Obvious rebuttal to Piers Morgan


PDA






JustinJ
January 18, 2013, 12:16 PM
Every time i watch Piers Morgan debate in favor of gun control he cites the total number of "gun murders" in England and other countries relative to the US. Has anybody countered with the question of "why do only gun murders matter to him" and "is murder by other methods acceptable"?
Also, it should be pointed out that total number violent crimes in a given time is not comparable when two samples have completely different population sizes.

It seems odd how many pro-gun advocates on his show fail to recognize these two manipulations. Maybe somebody has made this counter point when debating him but i've not seen it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Obvious rebuttal to Piers Morgan" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
radiotom
January 18, 2013, 12:18 PM
Because gun murders are so much more uncivilized for Brits than using knives, clubs, etc.

Waywatcher
January 18, 2013, 12:19 PM
Yeah, I feel the same way.

Would it make Piers feel better if the deranged murderer had used a longsword? The carnage would have been much more traumatic and just as devastating and rapid.

nathan
January 18, 2013, 12:23 PM
British hoodlums use crowbars, baseball bats, knives and fist . Maybe thats what Pierce Morgan' idea of a civilized state.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtOXiQToz64

brnmw
January 18, 2013, 12:27 PM
The anti's don't recognize it as a valid argument therefore do not recognize it at all. Kind of like the analogy of the gun did not pull its own trigger the evil person behind the gun pulled the trigger... they do not again recognize that for every "One" or "Two" people that commit mass killings with as they call " High Powered Assault Machine Guns" there are another Million(s) that own them would never commit such an act. Then realize (the liberals to clarify) that those acts by everyone else's viewpoint that owns one... is actually appalled\disgusted at the acts in question carried out by the Evil & Sick perpetrators.
*I don't know if that made any sense but it sounded good in my head any way's.

robhof
January 18, 2013, 12:35 PM
They also include justified shootings in their statistics, so in their eyes, if you defend yourself, you are a murderer, as well as police shootings, they must be murderers too, unless they are defending a Leftist zealot???:cuss::fire::banghead:

jamesbeat
January 18, 2013, 12:36 PM
What about the number of violent crimes that take place in Britain that could have been prevented had the victim been able to own a HD shotgun or carry a concealed handgun?

I'm from Britain, and believe me, it is far from being a crime-free utopia.

I sleep a whole lot better in my new home in the States than I ever did when I lived in the UK. I may live in NY, but at least I'm still able to own a shotgun (for the time being at least)

MedWheeler
January 18, 2013, 12:37 PM
Gun control is not about guns. It's about control. Here, the people have it, and the government wants it.
In Britain/the U.K., the government now has it. It's not nearly as concerned with the crime rate there.

JustinJ
January 18, 2013, 12:52 PM
I'm more concerned about why nobody debating him has made this point. Are our spokesman a little too entrenched in the script to engage in discourse?

DanMar757
January 18, 2013, 01:41 PM
I watched a youtube video of his interview with Ted Nugent the other day and Piers made the comment that there are 80 gun murders a day in the US. By my math that equates to 29,200 per year.... or way, way off the mark which is somewhere around 9,000 murders committed with a gun out of a total murder count of ~12,000 (from the FBI crime statistics). The surprising thing to me was that Ted played right along with the numbers, something like "yes, but 75 of those were committed by felons that were let out of jail by the broke justice system". I thought that statement by Ted legitimized Piers obvious and likely deliberate lying about the facts. Big surprise!

The exchange with the bogus numbers begins at around the 2:00 mark in this link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjNwMOLulUQ

hso
January 18, 2013, 02:03 PM
This information has been given here at THR. The UK Home Office published their version of our DOJ/FBI Uniform Crime Report and ranked the UK in the middle of the pack for murder. That in the face of European countries far more liberal about firearms ownership than the UK (and some more so than the US in some respects) having lower violent crime and murder rates.

That information should be presented as comments every time Piers Morgan is brought up (I did in response to his Daily Mail rant in the UK).

HarcyPervin
January 18, 2013, 02:04 PM
DanMar - i was just in the process of putting that link up....it seems Piers is getting his butt handed to him more and more these days. People have figured out that they just have to go right through his badgering and bullying. Ted is a bit of a nut-case, but he did a great job of citing his source for that information and stopping the Brit in his tracks.

10mm Mike
January 18, 2013, 03:06 PM
Ted is a bit of a nut-case, but he did a great job of citing his source for that information and stopping the Brit in his tracks.

And what exactly makes him a nutcase? Being passionate about something he believes in? Refusing to be bullied by some british jerk that needs to be deported? Having statistics to back up his claims? Being a good showman?

Manco
January 18, 2013, 05:08 PM
Would it make Piers feel better if the deranged murderer had used a longsword? The carnage would have been much more traumatic and just as devastating and rapid.

This is how he, or at least typical antis who know how to debate, would counter: "But we're talking about ASSAULT rifles/weapons here, not about swords or handguns, for that matter. Don't try to avoid the subject by changing it."

Just like that, our valid comparisons are swept aside, with an accusation of attempted avoidance thrown our way for good measure. It's like trying to ask why guns are used to protect Obama's children--as far as the antis are concerned, our point is automatically invalid and we are "cowards" for even mentioning his children. Meanwhile, they can parade all the children they want on stage with them, and manipulate public sentiment using murdered children--no problem. And if we call them out on it, then they'd just say "You're choosing ASSAULT weapons over children--SHAME on you!"

They can't beat us with reason and logic, so they avoid it and use more effective techniques that more of the population can understand. That's when some of us who are actually on TV debating the topic can lose and have lost our cool, making a mockery of our cause.

Skribs
January 18, 2013, 05:20 PM
That's why I say that laws focusing on the gun aren't going to do anything. Focus on the root cause of violence is harder, but in the end will yield better results.

Evergreen
January 18, 2013, 05:27 PM
He is the world's biggest hypocrite. If it wasn't for how stupid a majority of people were, he would have been kicked off the air a long time ago.

He keeps crying about how much gun violence America has, yet his whole thrust is banning "dangerous and deadly assault weapons". Yet, when people challenge him and ask if he against disarming the American people, he says, "No, he supports the 2nd Amendment". He says people should be able to own handguns for self-defense. Yet, all the statistics he cites on gun violence are committed with handguns, not the"assault weapons" he is so against, which contradicts his argument.

Of course anybody with half a brain knows Piers is full of crap and is doing what he can do to look like a hero, increase show ratings and he probably, himself, hates the fact that any "Yank" has the ability to own a gun and to defend himself from his beloved Queen.

HarcyPervin
January 21, 2013, 02:29 PM
And what exactly makes him a nutcase? Being passionate about something he believes in? Refusing to be bullied by some british jerk that needs to be deported? Having statistics to back up his claims? Being a good showman?

Read his auto-biography, watch his show. Nothing wrong with passion, and absolutely nothing wrong with how he conducted himself here. The man, for lack of a better term, is out-there. He is a very opinionated person, and his opinions are quite genuinely Ted Nugent. I don't agree with everything he says, but I think he's a hell of an ally and spokesman for our cause.

BHP FAN
January 21, 2013, 02:38 PM
you don't need to rebut Piers Morgan, the man is a known hoaxer.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3716151.stm

Fred West
January 21, 2013, 03:19 PM
He went to any lengths to sell papers. Got the sack several times I believe for overstepping the mark and was up to his neck in the phone hacking scandal in Britain several years ago which resulted in the Sunday paper The News of the World being forced to close. He always seems to come up smelling of roses. Anyway, you've got him now and good riddance to the piece of filth. I just hope he gets his comeuppance some day but I'm not holding my breath.

JustinJ
January 21, 2013, 04:01 PM
you don't need to rebut Piers Morgan, the man is a known hoaxer.

You don't? So just allow his viewership to be misled by distorted statistics? Then what's the point of gun rights advocates going on his show in the first place?

I don't care for Piers Morgan either but ad hominem attacks are not helpful and actually make one appear as though they lack the ability to actually defend their position.

BHP FAN
January 21, 2013, 04:11 PM
No, you don't. just post this every time you see his name.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3716151.stm

BHP FAN
January 21, 2013, 04:15 PM
It's not an ad hominem attack, it's the man's own words... a ''journalist'' without credability is nothing.His own country does not want him back. Why would we care what this ''person'' has to say?

JustinJ
January 21, 2013, 04:22 PM
It's not an ad hominem attack, it's the man's own words... a ''journalist'' without credability is nothing.His own country does not want him back. Why would we care what this ''person'' has to say?

An ad hominem attack is when one attacks the credibility or character of another rather than his arguments. So yes, that is an ad hominem attack.

No, you don't. just post this every time you see his name.

How exactly does a guest on his show post that link? What you fail to acknowledge is that when Piers Morgan has a pro gun guest on his show and debates said person there are countless viewers who can be swayed by the exchange. Just calling him a hoaxer repeatedly is not going to win the argument.

joeschmoe
January 21, 2013, 04:27 PM
"You are a subject who bows to a queen. We are a Republic where the People retain our rights, and grant the government certain "Limited" powers. You have a monarchy that grants the government any power it wishes and the peasants have no rights except what they are "allowed" by the government.

Very different systems and perspectives of "rights". We already fought over this issue once. Don't try it again.

BHP FAN
January 21, 2013, 04:53 PM
''An ad hominem attack is when one attacks the credibility or character of another rather than his arguments. So yes, that is an ad hominem attack...''

You're right, Justin. It still does not change the fact
that the man's own words prove he'll say anything at all...even to endangering his own countrymen, to make his point. I don't think such a person has any credibility at all.

r1derbike
January 21, 2013, 07:22 PM
I remember in an NRA video, the interviewer asked a hoodlum about the gun ban in the U.K. He balked and said he could get whatever he wanted. The ban didn't affect him in the least.

Almost sounds like another country, no?

If you enjoyed reading about "Obvious rebuttal to Piers Morgan" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!