In Defence of Piers Morgan

You know what? Someone has to do it… So I accept. I have an ulterior motive for this defence of Mr. Morgan…

We worked so hard to get rid of him, we don’t want him back…

Right… without further adieu, let’s plunge into this latest and greatest moronic pile of tripe courtesy of Larry Elder… I call shenanigans on this pile of utter wank on the basis of a simple grasp of American Law which the average “patriot” seems to forget. We dislike Morgan because he is an odious twit who’s barely legal usage of the paparazzi to dig dirt for his fish and chip wrapper of a paper. We dislike him because he was complicit in the phone hacking scandal. He is everything that is wrong with modern journalism and an emblem of tabloid journalism.

However the hate he receives has to be legit, not the moronic screed of a thousand “Patriots” who forget the laws of their own country! Jeffrey? Fetch me my fighting trousers…

CNN’s Piers Morgan writes that the pro-gun crowd’s anger toward him stems from anti-British bias: “This gun debate is an ongoing war of verbal attrition in America – and I’m just the latest target, the advantage to the gun lobbyists being that I’m British, a breed of human being who burned down the White House in 1814 and had to be forcefully deported en masse, as no American will ever be allowed to forget.”

Yes. Plenty of Americans are saying that but apparently the good “patriots” who signed those petitions forget the First Amendment. And I am pretty sure there is no part of the American Constitution that says “Don’t insult guns. You will hurt their feelings!”. Piers Morgan could threaten to give lap dances on Lincoln’s Grave while reciting from the Koran and it would still be fucking covered by free speech! That’s the fucking point of fucking free speech, you imbeciles.

And yes there is an anti-british bias in the arguments against Piers Morgan. If he were American you wouldn’t be talking about deporting him and in fact you wouldn’t have bothered at all. However the entire screed against Piers Morgan has been filled with comments that would be considered “rather racist”. This particular essay doesn’t have any but others do.

Scads of “in-sourced” Brits appear on our telly without us Yanks calling for their deportation. Hell, we just let a Brit play Abe Lincoln. Fox’s Stuart Varney seems to escape this anti-mother country xenophobia.

Well I don’t know who Stuart is but if he works for Fox then he is probably like Piers Morgan except he doesn’t say what’s on his mind and instead is the equivalent of Kermit the Frog if Jim Henson was a far right wing neo-conservative. Basically? Whatever is on his Teleprompter is what he reads.

Take the treatment of Larry Pratt. Respected in circles that Piers “I-have-fired-guns-only-once-in-my-life” Morgan chooses not to hang out with, Pratt heads a pro-Second Amendment group called Gun Owners of America. Pratt, on Morgan’s show, attempted to explain that the “gun control” big picture requires understanding something: Hundreds of thousand of Americans, every year, use firearms for self-defense.

So the only people who can talk about gun control are gun owners because fuck everyone else’s opinion. And I don’t respect a man who thinks the right to shoot someone is more important than the right to not get shot.

So if the Queen (who hunts) were to give you advice on gun control would it be acceptable or not? Hundreds of Thousands of Americans? I am sorry? Hundreds of Thousands?

I am sorry I am not strong on Geography but is the USA that country East of Iran and West of Pakistan? Because the picture you seem to be painting is one of “don’t come to America! It’s the greatest country in the world but if you don’t have a gun they will fucking murder you and steal your shoes! Won’t someone think of the children”. If you require deadly force to defend yourself in your country it is a sign in most of the world that law and order has broken down and that the USA’s standard currency is the bottle cap.

“Morgan’s response? He called Pratt “an incredibly stupid man” and denounced “idiots like you.” Then came this: “You don’t give a damn,” Morgan said, “do you, about the gun murder rate in America? You don’t actually care.” Morgan offered no study, expert, number – nothing whatsoever – to counter the claim. That anyone with a moderately functioning brain could find an upside in owning, let alone using, a gun simply astonishes Morgan. Defies common sense!

Anyone with a moderately functioning brain wouldn’t talk about the taking of a life so easily. What other use does a handgun have? If it’s target shooting then leave it at the range. These are the words of a man who doesn’t know what the cost of killing another human is. This are the words of a man who lives in a fantasy. He is Walter Mitty, foiling a crime with his mighty gun. Oh we all have that fantasy; the point is we grow out of it!

Oh sure there are some people hell bent on killing at all costs but you know what? In a country without guns their rampages are generally a lot more short lived and can be escaped by running. The possession of Firearms hasn’t stopped murder rates in the USA, they have however made crimes of passion a lot more deadlier.

Is it true, as claimed by Florida criminalist Gary Kleck, that 2.5 million Americans each year use a firearm for self-defense? Is it true that, of that number, 400,000 people believe that, were it not for the gun they used, they would have been killed? These are questions and answers the anti-gun crowd ignores, chooses not to think about or considers irrelevant.

Wait? That means that 2.1 million Americans used a gun pointlessly for self defence and even when they weren’t at risk of dying. They were prepared to KILL someone to protect stuff…

Do you realise how cheap you have made human life? That you can compare a human being to a TV or a wallet? And what? 400,000 people thought they were at risk? Okay so if we don’t have guns we should have 400,000 extra deaths. Keep this number in mind… We shall not ignore this number.

But of Kleck’s claim that 2.5 million Americans yearly use guns for self-defense? Wolfgang wrote: “What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. … I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well.”

Again there is this 2.5 million figure… Let’s keep that in mind too for some math-fu later on…

The Oscar-winning Michael Moore says America possesses “too many guns” because of racism. For my pro-Second Amendment documentary, “Michael & Me,” I “ambushed” Moore. The anti-gun Moore, by the way, was surrounded by security and coming into a venue a back way to avoid the very “ambush interviews” in which he specializes. Three times I asked Moore how often Americans use guns to defend themselves. Three times Moore deflected the question, merely repeating “we have too many guns.”

You do have too many guns. Guns are too easy to acquire and Americans pay the price every single year. But the solution is more and more guns which don’t solve the problem.

Morgan is right. Per capita, we have nearly 50 times the gun murder rate compared to the gun murder rate of England. But look at all murders, whether by knife or baseball bat. Rather than 50 times the rate, it is less than five – not 50 – times higher than the murders committed by any means in England. For my documentary, I interviewed Joyce Lee Malcolm, author of “Guns and Violence.” She said the same murder-rate discrepancy – five times the British rate – existed between New York City and London for two centuries, and during most of that time neither city had any gun control laws.

Okay! Let’s play at some mathematics….

All murders? Okay! The International Murder Rate is 7.6 per 100,000. UK’s murder rate is 1.2 per 100,000. The USA’s murder rate is 4.2 per 100,000.

So yeah it’s less than 5 times higher but it’s still fucking high. I understand saying “well we aren’t Honduras” but fucking hell that’s a stupid fucking argument to make! You don’t compare yourself to the worst rates on the planet!

Want to know something funny? PALESTINE IS SAFER THAN THE USA. Now the UK’s rate isn’t as low as we like it but it’s much much lower than the American Rate. Saying that “well it’s not 50 times the rate” fails to bring into account that nearly 70% of murders in the USA are due to the ease of availability of guns. If we work out what 70% of 4.2 is you can deduct that and get a number rather close to 1.2… But that’s faulty as an assumption, what if all those gun wielders tried other methods of murder?

You would still have a much lower murder rate than that.

This is a man who thinks guns lower crime yet thinks having a murder rate four times higher has nothing to do with the ease of availability of guns. But remember the prior figures?

It is estimated that around 14,000 people are murdered in America each year. If we are to suggest that every fire arm usage was in self defence of life then 14,000 deaths + 2.5 million = 2514000 attempted murders. AKA an attempted murder rate of 838 per 100,000. Oh fine let’s use the estimate of 400,000 where the gun owner were considered to be in threat of death which works out at 138 per 100,000 attempted murders…

I mean these are people saying that if there were no guns there would be a murder rate of a 138 per 100,000. Honduras which has the worst such stats in the world only has 78 murders per 100,000! Either guns really are this good or the stats being quoted are blatantly stupid.

Clearly guns aren’t the problem here… It’s the fact that if Larry were true then what we are looking at is a failed state.

This must make Malcolm “an incredibly stupid woman.” Debate over.

If that’s the case then what does that make Larry? A man who thinks a 4.2 per 100,000 murder rate is “not bad”. A man who thinks that guns solve the problem. A man who has just portrayed America as worse than some of the most dangerous places on Earth?


  1. laurie says

    Slate has been keeping a tally of the gun deaths in the US since the Newtown school shootings. The results are surprisingly hard to come by, since no federal agency is allowed to keep track of them. Stupid, I know, but the laws were amended to prevent the Dept.of ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) from tracking the numbers. Here’s the link.

    When you hear a claim about how many people successfully defend themselves with guns every year, remember that by law, no one can keep track of the actual number.

  2. says

    Morgans primary audience, conservatives, lash out xenophobically at a British man because he disagreed with them and this is a surprise? In the US it’s not just the number of guns, culturally we glorify gun violence. It’s a poisonous atmosphere and people are so steeped and so close to it they refuse to see it.

    Also, I appreciated the Fallout reference, and I especially liked the Professor Elemental reference.

  3. smrnda says

    Pro gun Americans are, for the most part, simply pro-gun. They live in a fantasy world where they’re the heroic lone gunslinger who saves the day. If they were shown statistics that crime had (hypothetically) decreased to be almost non-existent, if the murder rate of the USA as the lowest on earth, they would still argue that they need a gun ready and loaded or else they might meet with certain death at any moment. They would never think (as a few Israelis I know do) that if people need to tote around guns to be safe that this is an undesirable state of affairs. Too many Americans want to live in the imaginary wild west.

  4. says

    Little substance to this comment I am afraid.

    I too enjoyed the Professor Elemental reference. Finding a Fallout reference in the same article really is like a biscuit with ones tea. Splendid, sir!

    Seriously, enjoy your writing Avicenna, one of my go-to blogs these days. Thankyou.

  5. says

    I’d should check with you right here. Which isn’t some thing We usually perform! I get pleasure through studying an article that produce individuals believe. Also, thanks for permitting me in order to remark!

  6. says

    Grand Theft Auto V is the game to get; it’s an incredible value for what
    you’re paying for. Players will be able to
    add the new score pieces to their own created content
    as the music will be added to the in-game music creator.
    All of the playability of the first game was still present, but the
    developers added more features in order to add to
    the value.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>