Piers gets owned on 2nd Amendment

Register to hide this ad
Excellent. I said on TTAG that he was a "pompous English circus clown masquerading as a journalist". :D He was fired from his job in the UK for publishing doctored photos of UK soldiers to make them look like they were committing war crimes. And yet CNN found it fit to hire him. He is a disgusting pig.
 
Morgan obfuscates the line between the M-16 and an AR and it really pi$$es me off. The whole bit about Reagan had to do with automatic guns I am pretty sure. Anyone out there trying to advocate for us in the media needs to stop using the whole assault weapon mantra. I'm tired of it. If Ben had delineated the difference between the two, it would have been golden.
 
Please tell me Morgans 15 minutes of fame are about up. I removed CNN from my channel menu because they have become the new "reality show" replacement for Jersey Shores.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here...

...but Piers Morgan, like so many others in the "media" such as it is, only exists because we watch them...we watch their antics...we listen to their garbage...we think they are somehow credible. His kind have existed as long as there has been ANY media.
If you want him, and people like him, to fade from the scene...you have to stop watching his show...watching the many other shows like him, stop watching the networks that produce these shows...stop buying their books, videos, and whatever products they might put out. Stop buying the products of their sponsors. Then he and his ilk will fade into history.
It is all about ratings and money. Take these away, he dries up like a dead fish on the beach and his show gets moved between late night TV infomercials.
IMHO he is about as much a "journalist" as Joe Pyne, Morton Downey, Jr. and Jerry Springer.
 
Agreed.
No attention is death to a guy like that.
'nuff said.
 
I am getting really mad.. Why in the hell is nobody explaining on TV that assault rifles are illegal and that a AR15 is not one of those...

Mr Morgan is is huge pig. On the one side he wants to hear arguments but as soon as they start to have a strong development he cuts the person off knowing that otherwise he wouldn't have any answer for it...
 
I am getting really mad.. Why in the hell is nobody explaining on TV that assault rifles are illegal and that a AR15 is not one of those...

Mr Morgan is is huge pig. On the one side he wants to hear arguments but as soon as they start to have a strong development he cuts the person off knowing that otherwise he wouldn't have any answer for it...

Assault rifles and all full auto firearms made before a certain date ( I think 1986 ) are NOT illegal. It just takes a class III firearms permit which takes some time and $ to aquire. It is the cost to feed those full autos that is the largest restriction.
 
Piers Morgan is a person who

"I had to edit this part, to stay on the forum."

He is simply a Shock Jock on the Television, sells ad time in commercials. He makes money for CNN.

Like Rush Limbaugh, Jon Stewart, Howard Stern, glenn beck, or anyone else who can whoop up controversy in an instant with their ill chosen words.

1st ammendment protects us all, even them.

Chuck
 
...but Piers Morgan, like so many others in the "media" such as it is, only exists because we watch them...we watch their antics...we listen to their garbage...we think they are somehow credible. His kind have existed as long as there has been ANY media.
If you want him, and people like him, to fade from the scene...you have to stop watching his show...watching the many other shows like him, stop watching the networks that produce these shows...stop buying their books, videos, and whatever products they might put out. Stop buying the products of their sponsors. Then he and his ilk will fade into history.
It is all about ratings and money. Take these away, he dries up like a dead fish on the beach and his show gets moved between late night TV infomercials.
IMHO he is about as much a "journalist" as Joe Pyne, Morton Downey, Jr. and Jerry Springer.

AGREED, and would only add that by going on his garbage show and debating him all we do is help his ratings. I understand the desire to try and "beat" him but I doubt he or his employer cares about anything beyond ratings. No controversy=no ratings and eventually no job. We should just ignore him.
 
One thing I wish Shapiro would have challenged Morgan on was his crowing about the letter signed by three former Presidents, Ford, Carter and Reagan:

May 3, 1994
To Members of the U.S. House of Representatives:
We are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military-style assault weapons. This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety. Although assualt weapons account for less than 1% of the guns in circulation, they account for nearly 10% of the guns traced to crime.
Every major law enforcement organization in America and dozens of leading labor, medical, religious, civil rights and civic groups support such a ban. Most importantly, poll after poll shows that the American public overwhelmingly support a ban on assault weapons. A 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 77% of Americans support a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of semi-automatic assault guns, such as the AK-47.
The 1989 import ban resulted in an impressive 40% drop in imported assault weapons traced to crime between 1989 and 1991, but the killing continues. Last year, a killer armed with two TEC9s killed eight people at a San Francisco law firm and wounded several others. During the past five years, more than 40 law enforcement officers have been killed or wounded in the line of duty by an assault weapon.
While we recognize that assault weapon legislation will not stop all assault weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals. We urge you to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan

First, let's address Gerald Ford. Ford was not elected President of the US. He was appointed under the 25th Amendment. Ford was never known for his conservative values:

Ford sounds like a liberal now, which is why I like him. He took Nixon’s commitment to many of the Great Society programs even further, financially expanding Social Security, OSHA work standards, the FDA, and welfare programs. He supported fledgling drug programs, and believed in tax relief for low-income people while raising rates on the rich.
Here’s a shocker: in his first year Ford tried twice to pass a universal health care coverage program. Both times it was his own Republican party which shot it down. If that doesn’t prove the man did what he thought right, over and above conservative pressure, nothing does.
Except maybe this: Ford also felt that to heal the country, Vietnam War “draft-dodgers” had to be allowed home (most were in Canada). He was pragmatic, and knew that a free ride would never work, so he proposed to bring home the men without penalty so long as they worked a time of public service (i.e. hospital work). Courageously, he had the guts to announce this program at a VFW meeting, and was met by stony silence and disbelief. He strongly pushed the program in Congress anyway, but was supported only by Democrats.
U.S. Presidents – Gerald R. Ford |

Ford's only appointment to the US Supreme Court during his tenure was John Paul Stevens.

Stevens was certainly no conservative"

By the time he retired from the Supreme Court last year at the age of 90, Justice John Paul Stevens had become something of a hero to American liberals. The editorial board of The New York Times praised “his record of being on the side of fairness and justice,” while Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne called Stevens’ retirement “an enormous loss for the country, and particularly for progressives.” The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin wondered, “What will the Supreme Court be like without its liberal leader?”…

John Paul Stevens' Faint-Hearted Liberalism - Reason.com


And Stevens views on the Second Amendment are incredibly "progressive":

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens called for Congress to tighten gun laws in the wake of shootings such as the one that took place in Aurora, Colorado.
Stevens noted that the legal precedent for restricting gun rights —United States vs. Miller — still stands, despite the ruling in the 2005Heller case that overturned the Washington, D.C., ban on owning handguns, even in one’s own home.
“[Miller] was generally understood to limiting the scope of the Second Amendment to the uses of arms that were related to military activities,” Stevens said today during a question-and-answer session after a speech today with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence’s Legal Action Project. “The Court did not overrule Miller [in Heller]. Instead it ‘read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns . . . Thus, the Second Amendment provides no obstacle to regulations permitting the ownership or the use of the sorts of the automatic weapons used in the tragic multiple killings in Virginia, Colorado, or Arizona in recent years.”
Justice Stevens: Second Amendment is

Stevens ignores the Miller Court's analysis comparing the weapon Miller had to those used in the military, and jumps to the self fulfilling conclusion that a weapon banned since 1934 under the National Firearms Act was not in "common use" in the US, and was thus outside the scope of the Second Amendment. Of course it was not in common civilian use in 2012 - any citizen owning one since 1934 would have been a felon under federal law.

Now let's move to Reagan. Reagan signed that letter in 1994 - the same year he announced he had been diagnosed with Alzheimers disease:

In 1994, President Reagan revealed to the nation that he had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s. But earlier, in 1989, doctors operating on Reagan expressed their belief he was suffering from the degenerative disease.
Ron Reagan writes that in July 1989, his father was thrown off a horse while visiting friends in Mexico. He received medical attention at a hospital in San Diego. When surgeons opened the president’s skull to relieve pressure they “detected what they took to be probable signs of Alzheimer’s disease.”
Political Bookworm - President Reagan suffered from Alzheimer's while in office, according to son

Doctors had suspected since 1989 Reagan was suffering from Alzheimers. And more than a few Secret Service Agents on Reagan's detail had strong suspicions of that fact. I have no cite here - my comments are based on discussions with Secret Service Agents years ago.

Ben Shapiro was correct when he noted that Piers Morgan was "standing on the graves of children" in his attacks on the Second Amendment. And just as reprehensibly, Morgan is also trying to gain advantage by using the words of a man uttered in the throes of serious dementia.

Piers Morgan is a despicable man.
 
I just watched the video posted above and I am a little torn on both sides. It was really nothing more than a heated debate, but that is what Morgan does. I am for guns and our rights but I do have a question....and I mean no disrespect here....we are against a gun ban so we can keep our guns...I get that, however is not our military working for the Government and Obama? If the Government did decide to go nuts and do the tyranny thing....as the military is under Obama's control, would we not be fighting against the best military in the world? That being the case our small amount of firepower and lack of real combat training compared to the US Military.....well we would not stand a chance. Somehow, someway I think we as gun owners need a different approach but I have no idea what that is. LOL :)
 
I am getting really mad.. Why in the hell is nobody explaining on TV that assault rifles are illegal and that a AR15 is not one of those...
...


Maybe because some of us that own Title II firearms would be quick to tell them that they are not illegal.
 
Back
Top