Get To Know Piers Morgan
READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
Thank You
![Into the Jungle with Jack Hanna](http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/121126045719-pmt-hanna-cheetah-00012828"-search-tease.jpg)
Alan Dershowitz: "What we're trying to do is limit the access of guns to people who don't need them"
Coming up this evening at 9 p.m., "Piers Morgan Tonight" continues it's coverage of the recent tragedies in both Colorado and Wisconsin, using the shooting deaths as a platform on which to further discuss the issue of gun control.
Joining Piers Morgan in advance of his forthcoming book "Gun Guys: A Road Trip," author Dan Baum reveals details of his research, making the case that tougher firearm laws won't solve the problem:
"I just spent two years, driving 15,000 miles around the country, talking to gun owners. And what I picked up was gun owners identified very strongly with their guns," says the man who describes himself as a Liberal Democrat.
"When you come along, somebody like Mr. [Alan] Dershowitz, who does not look to me like a big gun guy," Baum continues. "He comes along and tells your ordinary law-abiding gun owner 'You can't be trusted with this kind of gun'... the reaction is 'Well, to hell with you.'"
In response to being referenced directly by Baum, the lawyer takes exception, suggesting the issue of firearms in America is based on more than simply a person's appearance:
"I like the fact that your guests can tell who a gun owner is, by just by looking at him, and he can tell by looking at me, by hearing my name, by knowing what city I live in, whether I'm a kind of gun guy or not," says the man who last visited the show on July 20th, the evening of the deadly Aurora, CO movie theater shooting which claimed the lives of 12 people and injured 58 others.
"The vast majority of gun owners don't kill, but people who do kill, tend to kill with guns, and often with illegal guns," Dershowitz explains. "What we're trying to do is limit the access of guns to people who don't need them."
Watch the clip, listen to the interviews, then tune in this evening at 9 p.m. for a lively debate that comes in the aftermath of the nation's second high-profile gun incident in less than a month.
-–
» Follow Piers Morgan Tonight on Twitter
Latest video
Thanks Piers, Great show!!! You are informed and opinionated and ask the right questions!
I wish I could have had Pierce see this article before his program further proving the mentality of americans when it comes to their guns. I encourage anyone who wants to see how other's perceive american "gun slingers" in other countries. We love our american friends, but don't think for one minute that when we travel through the USA we are not concerned and sometimes in fear of who is packing a gun. Please read the article and understand how ridiculous someone acted who should have been in control of his urge to draw a gun yet not only wasn't, but had the lunacy to write newspaper here and complain about it. The article is called: American police officer bemoans lack of guns in Canada. The link to it is http://news.sympatico.ca/oped/coffee-talk/american_police_officer_bemoans_lack_of_guns_in_canada/5161d1e6
I sincerely hope Pierce reads this and follows up with both Obama and Romney on the mentality that needs to change.
Good for us we don't give a rat's you know what what you think of us.
I found the discussion between Mr. Gershowitz and the others to be very interesting however failed to address a larger issue that being the causation of violence. Guns are mere tools by which a violent society has the means to express hatred and discord. As a professor of criminal justice at New Mexico State University and a New York Detective for 23 years many factors play into our violent society. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss the issues from the perspective of not only a theoretical point of view but also a practical side where New Mexico has very lacked gun laws.
I think that life is hard and people are often so opinionated on less defendable topics than gun control, that being opinionated stops being such a favorable charicteristic as it is with Piers and become a good reason to shot others, people are as tough as all hell on each other so that if you dont reach a point when it is lucky that you dont have a gun at your side to kill your neighbors and family with and so get yourself locked up, then you have hardly lived.
I have often reflected that the easiest way to make sure I never become a murderer is to make sure I dont have a gun around, after all sticking a knife in someone would be so very messy and with a knife I would be much too close to my victim, I would have to see his or her pain sweart tears and spittle more clearly, so forms of killing that are not with a firearm are much less tempting.
I would rather someone stole my belongings especially now I can put my photos up in the computer clouds, than to live with having killed a mere theif, maybe with a mother and children who loved them. Really those who prefer killing theifs to losing their goods are a pretty heartless lot and considering how much pain guns cause in poor districts full of gangs and parents workign to hard to be t home for hteir children that wealthyish people who want the country full of guns though they would never actually kill a robber, are also pretty heartless about the fate of others, and they call themselves christians! It is time that people started to read read victorian boks again, people used to laugh about them being tear jerkers but it seems that without a diet of tear jerkers in our youth we become hard hearted. rose macaskie madrid.
The easiest way to not become a murder is to simply not kill anyone with out justification. It speaks volumes about you if the only thing keeping you from losing control and committing murder is the lack of firearms available to you. You, and you alone are responsible for your actions, not the tools around you.
Get this idiot off the air. I thought the host of a talk show should keep his personal opinions to themselves. Piers is an idiot. Send him home to see if he can make a living in his own country. I will never watch one more minute of CNN AGAIN.
Piers is just a bit bullish, a charcteristic that is often abdmired in men, at least it seems it is admired in men while they are of the right opinion. Gary, if you are an american man you can always handle a English man, the Americans beat us centuries ago, so you too can manage an English man and it will give you practice at fighting verbally, a fighter is always glad of a good bit of practice with another fighter so they dont want them out of the way they need the practice. Also this is an international news program with an English, Australian, Canadian and African team, Indian, Islamic and South American reporters, it seems to try to represent the whole world which is often what makes it good. This is Americas equivilent of other woorld international news channels and maybe the only news channel tha tso truly includes teams and reporters from all over the world making it special. rose macaskie madrid.
Piers,
I'm a Canadian and we have access to possess firearms, both restricted and not. All Possession and Acquisition licences (PAL) are vetted by our RCMP. We have far, far less gun violence from registered owners that the USA. Most gun vilolence here is from illegal or gag related firearms users. It's not that hard. Simply do proper vetting. It won't stop criminals, but it will stop disturbed individuals. see ==> http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/form-formulaire/num-nom/921-eng.htm
So true.
I don't see why every argument is black in white when it comes to political issues in America, Why can't we meet in the middle to make sense of things. There needs to be gun control in America, but it does not mean that you have to take away guns from everyone. There is no reason for private citizens to own automatic and semi automatic guns. these should be fully outlaw. The type of gun someone owns should be based on there qualifications.
Who are you to say what people should or should not have?
I'm an American who has freedom of speech and I say, NO ONE NEEDS AUTOMATIC WEAPONS except OUR TROOPS!!
I think the people who need an automatic weapon must have small p--s and those guns make them feel big! No one needs an automatic weapon for hunting. I wish the gov. would ask the automatic weapon owners to give thems to the Armed Services who can really use them.
@Leslie – I think you are very confused. I don't think you even know the difference between a semi-automatic and an automatic. Why don't you look up what is required to purchase an automatic. In fact the assault weapons you see hanging in sporting goods stores are semi-automatic. yes they RESEMBLE weapons of war. I can hunt with a bolt action .308 rifle and I can hunt with a a gun that RESEMBLES a weapon of war in the same caliber. No I can't hunt with a 30 round magazine, there are laws against that. Both guns do the same thing. Don't let the media cloud your judgement, do your own research. You'll be surprised what you can discover.
There are millions of us military veterans who are trained in using assault weapons and pistols , now that we are civilians we should not be able to own one, I think not Piers thats your English deal and philosophy any one that truly wants to kill on any level will figure out a way to do it. Its not the guns that kill it is the desire to do so that gets the act done.
Honestly, if i desire to do something and that somethign is very hard to do, it does put me off trying. Like if i am furious and I am counsciouse that it is easy to get a gun and no one will look supiciously at me when I go to buy one, becoming a murderess suddenly seems possible even for an idot like me, while in the countries I have lived in, I would not dare to try to buy an assault weapon I would be so scared that the police would start sniffing around me if i did and so sure I could never manage to buy one, so why try, the difficulties of being a mass murderer would put me right off trying, if being one truly took my fancy. I am really bad at doing things that seem hard to do. I hate failure and a good percentage of the population is like me in hating failure, I bet finding it hard to buy what they need to make killing easy would be an enormouse deterent to all but the cleverest, most efficient assasines. rose macaskie madrid.
Folks, please consider the following. A lot of people who support the right to bear arms are right wing Christians who act like extremists. I have been a member of the Born Again movement (Evangelical). When you dig deep enough you find that they are planting this idea of a post-apocalytic existence where Christians will be fighting against everyone else for mere survival.
Have you ever looked at who are hoarding guns? ...and the type of guns they are stockpiling? ...is it really necessary to have these type of guns to defend yourself against a burglar...or to go hunting? I believe there will be a race/religious war in America and some folks are already preparing for it.
One final point: these extremist Christians are practicing their own form of Jihad, and one political party in America is subtly supporting that practice.
Let's see some empirical data to back your statements. Uninformed opinion just that. Uninformed.
Funny. I'm agnostic and fully support the individual rights protected by the seconded amendment. How does that fit your stereotype?
I think Harold forgot to take his meds. That's just crazy talk.
Yes. There have been times in history when people have been very counscious of the dark side of religion but now we seem to be in a moment when all people can see is how religon has lost followers and so are inclined to think well of such an underdog. We have forgotten how dangerous religion can be in our suprise at what sometimes seems its near demise. People love figures like Jesus and Mohamed and such so much that they get very cross with those that dont seem to respect them enough and very violent verbally or phisically about those that dont agree with them enough, who dare to shake thier fist at such loved figures and disagree with them and they also fear other dissident humans going to hell so much that religion often makes them totally forget to think in their fear and love and makes them very passionate and dangerous. The puritans went to America to escape the English persuection of their relgions, so Americans more than anyone else should know how religion makes one group persecute another.
The near demise of religon has made the religious fight very hard to have a come back and they seem to have got very puritanical as a reply to the unreligious bit of society, as a way of having a strongly differentiated character from the rest of society, it is time we remembered to be wary about the strong currents that are not so charitable as other religious tendencies that religon creates. rose macaskie
I just wached this segment and have to say it looks like we are headed for another unproductive argument. All of the parties have dug in and will not bend.
As a gun owner I am a firm believer that the focus should be more on the people and less on the gun. I am all for waiting periods and denying the right to buy guns to some people. In the most recent incident it has been said that the gun was bought legally. Based on my experiences buying guns and the information I have heard this is not true. If he was "kicked out" of the Army, he did not buy it legally. He lied on the application to purchase it which is a crime.
Make people wait but do not blame people like me who are responsible and have taken all of the correct steps to owns firearms.
As for what is being done in other countries, why does it matter? This is not the UK, France, China or any other country, it is the United States of America. WE must find our own solution that both prevents tragedies such as those of recent weeks but protects the rights of people like me.
He was given a General discharge as unfit for duty. The only discharges that disqualify anyone from legal gun ownership are BCD (bad conduct discharge) and Dishonorable. Both of these are given by courts martial and are for felony offenses.
Piers, appreciate the show and the pragmatic approach towards the issue of gun control especially in the hands of crazy people. I like how you compared the crazy people to terrorists. This might sound crazy but when 9/11 happened, we had all the potential suspects get registered in NSEERS, then why can't we take the initiative to demand a psychiatric clearance for every gun owner? This may not solve or eradicate craziness from this world but it is going to give a common man the peace that someone has been checked by a professional doctor/agency before granting them such raw power. I can draw an analogy with a drivers licence where the driver is not guaranteed from committing a DUI but then at least the fact that someone of responsibility (DMV) has found the individual safe enough to be on the road and the individual has been educated of the repercussions of DUI makes our roads much safer.
As a combat veteran of the Vietnam War and a longtime veterans advocate I have to say I was disappointed in Pier's typically british approach (control, control, control). I was particularly offended by references to "crazy people doing crazy things", more relevant would be 'desperate people do desperate things ... the issue here is in the approach to mental health. Unfortunately Pier's approach (and that of Professor Dershowitz) simply supports the stigma of mental illness. What is relevant to this discussion is the context in which these desperate, violent acts occur. In the midst of our current crises the first thing to be jettisoned was mental health and social services ... a huge mistake. We have plenty of gun control as it is ... what we need is education, healthcare and social services.
Hand Guns are made for one purpose. that is to shoot a person. So if you buy a hand gun it is for shooting someone. You may need a handgun to defend yourself or family but in order to be given a license to purchase one you should first have to convince the authorities the reason that you need to defend yourself or family.
If the penalty for having an unlicensed gun was a minimum of 30 years in prison, fewer people would take the chance of having an unlicensed gun.
This is like saying the only purpose of owning a knife is to stab people. The majority of objects that are capable of doing harm are not meant to be used do such.
Dear Mr. Morgan,
Please stop referring to people with mental illness, who commit crimes with guns, as "crazy people." Very few people with mental illness commit crimes; in fact, they are far more likely to be victims of crime themselves. Calling those with mental illness "crazy" perpetuates negative stereotypes and increases the stigma that prevents people from getting the treatment they need. Jared Loughner in the U.S. and Vince Li in Canada have both been identified as living with untreated mental illness (schizophrenia) when they committed terrible crimes. Perhaps their failure to receive treatment was related to stigma perpetuated by a society that fails to understand that no one asks for a mental illness and that being identified as mentally ill means one is ILL, not "crazy."
Mr. Morgan,
I have listened to your position on guns in the U.S. with great interest. The arguments expressed by you and your guests are the same as those voiced during the nineties when the Clinton administration backed the assualt weapons ban.
It was during those times I chose to educate myself on the Second Ammendment. These are my findings.
Much of our law derived from English common law as it existed in the seventeen hundreds. Some was in response to the oppression of King George. The Second Ammendment falls in the latter category. If you were to find a dictionary in use at the time you will find that "A well regulated Militia" meant the entire population of able bodied men between the ages of eighteen and fifty in our nation whom were well trained in the use of arms. This means all arms, not just firearms. It was written this way so that each man could provide the arms that a man of his station could afford when called upon to defend his nation.
Like Switzerland of today, each of these men was expected to keep these arms available in their homes in case of need.
As I mentioned earlier, King George was seen as the main threat but our founding fathers also recognized that an armed citizenry was the most effective deterrent against any oppressive government. They knew that even an elected government such as ours had the capacity of devolving into a corrupt and oppressive one if the governed had no way of enforcing their consent.
I do not beleive that gun control has any place in the discussion of violence in out country. Guns are mearly a tool, not a cause.
Lest you write me off as a right wing gun nut, let me offer the following. I was taught the proper and safe manner of handling a gun starting at the age of four. I have served my country as a Naval Aircrewman hunting submarines during the Sixties. I started a successful business while in college. Later I chose to work as a Commercial pilot and then spent twenty five years with the Federal Aviation Administration.
Politically I am an independent with a liberal bias. The only politician I have ever given money to is Barack Obama. I intend to vote for him again this year. Finally, I tend to think these issues through rather than emotionally react. As proof I simply will refer to my membership in good standing in Mensa.
Thank you for your attention.
Jon Applegate
Solsberry Indiana
Easy to understand why a Brit doesn't like Americans to have guns.
He does realize that English tyranny is why we allow possession of military grade weapons, right? Maybe we should also disallow freedom of speech to the mentally incompetent... i.e. Piers.
CNN You used to be the most trusted name in news until you hired all the gays and then you hired Piers Morgon. I am done with you
"Hired all the gays"?
Dear Mr. Morgan,
I am a huge fan and a fellow Brit. I also share and agree with all your comments in relation to the lack of gun control in the USA and what appears to be a serious problem that is getting worse. However, I have to admit that if I were an American listening to your program, I would be thinking that I am fed up with a British guy telling us what's wrong in the USA and how better things are in the UK.. I worry that if you keep this topic going your popularity will drop considerably. This gun problem is too big for you to take on, even President Obamba and Mr Romney don't want to go there.
Respectively submitted.
I agree totally. Why American need a Brit like Morgan to express his opinion on the air way about american's gun control.
Do you know how many people have already stopped watching CNN because of Morgan? Please shut up.
And i thought Rich Sanchez was bad
I am passionate above the perliforation of guns in our society and saddened by the continued justications for American citizens to have the right to bare arms....the terrorist are not our only concern, but also the inner city youth who are murdering each other on a daily basis... The gun is the problem and remains a great option for the sane, weak, sick and evil in America... I feel for law enforcement and military who have to compete with this for the sake of "protecting" the second amendment..
Yeah. Good point. Inner city youths are never violent if they don't have guns.
By the way... There are dictionaries on the Internet. You can look up how to spell those big words that you think make you sound smart.
You can pry my Gun from my dead hands! You LIBTARDS are going to reap what you Sow!!!!
NOBAMA2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
well said
I'm Barack Insane Obama your Welfare Mama and I approve this message!!!!!!!
There you go again..... Please get help.
Dr. Dershowitz compares American gun owners to Americans who drive at speeds that exceed the local posted speed limit. First of all, owning a gun is not illegal. Speeding is against the law, hence a speed LIMIT. Second, the percentage of Americans who legally own guns that commits malicous crimes is much lower than the percentage of Americans who speed that causes fatalities due to vehicular accidents.
^^Let me correct myself: The percentage of Americans who legally own guns that commits malicious gun crimes is much lower than the percentage of American drivers that causes fatalities due to driving at speeds above the locally posted speed limit.
It's easy to understand why it's important to own a gun... if I had a reason. If my dependent or I cut off a body part – say a big toe – I wouldn't wait around to try and stop the bleeding. I mean, I would call-in an emergency, but will any (I wanted to say anybody, but I mean a sane person) person sit around for the EMTs to arrive before attempting to help the situation? At the same time, if anybody (...no, I mean sane person) had a threatening person assault their home, I would want them to be able to 'stop the bleeding' without depending on the emergency responders to show up.
At the same time, I hate this Second Amendment deal. Any Brit should understand that... You do not, in a representative government, allow people who are not stakeholders to walk the street like an officer, soldier, or part of a militia. Any British person can understand that... right? You want that person, who grew up across the street (with those good parents, of course) or under your roof, to be the person in your society to carry a gun. Does anybody reading the Second Amendment wonder who may consider themselves' a member of a militia? Now read me the rest of the rules...
Your father would just remind you about how that one nation knew the names of all the gun holders in that other nation because they had to be on record. My military is... (redacted). This is just a subject you put in one bucket or the other, man.
There should be government sanctioned 'gun shacks' (like there should be government 'love shacks') where people can go to get a piece! I mean, they'll have to return it in working condition, too...
Also, when you took the Fifth, I have all of the evidence, and the bottle you drank that from, from that time you did do it.
I have been all over the world and have found the majority of the people to be good but when the good men are too scared to stand up for one another they lose. You can't secure or police anything without taking freedoms away. In order to be effective you need people to be submissive and you need a lot of man power. I don't want to live that way just as much as our forefathers did not want to be treated like a second class citizen.
All mass murders agree gun control works, just ask Hitler.
Read the book, see the movie "The Road" by the American author Cormac McCarthy. ( awarded the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)
In an post-apocalyptic world, thugs with guns would rule by default, as in the book. It doesn't matter what would cause the lose of government, electricity, and organized society, by sun flair, meteor, or volcanic nuclear winter, the need for a well armed militia of good honest citizens is still needed, even in the 21st century.
Piers, you rightfully pointed out that minutes after such tragedy's, "the media" can uncover all sorts of reasons why this or that person should have been denied a right to have a weapon. Some guests don't hear you. They should have heard you say that families/friends of such haters, know who they are, and should before the, "act", make known their intimate knowledge of a deranged, hate filled socio-pathic personality. Simple!
Yes, I agree.
Negligence begins at home.
People should get more involved if their involvement could possibly prevent such violent crimes.
Also, a special police/security branch should be trained to monitor report-ins on potential/violent individuals.
Bravo to PIers and Mr. Dershowitz for finally speaking the truth! Common sense words at last. It's the first time I have heard a commentator (Dershowitz) speak with passion and logic on this subject. I agree wholeheartedly with all he said. Thanks Piers for challenging the fake 'surveys'.. this nonsense has got to stop.
You made some comments recently about how we don't need to own assault weapons and the second amendment. You have the right to say this because of the first amendment. I understand your points.
However, you completely missed the entire point of the second amendment. The Brown Bess was the AK47 of the period around the Revolution War. The second Amendment was drafted not to ensure people had hunting weapons or to defend the home. It was drafted so that if the citizens of the US should ever need to fight for freedom from oppression they are armed to do so.
I’m tired of the argument ”we will never have to do that”. It’s happening in the Mideast now and not too long ago in the US. In the 1860s we fought a civil war. It was in part, right or wrong, due to some citizens feeling the Federal Government was oppressive. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility it may happen again. I don’t think so nor ever want it to happen. One of the reasons we are not oppressed is because we are armed and willing to fight for our freedom, which is the true spirit of the second amendment.
Please quit comparing us to Norway, GB and other countries. The reason we are the United States is because we didn’t want to be Norway or GB. Many of our people came from there because they didn’t want to be there.
I in no way advocate the use of violence but understand it’s sometimes the last resort. I was in the US Army for over 20 years and have seen violence used to oppress and to gain freedom. In some cases it is the only thing some people understand or respond to. (sad but true)
I agree wholeheartedly. Ingrained in my American core is the belief that I am armed to fight off an out-of-control government that takes steps to violently force a dictatorship on us, instead of living free. I'm not from New Hampshire; however, they have the greatest motto of all human history, "Live Free or Die." God rest my soul, no one is disarming me or my family.
Mr. Dershowitz writes, ""The vast majority of gun owners don't kill, but people who do kill, tend to kill with guns, and often with illegal guns," Dershowitz explains. "What we're trying to do is limit the access of guns to people who don't need them."
I reply, "The vast majority of car owners don't kill, but people who do kill, tend to kill with cars (FAR MORE THAN WITH GUNS), and often with illegal road behavior (e.g., texting, improper lane changes, red light running, speeding, alcohol, etc.)," Ms. Randolph explains. "What we need to do is limit access to cars to people who need them (cops only, sorry folks, you're going to need your bicycles)."
If Mr. Dershowitz actually cared about innocent lives lost, he'd pick up on the glaring fact that four times the number of senseless killings take place on our roadways by people breaking traffic laws left and right. According to his "logic," everyone needs to turn in their cars to save more than 44,000 innocent lives per year on our roadways.
Alan Dershowitz: "What we're trying to do is limit the access of guns to people who don't need them"
When did the Bill of Rights become the Bill of needs?
Way to go america. Buy lots of guns and big cars. My Remington Arms stocks and Alberta Oil Sands are doing just great . Next Nov. vote for Romney and we will have around 160,000 jobs moved to Canada.
Good grief Piers! The reason Barack Obama isn't addressing gun issues is very simple – he doesn't want to get shot! If you don't have the guts to acknowledge that reality, you're part of the problem.
We need to stop blaming and picking on the NRA. It is a very influential organisation. We have to respect it.
We should join the NRA. And if we could afford, we should follow Romney's lead and buy a life-time membership.
Remember the religious conservatives infiltration of the Republican Party that started in the 70s culminating in their successful takeover of the Party that pushed GWB into power.
We should do the same to the NRA. We should join the NRA and infiltrate it. And be good friends with gun lovers. Being on the same side will make gun control motivation more effective and successful. We should realise that freedom of gun ownership cannot and should not be eliminated – but we can work effectively to limit the prevalence of guns in the wrong hands.
If you look at Mitt Romney's record in Massachusetts, he had been the most left-leaning and liberal Republican there. Romney the liberal has successfully infiltrated the Right wing party and is at the top of its leadership. We should do the same. I would love to see Obama another four years, but OTOH would hate to see Romney's infiltration be in vain – I'll sit on the fence at the moment.
Those in favour of guns sat and pretended that guns have ben responsible for a reduction in crime in the last few years. Maybe there had been no such thing as a reduction in crime, I have not investigated it and Alan Dershowitz pointed out that there are other reasons that would explain a reduction in the crime rate like that nearly the whole poppulation is in prision so there is no one left to steal anything.
It seems to me that so many people forget that schooling is not just becoming what used to be called a person with encyclopedic knowledge, it is also about becoming a person who has the disciplines necessary to be fair and wise and research things. Disciplines such as waiting for evidence before they judge a situation, or looking for evidence and being aware when they dont have it, so that fun as it is to jump to conclusions they hold their horses. The disciplines are things like brain storming, trying to think of any possible thing that could bring to bear on a situation, not to just think of the only thing that you know of that might have affected the situation but attemping to cover all possibilities. A reduction in the populations counsciouse about what these disciplines are is likely to make for a mean narow minded population.
The disciplines an education is meant to give as well as imparting knowledge are those that are normally necessary for most mental types of jobs and that normaly need to be taught, as we weren't all born miraculously capable. A lawyer knows that he should not jump to conclusions and that he should try to cover al possibilites if only so as to see what his opponent in court is likely to do, a journalist is taught to do research before reporting on something, at least they are in theory, sometimes it seems that journalist do very little research, and doing reaseaerch requires disciplines, like trying to perceive what other things might have weight in the topic you are dealing with etc..
If the general public heard people talk about these disciplines more often, preferably in ways that made the disciplined mind look as tempting as sporting abilities seem to be for most, then Alan Dershowitz would not have to say that there are different reasons from the rise in gun ownership that could have caused the reduction in crime in America in recent years, because the general public would, on their own have thought, these people have only given me one set of possibilites and so it looks as if they might be trying to pull the wool over my eyes, things are always more complicated than that. rose macaskie madrid.
Has anyone ever examined the idea of requiring a gun owner to have insurance on their gun and amo (s)? Similar to car insurance (cars cause deaths). It seems to me that if there were strict insurance laws/rules, controled at the time of purchase like drugs, they would be better controlled. There is a right to own guns, to be sure, but no right to own them without insurance for use.
YOU CAN PRY MY GUN FROM MY DEAD HANDS!!!! LIBTARDS!!!!!
https://www.electricpercolatorcoffeepot.com/10-top-coffee-bloggers/
We are a group of volunteers and opening a new scheme in our community. Your site offered us with valuable information to work on. You've done an impressive job and our whole community will be grateful to you.
https://www.electricpercolatorcoffeepot.com/10-top-coffee-bloggers/