Not sure what the point of this is but I’ll take a guess that it’s in support of Jones and against Morgan.
So where do we start……
a) The so-called reporter started off by saying the Britain had banned guns. That is totally and completely incorrect. Anyone can own a gun in Britain as long as they do not have a criminal record or pshyciatric problems etc etc. There are some restrictions on guns as in Canada but there is no ban.
b) Again after going through the stats he repeats that guns are banned in Britain. Where did this guy get a dipoloma to get a job in the media or as a reporter?
c) Then he mentions Honduras, Jamaica and El Salvador have higher rates of gun murders. Well Honduras and El Salvador are the centres of drug cartels and death squads and gun deaths there are common. Also both countries the governments and the police are corrupt so in essence there is really not much …..law. The other ones on the list that he didn’t mention were Guatemala, Swaziland, Columbia, Brazil, Panama and Mexico. All of these virtually 3rd world countries with massive crime, drugs, corruptness and a wild west mentality, The first and only supposedly educated and industrial country with these others is the …..USA.So it's not much to cheer about being on the same street as the others.
d) Next he goes on about Britain and says it has the second overall highest crime rate in the European Union. That may be true or not, I didn’t bother looking it up because…..we are not talking about ‘general crime rates’….we’re talking about gun homicides!
He goes on to talk about ‘violent crime rates”. What is classified as violent crime varies a lot and so do the statistics that go with each group of statistics counters. I came across one site that said Canada has the 8th highest violent crime rate in the world at 2,516,918….yet another site said Canada’s crime rate was 2,452,787…..but…..only 12.6% were violent.
e) He goes on to state that in the US the violent crime rate in the US is 466 per 100,000 people but I found the US Bureau of Justice Statistics which are printed by the FBI and the violent crime rate in the US per 100,000 people is in reality 3,466. Quite a difference!
But if anyone is realllllyyyy listening to what this guy is doing….he started his rant saying he had FBI stats but that was just for what he said at first. As he continued on he pulled stats out of anywhere else he found them that worked for him, but not FBI stats.He wanted to leave the impression in people's minds that all his stats were FBI based on his singluar first statement.
f) At the end he ends by once again talking about ‘violent crimes’ but the discussion is about ‘gun homicides’ (and we haven’t even got to talking about gun shootings in the US where no one was hit and gun wounding in the US where the person didn’t die but it was still caused by a gun)
Another site showed Number of Murders by Firearms, US, 2010: 8,775. Number of Murders by firearms, Britain, 2011: 58 ….and because Britain is 1/5th the size of the US that is equivelent to 290 US murders.
The bottom line is:
a) The figures are out there in various forms with various definitions and can be picked up by anyone for any agenda as they please.
b) The commentator has manipulated the figures and manipulated how he presented them and he couldn’t even get the fact correct that Britain has not banned guns.
c) And also….this is Fox news. The TV equivelent to the Nationsl Enquirer and with a long, long, long list of rabid Republican commentators and both general Republican and NRA support. They are in the same bed as The Maury Show or Jerry Springer…basically sensationalism TV for the trailer park. Of course we have our own here….The Sun.
But in the end he never once mentioned the important discussion and that is not about guns themselves but the type of guns and the large clips and the unregulated sale of any gun at gun shows in the US where anyone can buy anything….even Rambo wannabes.
Few people in the US want a ‘ban’ on guns. No one wants to stop hunters or target shooters. All people want to do is as has been done in Canada and Britain and other countries and that is stop the sale of guns that are meant for the military or police, and clips that have no need to carry a massive amount of bullets, and strengthen the laws on who can get a gun and by what means. Assault rifles have one purpose ….to assault and kill and they’re not used for bunny hunting. Large capacity clips have no purpose except in a military context.
That commentator must have been really desperate for a job to go to Fox.
Hummmmm well Jones and I are totally different ends of the scale, but that was a nice try anyhow.
Vocal....yes.
Convinced of the absolute truth of my opinions....sometimes, as is everyone else believes in their views (or they wouldn't say them). And I'll continue to believe what I do until there is proof otherwise.
As for the last part...the only people who say that are the ones losing the discussion. Not my problem.
You have a really nice day.
At the end of discussion Morgan resigned with "whatever" and Jones "won" the argument.
Not in reality. Morgan just gave up talking to someone who from the beginning had a closed mind and rambled about everything up to and including ''how many monkeys are on the head of a pin''. Morgan just felt there was no point in wasting time trying to get through to Jones.
Jones didnot win the discussion.... in the video he looked like a demented man who needed a downer.
