READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
Whether you fell asleep early, stayed out too late, or simply want to watch it again, we realize it's not always possible to get your entire "Piers Morgan Live" fix from television. As an answer to this, we offer the below labor of love – "Piers Morgan Live, Rewind" – dedicated and designed to getting you caught up and connected to the conversation.
Amidst the release of new details from the December 14th mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., on Thursday evening Piers Morgan invited a trio. of insightful and energized guests to share their specific positions on gun legislation and assault weapons.
"There is a deliberate effort to conflate the types of firearms. I do not own a military-style assault weapon just because of what - a firearm looks scary? Then you call it military assault?," wondered Dana Loesch. "Do you realize that one of my children has a BB gun that looks like an AR-15? Is that going to be considered a military style assault weapon? It sounds silly and uneducated."
After hearing Loesh surmise that something as seemingly harmless as a spoon could technically be considered an assault weapon, Van Jones jumped in with his objection:
"This is the conscious strategy on the part of the pro-gun folks to constantly bring things back around to things that don't make any sense," said the CNN contributor and former Barack Obama White House official. "You're talking about people stabbing people with spoons. If that was a problem we had in America, people stabbing people with spoons, we wouldn't be talking about this right now."
"I'm just trying to establish where you draw the line. Where do you draw the line at preventing the deaths of children, Piers?" asked the Conservative radio personality, within the context of a debate on magazine capacity.
"I would love to draw the line, Dana, at zero gun deaths in America," came the host's response.
Misinterpreting Morgan's statement, Loesch drew an inaccurate conclusion:
"So you do believe in disarmament, then," she declared. "Thank you. That's the answer that I wanted."
But this was an assumption that Morgan was not going to let slide:
"When did I say disarmament? Wait a minute. You talk about conflating the argument. Dana, when did I say disarmament?"
Meanwhile, prior to his energized discussion with the likes of Loesch and Jones, Morgan also engaged in a more civil conversation with Richard Feldman.
The president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association, Feldman looked to promote the theory that the guns themselves aren't to blame, but rather, those firing said guns:
"If you double the number of guns owned by people who aren't misusing them, it's going to have no impact. And if you just add a few hundred guns in a community where the people are going to misuse them, you have terrible tragedies in ones and twos. If we focus clearly on the problem which is never the gun per se, but is always in whose hands are the guns," said the former NRA Operative. "You don't need a firearm to cause horrible tragedies. A gallon of gasoline can cost the lives of 100 people or more. We have seen it in Brazil. We saw it in the Bronx in the 1980's. The Happy Land fire, one gallon of gasoline, 87 people were killed. You don't need a gun if your intent is to cause mayhem.
Additionally, as part of the segments which featured Loesch and Jones, last night "Piers Morgan Live" also welcomed Grover Norquist.
Generally joining the program for his financial and taxation expertise, in this instance the topic was same-sex marriage, and the right for the courts to intervene:
"Once you get the government into defining something, they're going to mess it up. Marriage for a lot of people is a religious sacrament in any of the Abrahamic faiths," noted the "Americans for tax reform" president. "So I think there are a number of laws that the government's got itself into that we need to extricate it. If the government was less involved in marriage and defining it and regulating it, we might be better off, everybody."