Home - by BigFurHat - January 11, 2013 - 00:22 America/New_York - 24 Comments
This was a right thrashing of this foreign twat,
a twat who says to Shapiro. “you come in here with your little book.”
Wait until you see what he calls the “little book.”
ht/ jerry manderin
January 11th, 2013
Ben fails because he called semi-automatic rifles assault weapons. Piers hits him again and again and he doesn’t get it.
Why are people like this, Alex Jones and Buck Yeager the spokespeople of the 2nd amendment?
“We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment,” the group said in a written statement. “While claiming that no policy proposals would be ‘prejudged,’ this Task Force spent most of its time on proposed restrictions on lawful firearms owners — honest, taxpaying, hardworking Americans. -NRA, after sitting down with Biden and other firearms groups Thursday
You honestly think your own government will turn tyrannical on you? ‘I don’t know… ask the Branch Daividians what they think about that’.
Piers Morgan goes through a list of mass shootings repeatedly asking “what kind of gun was used” and getting the repeated answer “assault rifle” which Piers describes as the “weapon of choice” for murderers. He steps on Shapiro’s point that most murders are committed with non “assault weapons” which effectively means that assault weapons are not the “weapon of choice” for murderers, as the Redcoat suggests.
Does anyone with an IQ higher than a box of paperclips actually fall for Morgan’s rhetoric?
The bottom line of Piers’ various anti-gun argument fallacies is that he wants to imagine non-existent exceptions to the 2nd Amendment and that he doesn’t respect the concept of liberty. The philosophy of liberty says that, so long as you are not intruding upon the life or property of other people without their consent, you are free to do it. Manufacturing, selling, buying or possessing an “assault rifle” does not intrude upon others therefore the government has no right, morally or constitutionally, to persecute those who do. Piers has neither the decency nor intelligence to understand this.
BTW, I keep putting “assault rifle” in quotes because “assault” is a behavior, not a weapon.
Repeating Assault Rifle was a major faux pas. He should have clarified that they were RIFLES.
That “behavior” statement is pure gold!
Liberals swear that Ronald Reagan was senile during his second term in the 1980′s, so I think they can agree that we should ignore what he said in 1994.
Mary Jane Anklestraps
The little book he says. He recoiled from it like it was covered with toothpaste and soap.
People like him were the reason we had the revolution to begin with.
I thought his limey ass was leaving anyway?
Boobie the Rocket Dog
Wish there were a transcript. I can’t stand even 10 seconds of that Anglish dickweed.
Assault weapons were not used in any of the shootings. That’s the lefts term for semi auto rifles. ANY semi auto rifle.
oops, you guys already made that point. sorry, I was really pissed when I posted.
Piers seems very agitated is this interview. He knows the drive-by media is already slow-rolling away from Sandy Hook,so he is trying desperately to wring the last drops of emotion and grief from the tragedy before the window rolls uo in the last News Action Team van as it leaves town. He is hoping that his allies in government and media can still make this a turning point in the War on Guns.
Don’t tarry in Sandy Hook with the sea at your back, Piers. Your friends and fellow-travelers will slink away towards the next shiny object soon. Remember, Piers…Cornwallis hung out at Yorktown, waiting for help that never came, and he ended uo being sent back to England in defeat.
Why do we need them Piers? Because Eric Holder sold known bad guys thousands of them and they are still out there.
^^^Shapiro should have used that as an example of government tyranny.
Birdie Num Num
Yeah,… and Piers came here with his little wiener.
(Beavis and Butthead wept)
Piers likes Moa’s Little Red Book a lot more than the little book of the Constitution of the United States.
Is Piers dense or what? He must of asked Shapiro three times to explain the concept citizens defending themselves against a tyranical government. Shapiro got better with each explanation, throwing in historical examples. It was the best part of the interview.
Correction: Mao – I’ll denounce myself and seek more re-education.
brave my ass!
brave would have been for ben to stand up the first time that smirking brit interrupted his answer and smack that smirk right off his face then sit back down like nothing had happened and continue his answer.
trying to debate the establishment is useless. they are not there for a debate.
Maudie N Mandeville
Ben should have pressed Piss on the pistol issue and asked why he isn’t concerned about 500 murders this year just in Chicago and the thousands of others in majority African (American) urban areas. It’s not racial, is it Piss?
Ben did well to stay focused on the government tyranny even though Piss seemingly didn’t have the intellect to understand it. Next time ask Piss what Hitler did before he started killing Jews. And what Stalin did before confiscating crops and farmland.
A well armed citizenry is a check on government tyranny and that fighting with pitchforks and shovels didn’t work out so well for the kulaks. Thank God we weren’t defenseless when we fought those pretty fellows in their bright red uniforms, eh Piss?
Morgan, like the Journal News, cares not one whit about anything except trying to stay relevant when neither no longer is.
“You can smirk at me all day long.”
I’m sorry, I always smirk when I’m speaking to a pseudo intellectual.
Ugh. Ben did a good job, but we need better spokesmen for this issue.
Morgan was incredulous that Shapiro dared suggest he was using the tragedy in Sandy Hook for leverage – then does exactly that by invoking Mark Kelly/Gabby Gifford to set-up a policy argument for Ben to answer.
The big, scary question – “Why does anyone need an assault rifle or high capacity magazines?” – should neither be feared nor difficult to answer:
“I must be better-armed than any criminal or criminals that would seek to do me harm. Period.
The right of the Individual to defend himself is fundamental within a Free Society. Within this construct, the very question becomes irrelevant.”
One could elaborate on this by citing examples from history, but history means nothing to Liberals.
ben could havae asked the a$$hole if he cares about the children so much what about these statistics?
Gun Deaths in the U.S. for 2011 : 8,583 per FBI unified crime report.
Abortions in the U.S. for 2011: 333,964 just by planned parenthood.
“Why does anyone need an assault rifle or high capacity magazines?”
My favorite answer to this is: “Why do *you* get to decide what *I* need? I dont see why anyone *needs* a fancy car, but I dont go around advocating banning them.”
Snail Mail- BigFurHat / PO BOX 150 Southfields, NY 10975-0150
Want an Avatar? Find out how here.
--SUBSCRIBE by Email FREE