Skip to comments.Newt Gingrich vs. Piers Morgan on Gun Control Debate - 1-24-13
Posted on 01/25/2013 2:30:42 AM PST by sheikdetailfeather
Published on Jan 24, 2013
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
I was eating supper at my favorite BBQ place and CNN was on.
Newt got some good ones in, even if it was edited.
Anybody see the “gun girls” interview afterward?
They got some good ones in too, such as (paraphrasing) “many crimes are prevented by people with guns, but the problem is, you won’t report it”.
Now I`m convinced Morgan has masochistic tendencies. This guy gets destroyed everytime he takes on someone from the conservative side of this argument.
I can`t imagine Larry King being particularly happy with what that obnoxious, effeminate limey has done to that show. At least with King conducting the interviews, there was an atmosphere of mutual respect, regardless of the political differences.
I missed that part. Thanks for letting me know how it went with them. I am glad they did such a great job!
Newt blew it at the very beginning. IT IS NOT ILLEGAL FOR AMERICANS TO OWN FULLY AUTOMATIC WEAPONS, PIERCED!!!!!!!!
Feinstein says that when you visit an actual crime scene, where a person has shot themselves that it changes you in what these weapons can do.
I can say that no it doesn’t, because I was chosen to check on my neighbor, who had shotself and I had to call 911 to report him dead.
Nope, I’m still pro-gun.
Somewhere I saw that guns equal freedom. Trying to remember exactly where was that?
When Morgan asked Newt why someone needed a weapon that fires 100 rounds in a minute, Newt should have said during a time of revolution. Or he could have taken a lesser position and said during a riot when you are facing down an approaching angry mob and their are no law enforcement anywhere to be had.
It is like people are afraid to say exactly why we have the Second Amendment.
Your weapon is first and foremost an emergency preparedness supply. Like a fire extinguisher you hope you never need it for its intended purpose. Once in a while you have to test it to make sure it is in working order and you are familiar with it. And you need it to be there should the time come.
Our founding fathers gave us the Second Amendment as our republics emergency preparedness system. With citizens having the right to keep and bear arms, our system of government has a final check for the people should the government forget its place.
Patrick Henry's speech is available on YouTube. It is about a 9 minute listen while someone reads his speech. It is a masterful speech. As you listen to it, think how hollow and shallow Patrick Henry's speech would be if there had been no arms to back up his words. Guns equal freedom might better be expressed Guns secure freedom. And by the way, I hear Gunssecurefreedom is available as a screen name.
Right. He let Piers' lie about automatic weapons stand, and couldn't answer why we need to fire 100 rounds. The citizens of this country had the same 'assault weapons' as the british.
Feinswine stuck her finger in a bullet wound to find a pulse?
Exactly! I heard some guy the other day saying if we want to follow the Second Amendment then only muskets should be allowed.
Lawton_For the second time in just one week a shooting is ruled justified in connection with an attempted burglary. This time it happened in Lawton’s Old Town North Addition in the 500 block of Bell. The homeowner says he was asleep in the middle of the afternoon when he heard someone trying to break in. He says his first reaction was to grab his gun to stop the would be burglar in his tracks.
Like many homeowners in Lawton, Andy Miguez says he’s been extra cautious of burglars lately. Especially after, he says, his neighbors home has been victimized a handful of times recently. What he didn’t know was that he was next.
“Somebody rang my doorbell. Knocked on the door and I didn’t answer it,” says Miguez. “They lifted my mail slot up and looked in my mail slot and I could see somebody out there moving around - and they came around the other side of the house and jumped the fence,” he says.
The stories are there. CNN just won’t report them.
Customer pulls gun, stops robbery
“He was turning against the other woman. He didn’t actually see me coming up at first and then when he did, he turned around and I yelled at him to put down his weapon,” Charile explained.
“(The) next thing I know is Charlie is jumping over the, uh, courtesy booth into the courtesy booth,” said Brooks.
Charlie says was face to face with the suspect. “He just stared and looked at me for a minute. I cocked it back and then, all of a sudden, he laid it down on the counter and put all the money down.”
The suspect gave up the money and his gun and took off his mask. The people who work at Buck’s say the suspect has been casing the place for days.
This one at the link is actually a good read if you like these kind of news stories.
Piers logic is if the people let the government disallow fully automatic weapons, why draw the line there, why not disallow semi-automatic weapons....what’s the difference as Hillary would say. The difference as Newt should have pointed out is we never should have allowed the government to ban the fully automatics in the first place because that was an infringement!
I like what was pointed out here that our founder citizens had the same type of weapons as the British troops. It shouldn’t be any different today.
If one wants to spend the money go through all the paper work to do so one can have a full auto firearm.
>>>Feinstein says that when you visit an actual crime scene, where a person has shot themselves that it changes you in what these weapons can do.<<<
This seems like bull to me. I’ve been at the scene of terrible car accidents, including one where a 10 year old boy on a bicycle was profoundly brain damaged. It didn’t make me anti-car, though it did make me more pro-bicycle helmet.
Also, seeing unarmed, defenseless, innocent, victims gunned down might make a logical, rational person more determined to ensure that law abiding citizens are able to defend themsleves.
What I’d really like to know is, “Was Feinstein EVER pro-gun?” If she was anti-gun before the Moscone-Milk murders she will be even further exposed as an vile, opportunistic, liar.
I thought Newt did HORRIBLE in that debate.
Newt obviously doesn’t know squat about weapons.
BFL. should be interesting.
No surprise there.
But like Bill O’reilly, Newt thinks he’s an expert on EVERYTHING.
I watched the whole thing. Newt doesn’t know anything about guns. He doesn’t know that full auto weapons are perfectly legal for citizens to own. He initially conceded that point because he simply wasn’t aware of the facts. He had a beautiful opportunity to eviscerate the stupid british twit, but failed miserably all around.