Debating Piers Morgan

[Arejay]

Well I just watched another guest debate Morgan on gun control. I don't know if he knows his own history. When the English army was defeated and evacuated back to Englund from Dunkirk the English then stood alone. The British Isles were then facing an invasion. Dark and scary times for the British. The British asked us Americans for help and we answered their plea. We sent them our own rifles,shotguns,and pistols. Has this point been brought to his attention? If not, how can it be brought to his attention and receive a reply? Does not his own country's history validate our second amendment? History always repeats itself and Alex Jones isn't helping. Your opinions please.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[oakchas]

Alex Jones isn't helping.

[cmdrdredd]

Some of what was said is very true. Britain took away guns and violent crime rates using other weapons went up. Same in Australia. You cannot pick on the argument of "oh but the US has more gun violence". Yeah but there was an overall drop in violent crime in the past decade. That is according to the FBI. You can't ignore that. Also, how many of the firearm related deaths are due to a gun obtained illegally by theft? A good percentage are not average people buying a handgun to protect their family..

The argument is sound but you see, someone like Piers Morgan who comes here and touts England as the ideal model. That is BS. It is infuriating to hear him.

Especially when he nitpicks one statistic ignoring any counterpoints.

[steffen]

The opinions of Alex Jones are suprisingly poplular and it is important to listen to him in order to understand that popular opinions he gives a voice to.

Additionally, we shouldn't be mad at him for the actions of any gun grabbing liberal just like we shouldn't be mad at the tools that are used for murderer.

[OldVet]

Why is where someone "used" to live always so great? Why don't those people still live there? Please, Piers, go back to your Utopia.

[glockman10mm]

You don't debate an armchair intellectual like Morgan on the virtues of history, or the 2nd Amend, or even self defense.

You have to make it practical. It's like talking to a new gun person about the ergos of guns, when they have never even held one.

That's why I have invited him to come and shoot with me, so that he can see the differences in a single action revolver, , DA revolver, a semi autoloader, or rifle, shooting quickly at multiple targets in a home invasion type senario.

By placing him in a realistic type senario, and allowing him to shoot multiple targets with each weapon, it will give him a feel of what is really going on, and debunk the 10 rounds a second myth that is floating around.

Also by showing him how fast it is to change 10 round mags, and continue firing, this will also show the fallacy in the 30 round mag prohibition.

Of course, even this may not change a made up mind, but it's the only way to allow for an opinion based on facts.

[OldVet]

I would so like to be a fly on the wall at that meeting.^^

[steffen]

You don't debate an armchair intellectual like Morgan on the virtues of history, or the 2nd Amend, or even self defense.

You have to make it practical. It's like talking to a new gun person about the ergos of guns, when they have never even held one.

That's why I have invited him to come and shoot with me, so that he can see the differences in a single action revolver, , DA revolver, a semi autoloader, or rifle, shooting quickly at multiple targets in a home invasion type senario.

By placing him in a realistic type senario, and allowing him to shoot multiple targets with each weapon, it will give him a feel of what is really going on, and debunk the 10 rounds a second myth that is floating around.

Also by showing him how fast it is to change 10 round mags, and continue firing, this will also show the fallacy in the 30 round mag prohibition.

Of course, even this may not change a made up mind, but it's the only way to allow for an opinion based on facts.

The problem is that he probably does know about guns, and he's already made up his mind what side he's on. You don't win a war by inviting people over for tea, you win it by forcing them to surrender. Reference Hiroshima.

[Coltman 77]

You don't debate an armchair intellectual like Morgan on the virtues of history, or the 2nd Amend, or even self defense.

You have to make it practical. It's like talking to a new gun person about the ergos of guns, when they have never even held one.

That's why I have invited him to come and shoot with me, so that he can see the differences in a single action revolver, , DA revolver, a semi autoloader, or rifle, shooting quickly at multiple targets in a home invasion type senario.

By placing him in a realistic type senario, and allowing him to shoot multiple targets with each weapon, it will give him a feel of what is really going on, and debunk the 10 rounds a second myth that is floating around.

Also by showing him how fast it is to change 10 round mags, and continue firing, this will also show the fallacy in the 30 round mag prohibition.

Of course, even this may not change a made up mind, but it's the only way to allow for an opinion based on facts.

Very fine post. As are the others in this thread.

I caught a bit of Piers show in the middle of the night. It's obvious he knows nothing about firearms and US firearm laws and doesn't care.
(He and his guest spent all their time denigrating the "NRA" the "Gun Lobby" --totally one-sided.)

He should do some research if he's going to address the gun issue, as all the talking heads should.

For example, Mika Brezinski on MSNBC mentioned "bullets that blow people up" on Morning Joe this am. ***?!

Of course, they don't want to take the time to actually learn something. Hell, 30 minutes of study could have them up to speed.

But that certainly doesn't stop them from pushing their leftist anti 2nd Amendment views.

All the while, they are protected by armed security guards, riding in limos and working in big skyscrapers. It's ok for them to be protected, but we lowly plebes apparently aren't as important as they are.

[ghost tracker]

I'LL DEBATE PIERS MORGAN! Piers uses a common leftist tactic of, when presented with an irrefutable argument, moving the focus to elitist condescension. To those unfamiliar with the argumentative logic of civilized debate the tactic is the last bastion of the scowling aristocracy. Those skilled in debate recognize it as a desperate dive back toward the shallow end of the pool. Come on Piers, toss the gauntlet in my direction!

[steffen]

I'LL DEBATE PIERS MORGAN! Piers uses a common leftist tactic of, when presented with an irrefutable argument, moving the focus to elitist condescension. To those unfamiliar with the argumentative logic of civilized debate the tactic is the last bastion of the scowling aristocracy. Those skilled in debate recognize it as a desperate dive back toward the shallow end of the pool. Come on Piers, toss the gauntlet in my direction!

So who won the debate between Alex and Piers?

[8th ID]

based on facts.

I'm sure you realize this, but these people care NOTHING about facts. And especially good ole Piers. If Piers gets into a corner during a discussion, he just calls the pro-gun people LOONS...

[gregnsc]

What really pissed me off with Morgan,he asked one man,how can you say you enjoy shooting an ar15 after what happened in sandy hook?That man and his ar15,had nothing to do with sandy hook.It's hard for me to talk to someone,asking a stupid question like he did.

[8th ID]

Coltman77--

You're correct, the left knows nothing about firearms. I saw Jesse Jackson on CNN actually saying that 'these Assault Rifles are designed to and CAN bring down airliners.' No one questioned it.

[suntzu]

The only thing I saw was one idiot talking to another idiot

Did Alex Jone help? Of course not. My son has a couple of friends staying here for college break and they are middle of the road type kids (not anti's, they both hunt) and they thought Alex Jones hurt the 2A crowd.