January 11, 2013
Piers Morgan debates Ben Shapiro on Gun Laws - Part 1 - Youtube 5 45 mins
January 10, 2013: CNN television host Piers Morgan 'debates' gun legislation
with Ben Shapiro, author of 'Bullies', Editor at Large at Breitbart.com.
Piers is condescendingly dismissive when Shapiro points out that tyranny has overrun and destroyed countries throughout history. This is a central point of the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, in Shapiro's view. (The Second Amendment enshrines the lawful right of citizens to bear arms.)
Piers is so primed to destroy all comers who have a nuanced view with regard to the Second Amendment right to bear arms, that when Shapiro shares that his forebears were destroyed by the Nazis, in part, because they trusted that their government would never become tyrannical in nature, there is no pause whatsoever from Piers to acknowledge Shapiro's pain, let alone his point.
As for myself, I don't like guns. However, I would wish one could magically materialize in my hand should I be cornered by evil that is intent on taking my life or the life of somebody I love. Ergo, self-defense is a natural right.
Further, it is historically beyond question that peoples have had need from time to time in history to defend from attack from without, or from those who would oppress, abuse or destroy people from within a state's borders.
Excerpt from Part One (above): Ben Shapiro [at approximately the 4 minute mark]: "...fundamentally, the Right believes that the basis for the Second Amendment, and they believe in the Second Amendment, the basis for the Second Amendment is not really about self-defense and it's not about hunting, it is about resistance to government tyranny - that's what the Founders said and that's what the Right believes in this country."
Piers Morgan, CNN: "What tyranny are you fearing yourself?"
Shapiro: "I fear the possibility of a tyranny rising within this country in the next fifty to one-hundred years. Let me tell you something Piers, the fact that my grandparents and my great-grandparents in Europe didn't fear that is why they're now ashes in Europe. So this kind of Leftist revisionist history, where there is never any fear of democracy going usurpatious or tyrannical is just - " [cut off by Piers mid-sentence...]
Piers: "So just to clarify your position then, the answer to Sandy Hook, as it was to Aurora, as it was to Gabriel Giffords, as it was to Columbine and Virginia Tech, is you do nothing, is that your position?"
Shapiro: "That is not my position..."
Piers cuts Shapiro off: "What is your position?"
Shapiro: "My position is that we have to calibrate laws that are designed to get guns out of the hands of bad people and keep guns in the hands of good people who want to buy them. This whole idea that more guns versus less guns is -"
Piers cuts Shapiro off: "How do you do that? How do you do that?"
Shapiro: "Well, I think that one of the ways that you do that is by better screening for mental illness. I think that you do better background checks -"
Piers cuts Shapiro off: "Was Adam Lanza's mother a good person?"
Shapiro: "Um, I don't know whether she was a good person or a bad person I think she was irresponsible with her guns."
Piers: "Has there been any evidence to suggest that she was not a good person?"
Shapiro: "No," [through a series of interruptions from Piers about whether or not Lanza's mother was 'good' or 'bad'] - "she was an irresponsible person, she didn't keep her guns locked up and that should be against the law. She had a mentally ill person in her house. I mean, we are talking about laws we can both agree on, Piers, I don't know why you are disagreeing with me on this..."
Piers ends this execrable excuse for an interview or debate, whatever he chooses to call it,
by saying people can judge for themselves who has the stronger argument. I could not agree more.
- Diane V. McLoughlin