Piers Morgan Debates Gun Control with Alex Jones on CNN

[Postman Pat]

Canada has similar gun laws to the US, why are the figures so different?

Canada gun homicides 2009: 173 (0.5 per 100,000 people)
US gun gun homicides 2009: 9,146 (2.98 per 100,000 people)

 

[Nibble]

Two of the worlds biggest pricks. Alex Jones, that man is pure head mental and always has been. I saw a show of his a few years back, ranting and raving. He made my ears hurt.

 

[Arthritic Toe]

Here's an interesting anecdote. The song "teenage dirtbag" by Wheatus contains the line "Her boyfriends a dick, he takes a gun to school...;"

I noticed that when played on the US radio, the words "gun" and "dick" are bleeped out. Uk radio has no such issues with it. It's as if the word "gun" is a dirty little secret they're rather embarrassed about.

Make of it what you will. Ok its not that interesting.

 

[Nibble]

Hard to believe he was once the angel voiced boy who sang the theme song to The Snowman.

God, that made me really laugh. Well done sir!

 

[Nibble]

If Hitler's victims had been armed, they may not have been victims.

This shows such a fundamental lack of undrstanding as to how the Third Reich came to power and how the war started that it doesn't even merit a debate.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Well this all began here: Piers Morgan Debates Gun Control with Alex Jones on CNN - Page 4

"going to back any of it up? violent crimes are not higher in here than the US, i really dont know why this myth is being trotted out (ive checked before, i really cant be arsed to again)."

So I guess this is where you apologize and acknowledge that actually yes, violent crime rates are higher here than in the U.S., that it is in fact not a myth as you claimed, maybe admit that when you said you had checked you were lying, and then - get off my case jumping on everything I say, and maybe quit demanding evidence from me all the time, and start supporting the things you say with some evidence of your own.

Here's hoping.

The evidence for violent crime stats is incredibly hard to compare hence why even you only have a Telegraph article from 2009 and a Conservative commissioned report on crime stats 10 years ago in an attempt to discredit Labour policy at the time.

Objectively many different police forces, whether state to state in the US, or in the UK record their stats in different ways, especially on a loose term of 'violent' crime.

As a more definite example, in the US the homicide rate (regardless of weapon) is 4.8 per 100,000 compared to 1.2 in the UK.

Statistics can be delivered to serve whatever purpose you chose, and the pro-gun lobby love to include this generic term 'violent' crime and touting the UK as being more violent, but it is generally bollocks. It terms of the most violent of crimes, and as said regardless of weapon used, the US murder rate is 4 times that of the UK.

 

[Kent Seagull]

When will the thickos realise that they only need guns to protect themselves against people with guns? If guns are for hunting etc why on earth would anyone want a semi automatic, unless it was to wipe out a mass of people? If a man who demonstrates such a foul temper with his wild rants on live tv is allowed to have a semi automatic gun, something is very, very wrong with the USA.

 

[Nibble]

They're debating this interview on R2 now. It should garner some pretty funny call ins.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

I usually can't STAND Piers....but he's played a blinder there, even if unintentionally (due to the fact he couldn't get a word in edge ways)

Let the guy rant and get more and more angry whilst you just sit there blank faced.

However, the BEST bit was when he fell into mocking the english accent. Morgan didn't even MENTION it, he just let him carry on going. Brilliant.

 

[dingodan]

The evidence for violent crime stats is incredibly hard to compare hence why even you only have a Telegraph article from 2009 and a Conservative commissioned report on crime stats 10 years ago in an attempt to discredit Labour policy at the time.

Objectively many different police forces, whether state to state in the US, or in the UK record their stats in different ways, especially on a loose term of 'violent' crime.

As a more definite example, in the US the homicide rate (regardless of weapon) is 4.8 per 100,000 compared to 1.2 in the UK.

Statistics can be delivered to serve whatever purpose you chose, and the pro-gun lobby love to include this generic term 'violent' crime and touting the UK as being more violent, but it is generally bollocks. It terms of the most violent of crimes, and as said regardless of weapon used, the US murder rate is 4 times that of the UK.

2009 is not a long time ago. The fact that the commissioned report was by the Conservative Party during a Labor Government has absolutely no baring on the validity of the data.

"Violent" crime is only a "loose term" to those who don't like the statistics for violent crime.

And to be clear: You are less likely to be murdered in the UK, compared to the US. But, you are less likely to be a victim of a violent crime in the US, than you are in the UK.

 

[Nibble]

Guns will not reduce the violent crime in this country.

 

[dingodan]

This shows such a fundamental lack of undrstanding as to how the Third Reich came to power and how the war started that it doesn't even merit a debate.

Had nothing to do with how the Third Reich came to power or how the war started.

It was an observation. People who have been f***ed over historically tended not to have any weapons, in contrast those who f***ed them over did. It's something of a historical trend.

 

[dingodan]

Guns will not reduce the violent crime in this country.

True.

But neither did banning them.

 

[Nibble]

Had nothing to do with how the Third Reich came to power or how the war started.

It was an observation. People who have been f***ed over historically tended not to have any weapons, in contrast those who f***ed them over did. It's something of a historical trend.

I would say that Hitler coming to power and starting a war has a direct link to the death of his victims.

The Roman Empire fought and invaded numerous civilisations where the civilians were heavily armed, as did later conquests such as those of France, Spain, Germany, Russia, and many more.

The old Hitler and arms thing has been trotted out by you lot for decades. It's weak at best, ignorant and insulting at worst. I'll leave you with your theories.

 

[Nibble]

True.

But neither did banning them.

We have always had tight gun control. Hardly anyone outside of Farmers andd the odd nutter owned guns in the UK. Anyone would think we were all running around armed to the teeth before Hungerford happened.

 

[Bold Seagull]

2009 is not a long time ago. The fact that the commissioned report was by the Conservative Party during a Labor Government has absolutely no baring on the validity of the data.

"Violent" crime is only a "loose term" to those who don't like the statistics for violent crime.

And to be clear: You are less likely to be murdered in the UK, compared to the US. But, you are less likely to be a victim of a violent crime in the US, than you are in the UK.

Of course, a conservative supporting paper, looking at stats which have been compiled into tables by the conservatives, 6 months before a general election, are going to be completely objective!

 

[dingodan]

I would say that Hitler coming to power and starting a war has a direct link to the death of his victims.

The Roman Empire fought and invaded numerous civilisations where the civilians were heavily armed, as did later conquests such as those of France, Spain, Germany, Russia, and many more.

The old Hitler and arms thing has been trotted out by you lot for decades. It's weak at best, ignorant and insulting at worst. I'll leave you with your theories.

Genocide and war are somewhat different. I never said "Hitler and arms". I was not saying that Hitler implemented Gun Control, in fact Gun control was actually originally implemented in Germany largely at the behest of the Jewish community, who felt it would make them safer.

But that is besides the point I was making, which was that very many historical atrocities would have been far harder to commit, if not impossible, if the victims had have had knowledge of, and access to, firearms.

 

[dingodan]

Of course, a conservative supporting paper, looking at stats which have been compiled into tables by the conservatives, 6 months before a general election, are going to be completely objective!

Ad hominem circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false; this overlaps with the genetic fallacy (an argument that a claim is incorrect due to its source).

Ad hominem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[dingodan]

We have always had tight gun control. Hardly anyone outside of Farmers andd the odd nutter owned guns in the UK.

"The 1920 Firearms Act was the first serious British restriction on guns. Although crime was low in England in 1920, the government feared massive labor disruption and a Bolshevik revolution. In the circumstances, permitting the people to remain armed must have seemed an unnecessary risk. And so the new policy of disarming the public began. The Firearms Act required a would-be gun owner to obtain a certificate from the local chief of police, who was charged with determining whether the applicant had a good reason for possessing a weapon and was fit to do so. All very sensible. Parliament was assured that the intention was to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and other dangerous persons. Yet from the start the law's enforcement was far more restrictive, and Home Office instructions to police -- classified until 1989 -- periodically narrowed the criteria.

At first police were instructed that it would be a good reason to have a revolver if a person "lives in a solitary house, where protection against thieves and burglars is essential, or has been exposed to definite threats to life on account of his performance of some public duty." By 1937 police were to discourage applications to possess firearms for house or personal protection. In 1964 they were told "it should hardly ever be necessary to anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person" and that "this principle should hold good even in the case of banks and firms who desire to protect valuables or large quantities of money."

In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected.

Even more sweeping was the 1953 Prevention of Crime Act, which made it illegal to carry in a public place any article "made, adapted, or intended" for an offensive purpose "without lawful authority or excuse." Carrying something to protect yourself was branded antisocial. Any item carried for possible defense automatically became an offensive weapon. Police were given extensive power to stop and search everyone. Individuals found with offensive items were guilty until proven innocent."

Gun Controls Twisted Outcome - Reason.com

 

[somerset]

"I wanna get people off pills that the insert says will make you commit suicide and kill people. I wanna blame the real culprit - suicide pills. Mass murder pills".

This is an extremely good point. Forget guns, we HAVE to crack down on the Suicide and Mass Murder pills this guy is warning us about.

I used to be on 2 of these a day (after eating), which fortunately just made me want to self-harm. But on one occasion, I took my second pill halfway through a Hollyoaks omnibus by mistake, got up, and indiscriminately poured a bottle of Fabreeze into my fishtank, wiping out four pleco's, countless white cloud minnows and a black moor at a STROKE.

God alone knows what would have happened had I had access to a firearm.

Ban the pills. For gods sake ban the PILLS.

That made me chuckle..... Nice one.