Quantcast

«

»

Jan 03 2013

Piers Morgan Makes Powerful Argument Against Gun Control

We’ve all watched the ridiculous furor over Piers Morgan’s support of gun control in the wake of the Newtown shootings, which has included tens of thousands of people signing a petition to have him deported and other whackos even demanding that he be arrested for sedition. But now it appears that Morgan has changed his mind and is now arguing against gun control:

In conclusion, I can spare those Americans who want me deported a lot of effort by saying this: If you don’t change your gun laws to at least try to stop this relentless tidal wave of murderous carnage, then you don’t have to worry about deporting me.

Although I love the country as a second home and one that has treated me incredibly well, I would, as a concerned parent first – and latterly, of a one-year-old daughter who may attend an American elementary school like Sandy Hook in three years’ time – seriously consider deporting myself.

He is making an argument against gun control, right?

26 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    matty1

    On behalf of the British people, please, please don’t send Piers Moron back.

  2. 2
    IslandBrewer

    @Matty1

    I blame you and all the rest of the UK for sending all your religious wackos here to the New World in the first place! We’re just giving back.

  3. 3
    Raging Bee

    No, he’s basically promising to run away rather than be driven away by the bigoted gun-nuts.

    He seems to be saying that the gun nuts are driving him away, not by their threats or temper-tantrums, but by making their country so unsafe for his kids that he doesn’t want to live here anymore. Unfortunately, his wording was poor, and he sounded more spineless and cowardly than he should have.

  4. 4
    Louis

    Dear America,

    Please create and implement laws for the strictest gun control possible. We in the UK do not want Piers Morgan back. Perhaps, in time, some sort of financial arrangement could be made, or perhaps an exchange programme. We take the Westboro Baptist lot for a month, you keep Piers forever, perhaps.

    Please. Think about it. Just get back to us, okay?

    Love,

    Your Special Friend

    The UK

  5. 5
    Louis

    Also Ed, I would like to register a complaint.

    Your post has had the unintended effect (I presume) of making me feel moderate sympathy for Piers Morgan. This is not good enough. Don’t do it again.

    Louis

  6. 6
    Nathair

    “If you don’t change your gun laws to at least try to stop this relentless tidal wave of murderous carnage then, as a concerned parent of a one-year-old daughter who may attend an American elementary school like Sandy Hook in three years’ time I would seriously consider deporting myself”

    Please explain the “spineless and cowardly” part of that.

  7. 7
    d.c.wilson

    Okay, we’ll keep Piers Morgan if the UK agrees to take Rupert Murdoch.

    I’m sure the Aussies will even agree to sweeten the deal with an offer of their own.

  8. 8
    steve oberski

    While we’re at it, let’s work Ken Ham and Ray Comfort into the deal.

  9. 9
    scienceavenger

    Gee, and here I thought I was actually going to read a calm, sane discussion of gun policy, and instead I get idiots who want to deport someone for having a different opinion than them, and shrieking harpies going on about the “tidal wave of murderous carnage” whose victims amount to 0.004% of the country. How disappointing. A pox on all your houses.

  10. 10
    Raging Bee

    A pox on all your houses.

    Yeah, that “response” is so much easier than thinking about what’s actually being said, innit?

  11. 11
    Rowan vet-tech

    @9, well let’s see. As of 2009, ~ 1 person in 10,000 was killed by firearms. The population of the United States is over 300,000,000 at this point. This means that 30,000 people were killed by guns in 2009 and that number is probably fairly consistent from year to year. That means over a 3 year span, nearly 100,000 people are killed by guns. How is this NOT a ‘tidal wave of murderous carnage’?

  12. 12
    alanb

    @raewanvt,
    I’m not sure where your statistics come from. Wikipedia says 8,000 homicides by gun in 2004. (I didn’t check suicides). However, homicides disproportionately affect the young which most people feel is more tragic than deaths of those older.

  13. 13
    dingojack

    Ok we’ll give you Kylie and Rolf what more do you want?
    ;) DIngo

  14. 14
    Ed Brayton

    scienceavenger wrote:

    Gee, and here I thought I was actually going to read a calm, sane discussion of gun policy, and instead I get idiots who want to deport someone for having a different opinion than them

    To whom are you speaking? I’ve been blasting those who want to deport him, both because it’s repulsive and because it makes me have to defend someone I despise. This post is just a joke about that very subject.

  15. 15
    Rowan vet-tech

    I used all gun deaths, not just homicide. Because a large part of why I want better gun control is to help prevent those cases where children gain access to a gun and accidentally kill themselves or another. Part of ‘gun control’ is education. Requiring more classes on safety, etc. A little over half of those 30,000 are suicides now that I look a little closer.

  16. 16
    kyoseki

    Out of 31,000 firearms deaths in 2009, roughly 600 were accidental, the VAST majority of gun deaths are deliberate, and of those, roughly two thirds (19,000+) were suicide, not murder.

    It’s also worth noting that the UK never had a significant problem with gun crime or a high murder rate even prior to the gun ban (if it could be shown that the gun ban caused either of those to drop significantly, then you could make the argument that it had an effect, but that’s not the case, so I don’t know why people keep clinging to the idea).

    We do need a rational debate on gun control in this country, but right now all we’re seeing is hysterical bleating from both sides, until we can all settle down and actually look at the evidence as a whole rather than just picking and choosing the facts that suit our agenda, nothing is going to change.

  17. 17
    Gretchen

    and of those, roughly two thirds (19,000+) were suicide, not murder.

    This is not a statement for or against gun control generally, but it does seem perverse in the extreme to me to deal with suicide not by legalizing it so that it can be done more humanely and safely, or by upping resources to mental health providers in order to prevent the desire to commit suicide, but by making it harder to access a tool which is a popular instrument for it.

  18. 18
    bradleybetts

    Matty1: “On behalf of the British people, please, please don’t send Piers Moron back.”

    I second this. Sorry guys, he’s your problem now :)

  19. 19
    bradleybetts

    “…other whackos even demanding that he be arrested for sedition”.

    Also, what is it with the right wing and this habit of redefining the crimes of Treachery and Sedition? These are actual crimes with real legal definitions, and yet to the right wing they seem to just mean “Anyone doing or saying anything I don’t like”. It pisses me right off.

  20. 20
    anubisprime

    Piers is so beloved of the Brit populace….Not!
    But dim bulbs like Simon Cowell keep foisting the dullard on us.
    What ever gave ‘simple simon’ the idea that Piers was a good judge is not clear…so I rather suspect blackmail somewhere in this sordid little tale, for want of a better working theory!

    So maybe Piers knows summat’ about SyCo that the rest of us are not privileged to just yet.

    Certainly Blighty is rather pleased as a cohesive whole that one of our sons is ensconced elsewhere on this planet.
    Especially this one!

    The man is an arrogant pleb…
    That said I find it actually commendable that he took the NRA clone to the cleaners…
    That is something which should be done and far more often then it is!
    But on balance…we are happy that you have Piers to contend with, rather then us!

  21. 21
    kyoseki

    I still remember when those fake Iraqi prisoner abuse photos showed up on the front page of the Mirror when he was editor.

    … now he gets to pretend that he’s taking a principled stand and not in it for the publicity? I don’t think so.

  22. 22
    left0ver1under

    Putting aside the gun issue, Piers Morgan was directly involved in Rupert Murdoch’s phone hacking scandal. He may have been the one who gave the ok to do it or ordered it to be done. For that alone, he should be deported.

    Then again, considering the US government’s attitude towards wiretaps without warrants (both Bush and Obama’s administrations), Morgan fits right in.

  23. 23
    savagemutt

    This is not a statement for or against gun control generally, but it does seem perverse in the extreme to me to deal with suicide not by legalizing it so that it can be done more humanely and safely, or by upping resources to mental health providers in order to prevent the desire to commit suicide, but by making it harder to access a tool which is a popular instrument for it.

    Those things are good, but the problem with guns and suicide is that they’re so easy to use that they make it easy to off yourself when you’re just having a temporary bad spell. Whereas other forms of suicide require some degree of preparation which may give you time to cool down and think things over.

    At least that’s why I, as someone who is on medication for depression, don’t want to have guns around me. I went through a bad spell a few years ago with instances of intense sadness that lasted for just a few minutes at a time, but during those brief times a gun would’ve easily, and stupidly, ended my pain.

  24. 24
    Pocono Range

    The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to prevent future tyranny. They need the tools to do this.

    The term “Well Regulated” in the Second Amendment meant “Well Manned and Equipped ” in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time.

    United States v. Miller also determined that the term “Arms” refers to “Ordinary Military Weapons” (not crew operated). American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control.

    To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to writings in quill pens.

    Liberty is worth the risk of death!

  25. 25
    Nathair

    Liberty is worth the risk of death!

    Ignorant jingoistic zealotry, always good entertainment value.

  26. 26
    dingojack

    “The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to prevent future tyranny.”
    And the purpose of the 18th amendment was to prohibit the sale and distribution of alcohol. It was equally ineffective (and likewise caused great harm) and was, finally, repealed (once the narrow interests of the dry lobbyists were ignored for the wider interest).

    “Liberty is worth the risk of death!”
    après que vous

    Dingo

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site