Awesome gun control debate - Piers Morgan gets destroyed.

[NightTrain]

Not sure if this has been covered yet, but Pratt completely destroys Piers Morgan on CNN.

It's pretty long, but Pratt did an outstanding job. Toward the end you can see Morgan getting frustrated and when nailed he immediately switches topics.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QFbKhAfw4RI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


I would like to see his dumbass deported just because he's such a slimy liberal, but that's not legal... unfortunately.

[avatar4321]

Does Morgan ever not get destroyed?

[Voted4Reagan]

Pratt Destroyed him...

Again

[Robert A Whit]

Morgan pulls the typical left wing stunt so I won't listen to him talking.

Talk OVER the guest and prevent said guest from making points.

That is his only tactic.

[aboutime]

Not sure if this has been covered yet, but Pratt completely destroys Piers Morgan on CNN.

It's pretty long, but Pratt did an outstanding job. Toward the end you can see Morgan getting frustrated and when nailed he immediately switches topics.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QFbKhAfw4RI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>


I would like to see his dumbass deported just because he's such a slimy liberal, but that's not legal... unfortunately.


Anyone find it kind of comical, or funny when Morgan speaks of "PEOPLE WATCHING"?
Take a look at his viewership numbers, and when you stop laughing.
Just remember. Morgan is nothing, nobody, and never will be what he dreams of being, except...4680

[cadet]

I love the part where he's reading off how many homicides there are in the UK compared to the US.

"70 this year in uk, and 110 in us...."

When you realize that the US has...313,914,000 people. And the UK has 62,000,000 people.

He realizes that that means... percent wise, is a (pardon my french) shitload more.

[cadet]

http://www.theendrun.com/larry-pratt-british-gun-crime-stats-a-sham


To begin with, More Guns, Less Crime (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0226493660/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=thenru-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0226493660) author John Lott has recently explained (http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/12/so-did-piers-morgan-and-christiane.html) that this is a misleading representation of the statistics: Yes, the gun murder rate is relatively low in England and Wales, but it was already low before the ban, and the stats do not show a decrease in murders committed with guns (nor overall murders) since the ban was instituted, as Morgan implies. “There is a difference between levels and changes,” Lott notes. Meanwhile, The Telegraph reported (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6438601/Gun-crime-doubles-in-a-decade.html) in 2009 that gun crime had “almost doubled in the last decade”.But let’s look at the discussion that ensued after Morgan’s remarks. (Despite the fact that Morgan had just spoken for 1 minute and 39 seconds straight, he interrupts Pratt after only 18 seconds.)

PRATT: Well first of all, according to your investigator of your constabulary, the data that you’re using for the murder rate in England is a sham. There’s a monumental misreporting of what constitutes murder. If three people are murdered, it’s likely to be counted as one event. And…
MORGAN: What an absolute, absolute LIE! That is an ABSOLUTE–
PRATT: Well, that’s what you say when you don’t know what you’re talking about…
MORGAN: No, you see, Mr. Pratt. No, Mr Pratt. Let me tell you, it doesn’t take very long….
PRATT: But I was just looking at a 2000 report. And these are your own government’s data.
MORGAN: Mr. Pratt, it doesn’t take very long to count 50 gun murders.
As it turns out, what Pratt said does not appear to have been a “lie” at all, let alone an “absolute, absolute LIE!” Quite the opposite.
The report that Pratt was referring to was discussed in a March 22, 2001 article by Dave Kopel, Dr. Paul Gallant and Dr. Joanne Eisen, entitled “Britain: From Bad to Worse” (http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/3/21/205139.shtml)(cache (http://www.webcitation.org/6DYfSqpvX)).
In this article, the authors explained that “the violent crime rate has risen dramatically and steadily since gun bans have been instituted,” and that Britain had accordingly lost its reputation as an “unusually safe and crime-free nation.”

To the great consternation of British authorities concerned about tourism revenue, a June CBS News report proclaimed Great Britain “one of the most violent urban societies in the Western world.” Declared Dan Rather: “This summer, thousands of Americans will travel to Britain expecting a civilized island free from crime and ugliness … the U.K. has a crime problem … worse than ours.”
They then begin to explain that this increase in violent crime — “a trend seen wherever strict gun control laws have been implemented” — is something that British officials have tried to keep “under wraps” by manipulating the statistics:

A headline in the London Daily Telegraph back on April 1, 1996, said it all: “Crime Figures a Sham, Say Police.” The story noted that “pressure to convince the public that police were winning the fight against crime had resulted in a long list of ruses to ‘massage’ statistics,” and “the recorded crime level bore no resemblance to the actual amount of crime being committed.”
For example, where a series of homes were burgled, they were regularly recorded as one crime. If a burglar hit 15 or 20 flats, only one crime was added to the statistics.
The authors then say (and this is the part Pratt was most specifically referencing – emphasis added):

[B]More recently, a 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary charges Britain’s 43 police departments with systemic under-classification of crime– for example, by recording burglary as “vandalism.” The report lays much of the blame on the police’s desire to avoid the extra paperwork associated with more serious crimes.
Britain’s justice officials have also kept crime totals down by being careful about what to count.
“American homicide rates are based on initial data, but British homicide rates are based on the final disposition.” Suppose that three men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts as nothing at all. “With such differences in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a sham,” the report concludes.

Just going to go silently chuckle to myself now.