Anti News Anchor gets Owned by Keith Morgan - Page 2

Anti News Anchor gets Owned by Keith Morgan

This is a discussion on Anti News Anchor gets Owned by Keith Morgan within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The second part was even funnier than the first. The host is ignorant, has no knowledge of firearms, no concept of facts and was totally ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25
Like Tree9Likes

Thread: Anti News Anchor gets Owned by Keith Morgan

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array Alex_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,082
    The second part was even funnier than the first. The host is ignorant, has no knowledge of firearms, no concept of facts and was totally outclassed. I loved the part when he said he didn't want his neighbour to be armed because he might go nuts, to which Keith says:

    "If I sat my 9mm on the desk, would you shoot me?"
    "No I probably wouldn't" (probably?)
    "So why do you think someone else will?"
    "I don't know"

    Also, I think he genuinely crapped his pants when Keith stated he was armed.

    Another thing that bothers me about the antis is that they clamour for a "rational discussion about common sense regulation" and then as soon as the pro-gun person quotes the second amendment by saying "shall not be infringed" or refers to the federalist papers' account of the purpose behind the second amendment, they are practically frothing at the mouth as they spout their favorite line; "so you think people should have nuclear weapons?".

    Yeah, "rational discussion" indeed...


  2. #17
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,163
    Great interview, does anyone know an email address so I can send him my thanks for a good job. I'm sure he'd appreciate the feedback.
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  3. #18
    Distinguished Member
    Array whoppo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    1,306
    Great... now Dick's and Lower-than-Dirt are gonna take grenade launchers off the shelves... Buy 'em now boys and girls!
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    The Second Amendment *IS* Homeland Security
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    --------------------- Μολὼν λαβέ ----------------------
    ----------------------------------------------------------

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    Quote Originally Posted by ppkheat View Post
    Great interview, does anyone know an email address so I can send him my thanks for a good job. I'm sure he'd appreciate the feedback.
    kmorgan@wvcdl.org

  5. #20
    Senior Member Array surefire7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    colorado
    Posts
    537
    One of the best interviews I've seen yet! He stayed calm but clearly dominated the interview with facts. The interviewer quite often was very uncomfortable with his own ineptness.
    "Good decisions come from experience;
    experience comes from bad decisions"

  6. #21
    Senior Member Array Gaius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    656
    I was very happy to see this. Especially the point about the duty of police. Our guy was quite right. As a matter of both fact and law (and yes, I am a lawyer) every court including US Supreme has made it clear the police have no legal duty to protect the individual. The citizen is first and foremost responsible for his own protection and defense. But this should not surprise anyone, although it does. Consider: if the police had a duty to protect the individual, every time a citizen was robber, mugged, raped, murdered etc, by definition the police would have breached their duty and be found negligent and be subject to a negligence lawsuit. This obviously cannot, and in fact as a matter of law, is not permitted. BTY what does the "serve and protect" mean, again, as a matter of law? The police have a general duty to protect the community at large, but not the individual. Try this. If you call 911 and for whatever reason the police decide not to show up, are they liable? No. Why not? Same reason. No duty is owed to the individual citizen.
    Best way to win a gun fight? "That's easy, don't show up."
    --Wyatt Earp

    "Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything."
    -- Wyatt Earp

  7. #22
    VIP Member Array smolck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    3,300
    The "anti gun" guy has no facts and knows nothing. Problem with ALL of them is they cite statistics like "nobody has ever used an assault rifle to defend themselves" and think it is fact when it is not. Nobody calls them out. When you have a rational discussion, the anti gun people look like bafoons. This guy needs to take LaPierre's job.
    As Benjamin Franklin left the hall in Philadelphia, he was asked, “What kind of government have you given us, Dr. Franklin?” He replied: “A republic, if you can keep it.”

  8. #23
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    Quote Originally Posted by smolck View Post
    The "anti gun" guy has no facts and knows nothing. Problem with ALL of them is they cite statistics like "nobody has ever used an assault rifle to defend themselves" and think it is fact when it is not. Nobody calls them out. When you have a rational discussion, the anti gun people look like bafoons. This guy needs to take LaPierre's job.
    Yep. I've said it before, most anti's simply regurgitate the nonsense that they have heard from other anti's, and those people regurgitated it from people they've heard, and so on, and so on. They think that because this misinformation has been spouted so many times before that it must be fact. They don't bother to actually do any real research, and why should they? They have already been told what hey want to hear. They will look no further, unless they are continuously challenged on the facts, and even then only a relatively small number of them will feel prompted to check out the facts themselves (these are the ones we need to try to reach). Most will simply continue to regurgitate these fallacies to the next generation of anti's, and the cycle will continue.

  9. #24
    Senior Member Array Alex_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,082
    Quote Originally Posted by smolck View Post
    Problem with ALL of them is they cite statistics like "nobody has ever used an assault rifle to defend themselves" and think it is fact when it is not
    When they say this, someone needs to tell them the military and police use them to defend themselves all the time. Then follow it up with cases of civilians using the guns they're talking about (and falsely labelling as "assault rifles") to defend themselves too.

  10. #25
    VIP Member Array Sheldon J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Battle Creek, Mi.
    Posts
    2,286
    "The sword dose not cause the murder, and the maker of the sword dose not bear sin" Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac 11th century

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

keith morgan 2nd amendment
,

keith morgan interview

,
kieth morgan owns liberals
Click on a term to search for related topics.