The Sundance Kid
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RIPE for parody.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Re: Jones vs Morgan
The questions Piers wanted Jones to answer were completely irrelevant to the topic. What do the amount of gun homicides in the UK vs the US or the weapon used in the last two mass shootings have to do with the issue of gun control? Comparing the US and the UK is an apples and oranges comparison.
The UK's populace has been historically disarmed by the ruling class. It's NEVER had a gun culture, so why would it surprise anyone that it has less gun homicides? It still has a much higher crime rate, and the citizens can't defend themselves. 50% of UK home burglaries occur when the homeowner is home. This is compared to 8% in the US, where there has been a gun culture since the founding of the country and guns have always been legal and prevalent. Think about that. Not to mention the fact that in the US, violent crime is LOWER in places where there is less gun control, and the citizens are armed. Just think about the fact that every public shooting in the US in the last 50 years or so save ONE occurred at a gun free zone. It's the disarming of citizens, which leads to a sense of safety for criminals, that allows these tragedies to occur.
The fact the same type of rifle was used at the last two public shootings means we need to ban semi-automatic rifles? Even though they account for a tiny fraction of the gun violence? How is that a solution at all? It's just an unnecessary restriction of our freedoms.
Alex Jones made most of these points in the interview, but he went about it the wrong way. He came off as a raving madman, which he sort of is when he goes into his conspiracy theory shit. That's how Alex Jones is though, and the Piers Morgan show knew that going in, and it's exactly what they were counting on. This isn't about having a debate about the issue (if it was then Piers Morgan would have done that with the last guy, instead of simply shouting ad hominem attacks at him), it's about making the other side look crazy. Which they succeeded at, even though the reverse is true.