyone has a gun?
The shootings in Colorado where concealed carry is legal.... in all that crowd ....no one with a gun to protect themselves? Why has no mass shooting ever been responded to by a concealed carry civilian?
Guns ..... shooting at human shaped targets ..... not really sporting to me....
Rita in response to your question "Why has no mass shooting ever been responded to by a concealed carry civilian?" well they have but the mainstream media chooses to ignore them. Did you hear about the shooting in the Oregon mall? The shooter came into the mall to kill as many people as he could and started shooting. He then seen a concealed weapons permit holder pull out his gun so he put the AR15 to his own head and pulled the trigger. In almost all cases where mass shootings happen the person stops and kills himself when confronted by someone with a gun. But you won’t hear that from the mainstream media
BTW Piers Morgan has his facts all screwed up. The sandyhook shooter used 4 hand guns not the AR15 (it was found in his car).
You're absolutely right, the media don't report on these, or very rarely.
That's why the M16 M4, the military version of the AR15, and the AR15 are so popular with the military and police for house clearing. Many agencies have moved away from using pistol caliber sub guns, because of over penetration issues with pistol caliber bullets, in favor of the M4 AR15 which can shoot lighter faster bullets that don't over penetrate in a close quarter settings. Handguns are considered back up weapons in these types of environments.
Piers, would you mind giving me your cell phone number, cause I am going to need it the next time someone try's to harm me or my family! Calling the police now days is worthless. The lawyers have their hands tied to the point they can not protect the public any more. You take away my AR-15, and I want have any protection. I will be more than happy to give you my gun when the last drug addict and criminal is fried in the electric chair. Until then, I need my guns to protect me and my family.
Why don't you hop off of the gun control debate for a little while and focus on something that is more deserving of your time? https://marketplace.fedbid.com/fbweb/fbobuyDetails.do?token=%3D%3DwBKxmaVGYR9Kcq5Ajq%2BRH6QAAAAAHeAAgAgTFCGg%2FFzzqQbJAAyVXBA0Or
The Department of Homeland Security just purchased ANOTHER 21.6 million rounds of ammunition on top of the 1.4 billion they have already bought in the last 10 months. I admire your abilities to dig for true factual statistics and I think if you would dig in you could find some answers and information about exactly why the DHS needs 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. That's enough ammunition to fight a 22 year war firing 70 million rounds a year. Why does the DHS need this kind of stockpile? Is there something us Americans need to know? If the DHS can justify needing that much ammunition, then there is something we Americans need to know. Reply please, I'd like to know for sure if you're just another talking head or if you really care to make a difference.
when you have to get your computer fixed they tell you to start pushing F8 but who does this when your typing? so is it that no one pulls the trigger that fasts either on a gun. I had to laugh when I saw him doing that for I know he told him self to do that as fast as he could. See how fast this gun shoots!!! LOL
the mother of the 11 year old girl that was kidnap I want to thank her for answers to us he is dead to us. If he had been put to dead the frist time 18 years would never have happen. sad we don't seem to see that truth do we. the cops failed that little boy for if they had done there job with this man this would never have happen. sad isn't it. we just look the other way. guess that is why they want to take the guns its easyer isn't it
How come no one from the country (I mean not the city) has come out to say what they use their guns for. Guns can be protection from animals. I'm sure most Alaskan's walk in the woods with a gun and aren't planning on killing anything, they just want to make it to where they are going. It is so crazy to say no guns. Also Morgan said there is still gun violence in Britain. So in other words it didn't make no gun violence, so you still may be shot. Make laws better!!! The Police Chief in one of our major cities said their gun violence is usually illegal guns. How about we fix that problem!
If you don't like how this country is with its gun laws go back to England and have fun over there. Instead of gun violence you have brutal beatings and riots running through the streets so if you want that then get your ass back over there. Anyways you are not even and American so you can leave whenever you want. Also when you ask Ted Nugent a question let him answer even if you are scared of the truth that he will give you. If you do not want to listen to republicans and law abiding citizens then don't have them on your show or have interviews with them. They always are right but you just can't handle the truth when it is thrown into your face. So please if you don't want to have an actual debate with another person and you only want to hear your British accent then go stand in front of your mirror and look at the only friend and ally you have. You are as bad as the criminals that want to do harm onto good people.
we all have watched the video and every time he is gonna talk about the scarry AR-15 he will continue to to show the video of him shooting it but i want to see the other camara view with his face and reaction
Why keep thinking that Guns Are Us? Guns may be the answer to a question, but not the answer to the test itself.
Let me share a scenario...
Today is not your day. You wake up and find out you’re out of milk. You go shopping and find out you’re out of change. You go back to get a nap and find out you’re out of time. Night comes and you find out you’re out of sleeping pills. Then the best thing comes, an intruder in your home. At least you won’t run out of bullets. You made sure you bought hundreds of rounds to protect your home. You took gun lessons so you know how to use your semi-automatic m-16 riffle. Time comes, ready to roll. A hundred bullets ready… but one to the head was enough… awkward. Better safe than sorry though, right? Next week you hear about a shooting two blocks away from your home that killed dozens of people. I guess for the killers, one bullet wasn’t enough.
Americans live in a world of paranoia. But why? If you don’t trust the government, why stay to live here? I am confidence that I can prove that all is not lost if some guns (not all) take a break for a while. Three reasons why some guns are a threat to, well, domestic peace:
Let me explain. Many Americans think that because a “bad guy” has a hundred rounds of bullets, you must need a hundred rounds as well to have a fair chance of surviving. That’s not quite true. Anyone who knows of warfare knows more bullets equal more damage. To inflict the most damage. That’s the objectives that men with uniforms are given. Civilians, however, have another objective when it comes to self-defense: to stay alive. You don’t care about damaging your attacker as hard as you can; you want to neutralize him. Period. Survival depends on that crucial shot. So tell me… how many bullets does it take to kill a human being?
And if you can’t hit your target with one bullet, or two, or three, then you really shouldn’t be holding a gun in the first place, because all those bullets that you shoot don’t magically disappear in mid-air. They still fly until they hit something. So if you shoot a hundred rounds of bullets and you miss, well, all of them, that would mean that a hundred deadly bullets had been thrown aimlessly to the world. And they won’t stop, until they hit something. Or someone.
Not very smart or safe if you ask me.
Now let’s pretend that all American civilians are Rambo material (yeah right.) Even if they were, we must not forget that we are all human. We get emotional. We get sentimental. We get angry. We get scare. We are weak. Whether you accept this truth or not, the fact remains that many people with anger issues are not consider mentally ill, they are normal people with well, anger issues. Say this gentleman notices that his girlfriend has been cheating on him for the last two years, and he explodes. But wait! He also happens to own a semi-automatic weapon. So he decides to visit his girlfriend at her work and shoots her, but in the mix of emotions of anger and confusion, he doesn’t stop pulling the trigger and before he knows it, he shoots nearly everyone in the office. He is human. He doesn’t want this. But he can’t turn back time.
Now let us examine ourselves yet another scenario. You are on an ice skating ring, and a man with an assault rifle suddenly comes and stars shooting everyone. You have this very same gun, so you use it to… wait… you left this gun at home. Why? Because you went ice skating fool, and you don’t want your 4-year old niece to see you with a gun, do you? Not when you are going ice skating with the family to have fun in such a public place. You can’t bring it with you because it’s so big and draws a lot of attention. Is not like you can put it behind your shirt, like you would with a pistol. However what if you really want to bring your assault rifle everywhere you go, because you simply don’t care what people think? So you strap it around your neck and take a cup of coffee like a boss, knowing no one will touch you, or talk to you for that matter. And you see the guy next table with the same assault rifle around his neck, and you wink at him for a sign of approval, but he sees this as a tease and pulls it out to shoot you because, well, he has anger issues. You defend yourself and after a hundred flying bullets burst everywhere hitting flesh and concrete, you manage to take him down, but at what cost?
Please buy a damn handgun. It’s more practical. If any.
The second amendment defends the right for a “well regulated militia.” I have at least two friends who loved warfare science and would love to make little bombs and detonate them all around their backyard with unicorns and rainbows, but they know that bombs have been used for terrorism and that is why they are illegal. They make a sacrifice not to posses that which can cause more harm than benefits to society. So why can’t you make the same sacrifices? Guns will not be taken away. That would mean political suicide for any politician, and legit suicide for any gun-control movement freak. The fact remains that pro-gun dudes and gun-control people are in the same side. They want weapons to defend themselves. They want to save lives. They want to have freedom. They want to live in a safe place. So bitterness is much not needed. After all, they all want the same cake. They’re just deciding how much frosting it needs for a better taste.
Handguns taste good enough for me. Now what about you?
I say fighting fire with fire will just make more fire. If you let fear get the best of you, you won’t own guns… the guns will control you. Guns are us? You bet.
someone has been drinking the kool-aid just alittle to hard.
"I say fighting fire with fire will just make more fire" umm sir they do fight fires with fire. they do it often to make a fire line so the brush fire doesnt cross. they laso use fire to prevent future fires by burning the dead underbrush. so try again....
Son, I dont drink Kool-aid... I find that drink a little soft for me. Now read and learn about metaphors and symbolism, cause apparently you don't know what they are... People do fight fire with fire, and it literally creates more fire in order to end future fires. However, when people use that phrase, they usually transmit the message of an eye for an eye.. read and educate yourself, please:
"Chances are your experiences with the phrase 'fight fire with fire' have more to do with the opening track on Metallica's 1984 album 'Ride the Lightning' than they do with actual flames. The phrase goes back at least as far as 1597, when William Shakespeare wrote "Be stirring as the time; be fire with fire; Meet violence with violence. Take an eye for an eye. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. You know - the Chicago way."
You learned something today? Good. Now talk to me when you have anything to say on gun control issues and not silly remarks about fires and how they work... my baby cousin is more mature than u. Awks.
"How many bullets does it take to kill someone? One."
Or, you know, more. Depending on caliber, powder load, range, impact location, jacketing, and a variety of other factors. Didn't I hear about a woman who barely stopped a psychopath who invaded her home with 5 .38 caliber pistol rounds to the head? And that the invader lived, if I remember right? What if there were more?
A responsible person will be responsible, regardless of the variety of firearm they prefer. I am just as safe with my Remington 870 Express 20 gauge shotgun as I would be with a MilKor 6 Rotary Grenade Launcher. Arbitrary limits on firepower will not stop those with intent to harm innocents.
Also, I don't trust the government. I know very few people who do. I don't trust people that we pay a salary to for their entire lives, regardless of service, based on laws that were passed by them. I definitely don't trust people who own firearms and can afford private security (again, on our dollar), as well as recieve extra public protection (again, on our dollar), but are attempting to remove them from the citizens hands. But I do love my nation, and the ideals (if not the practices) that it was built on. Nowhere else has that appeal to me. I would like to keep it a place of personal freedoms.
You are fabricating extreme scenarios. Both sides have done this. Find the numbers, let them speak for themselves.
However extreme they may be, they are nonetheless probable.
"Arbitrary limits on firepower will not stop those with intent to harm innocents." That depends. Depends on the intent. I feel some people are also going to the extremes by thinking that freedom means having the power to do anything.. that is not freedom. That is anarchy. Freedom is the power to express yourself and pursuit happiness without compromising the happiness of others.. and sir. More than half of the nation is not happy. They are scare. Scare of getting into verval fights with the neighborr cause he may just snap and pull out a gun. Again. Humans are, and I quote "a superior species, but nonetheless, an species." Meaning, we are not perfect. We are... for our human nature.. violent. Selfish. Complex. A sane man can be crazy the next day. A crazy looking man can be wiser than Plato. The point is that as times evolve, so must we. The founding fathers lived in a time of simple weapons. A gun was a deadly as a sword. But the sword never ran out of bullets.. now, however, people have enough ammo to go to war with Spain..
BUT.. big but... if you dont trust the govt.. why live here?? it seems an awfully sad life to live in paranoia and distrust. Also, if the govt happen to become a dictatorship (worst case-scenario) you would be able to create a revolution on the time of the founding fathers, when the army, and the people had all the same weapons.. but now.. what are you going to do against a fighter jet? Hell, I can even give you 5,000 rocket launchers and you still wouldnt be a match for a predator drone. These are different times. So why hope for the worst? if you can bet for the best and help the nation get there.
having any weapon we want protects against anarchy. why do you & people like piers morgan thnk america has become filled with homicidal maniacs?
its just not true. most people are good people & have weapons to protect each other.
there is a lot of automatic weapon owners & you never hear about those being used in crimes. rifles are barely ever used in crimes. most guns just arent used in crimes & are used to stop crimes.
you have been listening to the wrong people.
we can protect ourselves & you should never trust politicians, get real
you really need to stop going on about stuff you dont know anything about. you are really teaching the wrong things & if people listened to you . they would be endangering themselves & others.
do you know its never recommended to keep a gun in your purse or in your back pocket? you are suppose to be in full control of you firearm at all times.
if its in your back pocket, the danger is that you cannot see who is coming up behind you to grab it.
if you keep it in your purse & someone grabs your purse, then you lose control of your gun.
both those things are the worst things anyone can do, you are telling people to put their firearms in places that criminals can easily get ahold of them– & then once a criminal has your firearm then you can imagine what could happen. they could use it against you. they could use it later to commit a crime. they could sell it to someone else . its very very bad to ever do anything you are saying. please stop & just listen. you have a lot to learn
Morgan doesn't want to hear the truth or acknowledge common sense. The responsible, the innocent should not be held accountable for the few that commit crime. If it were bad media, Morgan's behaviour would damn his peers (pardon the pun) as being lower than a snake. That they ought to quit their jobs or be fired. You see Morgan, the tail does not wag the dog, one bad apple does not spoil the others and people are innocent until proven guilty. Where is the attention to raise your children well, be given support to do so, to ensure you provide a home without poverty, to see to a good education, to socialize your children, to be a parent and be given opportunities to be a good one. Where is the coverage of that Morgan? Is Britain so much better? Are your countrymen so much more refined that you would not call them stupid? Perhaps you've been such a slack ass yourself that you've never had to do much for a living that you have no issue calling someone stupid. Opinions differ and because they do not match your ideals does not make them wrong.
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians
per year are
(C) Accidental deaths per physician
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of
Health and Human Services.
Now think about this:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S.
(Yes, that's 80 million)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths
per year, all age groups,
(C) The number of accidental deaths
per gun owner
Statistics courtesy of FBI
So, statistically, doctors are approximately
9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Remember, 'Guns don't kill people, doctors do.'
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN,
Almost everyone has at least one doctor.
This means you are over 9,000 times more likely to be killed by a doctor as by a gun owner!!!
Please alert your friends
We must ban doctors
before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!
Out of concern for the public at large,
We withheld the statistics on
for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention!
hahahahaha,,,, ray, good one!!
Yes, I know! Doctors are such freaks! cause u know they spent years and years studying a subject to save lives and occasionally fail to remove the bullet from the corpse.. yeah.. so sad. At least we have 1000 bullets at home to send more people to the doctors! You know, to give them more practice.. :D YAY 2ND AMENDMENT!
No. You said it right mate, "Accidental Death." ACCIDENTAL! Everyone heard that? He's a choke artist.. Accidental. Yo, check me out and add the numbers of deaths by Legit choice.. not accidents, but murders, and the numbers of deaths by guns would multiply.. while that of the doctors would add 0. Yo only in Chicago they kill more teens that Doctors lose patience.. I love ur facts. They straight. But u aint. Good thinking trying to bend the truth, but you sir, don't fool anyone. People are not even talking about gun accidents cases.. they care only of stopping intense purposeful gun violence.. Ahhh.. the pain, the pain, of having to read such silly comments :( *sad face* shorty write something smart, get a pencil and practice some lines, and add just a lil more tart... get back to me later, ight?
Luis, you are right. Ray’s joke (obviously he didn’t mean it as a serious pro-gun argument) while it’s hilarious and I thoroughly enjoyed it (I loved the lawyer part the most!), if we didn’t have doctors, significantly more people will die from lack of proper treatments for illnesses and injuries than from medical malpractice. Can the same be said about guns? Guns do have casualties, there were 8,583 homicide victims in 2011 (the latest year for which detailed statistics are available by FBI's uniform crime reports), but guns do also protect and save lives. If we disarm law-abiding responsible gun owners, wouldn’t more people die from lack of proper deterrent and defense methods?
Please do some research on "Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs)". There have been about 13 non-NRA studies on DGUs that estimate between 800,000 and 2,500,000 (depending on what study you read) instances occur each year where someone has stopped a criminal act, either from commencing or completing, with the threat of or actual use of a gun. And I’m sure there are many more “unreported cases” as well. Shouldn’t Defensive Gun Uses be an important part of gun-control debate?
I totally agree. Guns are important because they are part of the American culture and they can be used for self defense. However, "regulations" is the issue that everyone debates about. I think it's safe to say that from both sides, no one wants 0 guns in America, but also no one wants free for all weapons on anyone's hands either. I can understand those who feel victimized by regulations which could potentially ban hunting rifles, cause the majority dont do much harm and Americans have the right to hunt freely... however.. assault weapons are not use for hunting (all hunters agree, killing a game with more than 1 shot is not a sport) and I dont think they will be as effective for self defense either.
Let's face it. The only time where there are really risks or dangers is when you are "out there" in the streets. Break ins are not as usual as robberies on streets and public places. So are people going to bring their assaults riffles everywhere they go? The supermarket, your daughter's school presentation, the bank.... an airport..? I dont think so. I don't think is very believable or practical. A handgun is smaller, can be placed on a purse or the back of the jeans and is enough to keep you safe. How many bullets does it take to kill a human being? one (1) So, if people can't take out a so called "bad guy" with ten bullets, they should not own a riffle with a hundred bullets, cause well, for every bullet they miss... those don't just disappear in the air magically.. they keep going until they hit something.. god-forbid an innocent by standard.
So I think it would be irresponsible to let people own assault weapons that had been proven (as a fact) as military deadly, as men in uniform uses them to fight terrorism on a daily bases.
People are free to own guns. No one wants to take guns away, and that is the biggest misconception.
We just want to make the playground safer by removing the spiders from the swing-sets, not the swing-sets themselves.
Luis, I appreciate your perspective on gun-control. To tell you the truth, I’ve never owned a gun, so I admit I am ignorant when it comes to how different types of guns work for different purposes. But reading various posts by gun-rights supporters here and other sites (it seems many of them are at expert level on firearms and know what they are talking about), I’m getting a sense that the AR15, for example, is not necessarily more lethal than other types of guns that are not on the ban list. Also, someone posted an article claiming the below…
- General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP) on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security and member components such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) seeking over 7,000 AR-15’s and matching 30 round clips. The RFP describes these weapons as “personal defense weapons” and states they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”
And you say “all hunters agree, killing a game with more than 1 shot is not a sport”, but correct me if I’m wrong, I thought the AR15 is semi-auto, so you fire a bullet only one at a time... no?
I’m not at all thinking of getting one of those so-called assault weapons for myself (as I said I’m a total novice), but it seems unfair to me to say that even people who are skilled enough to handle those guns cannot have them. I hear the ranchers in Arizona and Texas, for instance, may actually get a good use out of those guns since they are facing possible land/home invasion by Mexican gangs who have powerful weapons themselves. If we need to talk about the ban, shouldn’t it be at the state level and not Federal?
Also, you stated your main concern of protecting yourself is when you are on the street. But my concern is when I’m at home alone. I rarely go to the areas that are not considered safe, or I don’t go out late at night, so I don’t worry about it. I live in a relatively nice area, so I’m not fearful of home invasion that much either, but I did have a somewhat scary experience of things being stolen from my garage. Luckily the burglar didn’t have an intention of coming inside the house nor hurting me, but if I happened to hear the sound and curiously went to the garage unarmed, I can’t say with certainty that the burglar would have just fled. There’s a possibility, no matter how slight that may be, that he may try to kill me to avoid being identified. Since then, I’m thinking of getting a gun and training myself on it.
My point is, everyone’s situation and how he or she needs a protection is different and we need to respect that. You say you can get the bad guy with one bullet, but that’s you. I certainly am not confident that I can. I imagine the intruder would not just stand still for me, I don’t know how many times I’d miss, and I don’t know how many bullets it’ll take for me to stop him from coming at me. And what if there were multiple attackers? 10 bullets suddenly don’t sound like enough for me…
semi-auto is 1 bullet per trigger pull. if its a rifle or pistol or whatever type, all semi-auto is 1 trigger pull. full auto mean bullets will keep firing until the trigger is released.
full auto are also legal but they cost insane amount of money & taxes.
most guns are semi auto.
there also also revolvers that are like semi auto in that each trigger pull is 1 bullet.
the point gun rights people just want to get across is that barely anyone who has a gun uses them for crime. infact there many many more incidents every year in which a gun stops a violent crime then a gun is used in a violent crime.
we also believe that just because a couple people cant handle the responsibilities of having personal freedoms, that doesnt mean we should take away those freedoms from everyone.
no one hardle ever uses an 'assault' rifle to assault anybody except police. we just want the same weapons as police & the founding fathers & others have explained the need to have that protection.
we arenot crazy & paranoid people, we just know the world has many crazy people who wish to harm others & we want to be able to stop them if we ever need to.
Founding fathers only wanted for Americans to own a gun to defend their liberties against oppression.. I don't think this is the case here. You say you want guns to protect yourself against crazy people, and say just because some people can't handle the pressure of owning a gun, that doesnt mean they should take them away... BUT..
1. Who says anything about taking guns away? Merely banning some assault weapons is not taking guns away.. O_o
2. People who talk like that sounds like children who say "mommy, just because lily feels sick on a roller coaster, doesn't mean I will too." Although it may be true, it sounds extremely selfish because those people who can't handle guns KILL people.. and saying thats not your fault is like saying thats not your problem and you dont care as long as YOU'RE safe.. pretty unamerican if you ask me. The founding fathers would have been disappointed.
Yes, all guns are deadly, but some are more than other and it is biological proven that you only need one bullet to kill a person. So ten bullets are more than enough if you are to stop a crime. If you can't do it with ten bullets, you should not own a gun.. take classes of shooting and get back to me later.
"infact there many many more incidents every year in which a gun stops a violent crime then a gun is used in a violent crime." This statement is totally wrong. TOTALLY. I'm sorry to inform you, sir, but unless you are counting crimes stop by some sort of federal forces (cops, FBI, national guard) there are WAYYY more crimes using a gun than those stopped by one. Get your facts straight, no hard feelings. I love the fact that you care about your country, but make sure you debate on a healthy and responsible manner. Blabbing inaccurate information is not the same as presenting a point of view and it may mislead several readers from the truth. Thank you very much. Get back to me if you have any questions or wish to challenge my facts and/or reasoning.
actually the founding fathers believed in personal freedoms & liberties. that includes having any weapon you want as long as it isnt harming others.
so either way, its meant so we can do what we want. its important because many times in history, countries & peoples who thought they were safe & never could imagine it, were over taken by dictators.
the founding fathers wanted to make sure that never happens to America.
actually you post is very ignorant. people should be able to have any weapon they want because it doesnt effect you at all.
to go around telling people what they can do is not what America is about. the founding fathers would think its crazy to have a government permitting people to do things.
there is good reasons for 2nd ammendment, like how sandy hook couldve been prevented if someone wouldve been exercising their right & not had that right taken away in the gun free zone.
it also stops murders & violent crimes if people exercise their right.
basically nobody goes around assaulting people with those rifles so you should stop trying to mislead people. almost every person who has that type of rifle has it for protection. so call it what it is, protection rifles. i know people see cops assaulting people all the time with those types of rifles.
thanks again but if you want more crime & to be more vunerable, dont carry a gun & dont get a high capacity gun for your home.
im not telling you what you can do so please dont tell me what i can do.
mind your own business, thanks
Alright I'm wasting my time with silly debates.. cause you sir, have no idea of what you're saying... "the founding fathers would think its crazy to have a government permitting people to do things." Are you... serious?????
1) Slavery: Slaves were not permitted to OWN GUNS! Founding fathers did not believe they should own guns... get your facts straight dude. Really don't talk if you don't know of your own history...
2) You want guns in schools??? yes because teenagers won't know how to get their hands on one and use it...we are humans.. humans are not perfect.. especially young ones. Guns should not be around little kids. Period.
And saying mind your own business its immature and stupid. If I decide to come and burn your car and say, "dude dont complain... mind your own business.." thats pretty selfish and stupid.
And please get out of your little fantasy world.... cops do not own assault weapons... please get your fact straights.. if you have nothing to do.. then go to the nearest police station and ask them what weapons they use.. cause dude you are just spitting words that are ignorant, and immature. Not trying to be a dick.. just being honest. Read and educate yourself. Take an American History course. Ttml.
What do you mean “cops do not own assault weapons”…??? SWAT police officers have all kinds of assault weapons, don’t they???
well you are just very wrong about your facts. the 1st time gunlaws were introduced were because the KKK were scared that their victims would start getting guns.
also, schools in some places do allow guns. in MN, teachers & faculty who have their permit to carry license can be approved by the principal to carry their gun in school.
you are just scared of guns for some reason & you dont understand that the facts show that you shouldnt be scared. thereare so many violent crimes that are stopped each year by gun owners, but you want to ignore how the crime & murder rates will skyrocket if you take guns. there are cities that have done this & they have the highest crime rates in the nation.
cops do use rifles to assault people. in some cases, they will see a permit holder carrying a pistol unconcealed(which is perfectly legal) & put a rifle to their head & surround them with 6 other cops with pistols to pointed at the person's head.
you should listen to facts because this debate isnt about opinions. piers morgan was going on for months that auto matic guns are illegal & you are going along with his ignorant ideas.
get a gun, learn how to use it safely, & if you ever try to do something illegal with it , hopefully there will be other people around with guns to stop you.
- it is biological proven that you only need one bullet to kill a person. So ten bullets are more than enough if you are to stop a crime. If you can't do it with ten bullets, you should not own a gun.. take classes of shooting and get back to me later.
So, Luis, are you saying, if I cannot gun down an attacker who is trying to get me (as I said, of course he’ll be moving around trying to avoid getting shot) with just one bullet, even after considerable shooting classes I had taken, then I should not own a gun even to use solely on my property?? I live on seven acres of land, only things I may damage when I miss the shot are the walls of my house or my belongings, I won’t harm anyone else unless someone is trespassing on my property and I can’t be responsible for trespassers, especially when I’m facing my own death.
Your case is good. It's almost excusable... except that, it's like saying, I own a big mansion with a huge backyard bigger than a football field.. so can I own a tank? It's not fair for those who simply live in small apartments, (cities were most crime happen) and they have to worry about their neighbor having an AR-15. You can have a gun with up to 15 bullets and additional ammo, but let's face it... even if you had 1000 bullets... by the time you shoot the 20th bullet, if you haven't hit the guy yet, the guy will hit you. Common sense. So even with limitless ammo, it is fair to say that there is a margin or limit of how bad you can be with a gun, and how good the invader is. I sound like a pessimist, I know, I'm for that I'm sorry, but if you can't shoot your target with even 20 bullets, chances are he (who will be arm) will shoot you first. So even with 1,000 bullets, you would still lose the fight.. How to win then? Better home security system, 9-11, more lessons. But bigger weapons and more bullets won't do much help (Not saying it won't help at all... it may help a little bit.. but the profit factor, minus the disadvantage of allowing every single man, (even mentally ill) to own deadly guns with numerous bullets, cancel that option out. I say that if people use all their strength and energy into thinking of new ways of protecting their homes, instead of trying to arm the whole nation, you would impress yourself on how creative people can be if they work together for a common goal. I just dont think giving everyone guns is that goal that we are trying to reach.
??? my post won’t go through... is something wrong with the site now???
Arnold Schwarzenegger legally owns a tank.
- but the profit factor, minus the disadvantage of allowing every single man, (even mentally ill) to own deadly guns with numerous bullets, cancel that option out.
I don’t think this statement is true. Defensive Gun Uses statistics show annually 800,000 to 2,500,000 (studies vary) are saved by having a gun. To me, it sounds like the profit factor outweighs the disadvantage...
You are right when you say “use all their strength and energy into thinking of new ways of protecting their homes.” Owning a gun doesn’t necessarily mean that we abandon that notion. We should still keep thinking about the better ways, but in the meantime, until we actually come up with those better ways, we should have a right to own a gun. I’m not trying to arm the whole nation, if someone doesn’t want to own a gun, I totally respect that. It’s our freedom to choose. I just think no one should try to compromise someone else’s ability to protect himself or herself.
1st of all , life isnt fair. if someone owns a large property & wants a tank, to say they cant because some othe rpeople have small properties is pretty childish.
you are a backwards thinking person & you are against what America is all about. people can do what they want if its not harming others.
who do you think you are to tell people what they can & cant do based on your opinion of what is best for them?
its about each persons need in their own situation.
i carry a 9mm pistol with me & thats all i own at this time. i use hollowpoint bullets that are meant to explode on impact so they dont travel through a criminal & they wont bounce of things like pavement or go through things like walls.
i would like to get a higher capacity, like an Srs rifle. just incase something happens like riots or another attack where there are mobs of people roaming the streets. i would keep it locked up in a safe & only take it out for the range or in case of an event like that
that is good post & reminds me of something really crazy i saw on piers morgan.
piers said in britian, nobody has guns. nobody can get guns. & there is 60 gun murders a year.
so they have more gun murders than they do guns!
i would rather live in a place where there is milllllions of guns & not even close to that many gun murders. seems like the people over there really are insane & cant handle much of anything if thats how they are around guns.
itd b pretty crazy to live in britian especially how high there overall violent crime rate is. no thanks!
keep listening to piers & then when someone crazy shoots you, you can blame him for telling you having guns are bad.
thanks piers! these people died because they didnt have a gun for protection! just like you wanted ! keep up the good work!
Why are you Canadians so obssessed with us Americans? You Claim to hate us, and say you laugh at us, yet still you so obviously worship at our alter. You hang on our every word. You french kiss our a$$es, and pour across our border (for better EVERYTHING) with wild abandoned. Admit it Canadians........you secretly want to be U.S. citizens...don't you?
Piers Morgan, I would like to thank you for your hard work. your courage, and your focus on gun control. you are true hero. people attack you for standing up against the ridiculous NRA and its idoit members, they attack you for having a voice of reason, and pushing for more guncontrol. I agree with you, and hope more americans stand up and fight againt these sub-group of idiots that dont represent the views of most americans.
you know piers is advocating taxation without representation, right? he said on his show that politicians shouldnt listen to the people who voted for them, but instead pass whatever laws they want.
thats what the founding fathers warned us about & those 'idiots' from the NRA are fighting so hard to stop.
thanks but you should be ashamed. if you cant handle freedom than maybe you should go somewhere else where you can rely on the government to protect your country & tell you what to do.
NRA are the biggest lobby in the country... which means they have the most money, pay the most money, and get the most money out of political decisions. In other words, they are slowly creating a tyranny as politicians would listen and respond to them directly before any American. The opposite of what the founding fathers wanted.
people support the nra. we pay them to fight for us & get our message to the politicians. if politicians go against what the majority of the people want, then we vote them out of office.
its not the nra who is voting , its the nra lobbying on our behalf
Thanks Obama for taking our rights and moving America towards a police state. And by the way for all of you lazy people out there who are getting stuff for free your future grandchildren are the ones that will ended up paying for it. Causing your family to be in debt for generations. Obama doesn't care about you he just cares about his laws being passed. And yeah sure he gave us gay marriage and abortion but in return we give him more "The Rights We Have." Wake Up America!!!
There you go again... yes Trevor Martin will be celebrating his 18th Birthday but what about George, he would probably have a tombstone in place and be forgotten.
ok so my question is, I always hear him mention the gun ban in england and how it is working, as the number of murders caused by firearms is so low, but what was the numbers in the years befor the ban? Isn't that the only way to tell if the ban is working? lets say they had only 59 murders in 2012, but had 46 in 1996, that doesn't really seem like it is "working". or if they oh I dunno maybe in 2010 had someone driving around shooting people and killing 12, would that still qualify as "working"? wasn't the gun ban started to stop mass shootings? "works" must have a diffrent meaning over there.
well ive heard they have the highest violent crime rate in Europe. but its hard to compare their small country over there. they have been ruled by a queen & were ok with that. here we dont want to rely on the government.
the best way to see how it works, look at the cities in the US with the strictest gun laws that were practically bans. those places have the highes violent crime & murder rates. if you look at the places here that guns are a part of the culture & have the loosest gun laws, the crime rate is the lowest.
but if you look at overal USA violent crimes rates than thats not really telling a true picture because that includes places like Chicago, where guns have practically ban banned already & have insane murder rate now. washington DC was another but they were smart & lifted some restrictions on guns & the crime rates dropped a little.
I wish the would have recorded the look on Piers Morgans face when he turned around from firing that AR he had in his hands. I bet there was a look on his face that would compare to a child on Christmas morning. And Zimmerman was COMPLETELY right. Criminals do not care about gun laws. Strict gun laws would only harm honest Americans that abide by the rules. One last thing, the UK DOES have the US beat when it comes to crime rates. So answer this Piers. Why is that? Guns are banned there.....What gives? Maybe it is because evil will prevail with watever weapon it is given. You disgust me with your rants Piers.
when he was shooting the browing, he had to like bite his lip so he wouldnt start grinning. piers is such a wierdo & a fake. because people have guns the overall murder rate goes down. piers isnt trying to stop murders, he i sjust obsessed with guns
Everyone should throw away their guns!!!!! Every single type of gun...Lets look for better pastimes. Point is, if there were no guns then we would not have to get more guns to protect from guns. It is easier to take a life with a gun than a knife, or arson etc. There are not that many Juliet's ready to run themselves on a knife. Moreover, with the way things are in todays economy, people who were considered perfectly normal, can under a brief second have temporary insanity enough to take their lives with a gun if it is readily available. Of course once dead you can't bring them back for treatment. Please stop this politics!!!! There is no reasonable debate that will deal with this issue and there are no such things as responsible gun owners. Responsibility should be to life. Surrender the guns. Stop selling the guns. Stop buying the guns. Lets be reasonable. Lets seek peace. Pierce I understand your frustration... Please Don't give up...
Gun ownership is about checks and balances. Gun ownership is about enforcing the theory that the government is a leech on society if society cannot protect themselves against it. The government does not have ultimate sovereignty. The individuals do. This must be reflected in ownership of the weapons. The old order of tyranny and despotism is marked, always and everywhere, by the centralized use of guns. This anti-liberty mentality, wherein only the state maintains and exercises the use of force is not only anti-American, it is also anti-progression.
He's obviously sad about his brother's death. You should ask him how he felt about guns before his brother's death. People die everyday and you don't get a chance to hear their story. As much as it pains me to say this but "We shouldn't get rid of guns." The world is a crazy and scary place getting rid of guns could actually do more harm than good. The media and News is trying to make gun owners seem evil. When more of the recent cases of a mass murder involved a mentally ill person. Not every person who owns a gun is mentally ill, also I just find it strange that after all the years of gang violence and gang wars the Government remained silence. But now all of a sudden they want all the guns gone, not to mention this could cause a war. That probably wouldn't last long due to the fact that the troops are coming back from a pointless war. And all that training is really for "US" for the people who choose to rebel against the Government and without guns we can't fight back. Email: Me :)
Have any of the people who don't think we need some type of gun EDUCATION. Heard of a three year old who killed himself with a gun????????????????????????????????? His father is a Sheriff.
If we give up our guns then so should the Government, whoever has the guns has the power.
What a stupid comment.
Nice post. I learn some thing far more difficult on various blogs everyday. It's going to constantly be stimulating to read content from other writers and practice a bit something from their store. I'd prefer to use some with the content on my blog no matter if you don't mind. Natually I'll give you a link on your internet blog. Thanks for sharing.
[url=http://outletschristianlouboutinsa.0fees.net]christian louboutin sale 2012[/url]
Amazing Post.thanks for share..much more wait ..
[url=http://coolchristianlouboutina.a0001.net]christian louboutin online store[/url]
You should take part in a contest for among the very best blogs on the internet. I will recommend this site!
[url=http://ownchristianlouboutinsa.0fees.net]red bottoms christian louboutin[/url]]
Notify me of new comments via email.