Just as promised here is the interview between anti-gun Piers Morgan and the Oklahoma Senator who introduced a bill dubbed the “Piers Morgan Act” which enables citizens to carry guns without a special license from the state.
Obviously, Morgan is pretty ticked- off that his name is being attached to a bill that expands 2nd amendment rights instead of abolishing them as he advocates.
We just couldn’t bring ourselves to actually watch CNN and pad this anti-gunners ratings (which are in dire need of help anyway), so we waited for the replay to come out. And here it is.
The Oklahoma senator pretty much destroys Morgan’s attacks with sound reason and facts. Two things which are more foreign than Morgan’s ideals. But I think Senator Dahm could have done a much better job in his responses. He has to remember, Morgan is not a gentleman, and you can’t treat him like one. When he spews out a rubbish premise you have to call him out on it. And believe me.. there was a lot of spewing going on in this interview.
Senator Dahm, you have to speak up when Morgan tramples our constitution. I give you credit for even going on that show with all 5 people watching from home, but a little research would have gone a long way. Morgan only uses the same old lies he always uses, so it’s not hard to refute his arguments, as we have done so below the video.
At least at the 10 minute mark the senator begins to find his stride, but of course that’s when the interview ends. Here are some of the problems I had with Morgan’s comments and how Senator Dahm could have answered them better.
What the senator SHOULD have pointed out is that magazines that hold 15, 20 or even 30 rounds are NOT “high capacity” magazines, but magazines which are pretty standard and common and already owned by millions of gun owners who shoot NO ONE on a daily basis.
And if we don’t restrict the rights of all Muslims because of the actions of a few radicals, why do anti-gunners seek to restrict the rights of all gun owners because of a handful of people? Can Morgan answer that question? No. He can’t.
On the mental health issues Morgan again fails to point out that background checks already stop criminals from buying guns if they go to a gun shop or retail store. But guess what? Criminals get their guns on the black market. Once again, only the law abiding citizens are effected by arguments like this.
Morgan also spewed out a few lies when he said that every country that has introduced strict gun control laws (aka gun bans) have seen a reduction in gun violence and crime. In the cases of both Australia and the UK, there was a spike in crime and homicides after the gun bans, as can be seen in these charts. Morgan has to twists the facts into complete falsehoods to make his argument that gun control has reduced crime. It’s simply not true.
By the way, Morgan stated that the senator wants things to be like the wild west with everyone carrying a gun at their hip. Every time anti-gunners use the “wild west” but I just have to laugh as they don’t even realize that the homicide rate was actually lower in the so called “wild west” days. Even with little law and order, the guns of the wild west were less “wild” than they are today with more gun control laws.
It was a nice try by Morgan to play the clip of the Sandy Hook parent who said his son had a right to life and that supercedes any 2nd amendment rights. His son did have a right to his life. And he had the right to be protected from the madman who came into his school. His son was robbed of the right to be protected because some influential people thought it would be a good idea to make a school a gun-free target zone.
Another inerrant view of Morgan’s is that the “well regulated militia” of the 2nd amendment is referring to the police and military, neither of which existed during the writing of the constitution as it does today. He is ignorant AGAIN of the facts. The founding fathers saw the militia as every able bodied individual who could bear arms. That’s a fact. There were even some laws that demanded every churchgoer in Georgia to carry firearms with them to church. And no, they were not military and police. They were just given the ability to defend themselves. Which is one of the most vital rights of all individuals.
Free video reveals “3 secret loopholes” to defeat Obama’s gun confiscation schemes for good. CLICK HERE. (Sponsored ad. Hey, we have to make money too.)