Bully Tells Her Side of the Story in Surprising Video
Bully Tells Her Side of the Story in Surprising Video
Must See Political Ad That Features Honesty
Must See Political Ad That Features Honesty
Donald Sterling Sues NBA and Shelly Sterling in New Lawsuit
Donald Sterling Sues NBA and Shelly Sterling in New Lawsuit
Facebook’s Zuckerberg to Face Alleged Contract Faker Ceglia in Court
Facebook’s Zuckerberg to Face Alleged Contract Faker Ceglia in Court
Job Listings

Piers Morgan Loses it on Gun Lobbyist Larry Pratt

Piers Morgan has been trying to get members of the NRA to come onto his show following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting on Friday morning. He wanted to debate their position about a post-Newtown world. Morgan finally wound up settling after no one from the NRA would bite.

On Morgan’s show last night, Larry Pratt was a guest. Pratt is the executive director of Gun Owners of America, which is a gun lobbying firm that criticizes the NRA for its leniency quite often.

As you can see in the video, Morgan was looking for anyone to unload his anger at, which is why Pratt was his target. The explosion occurred after Pratt said that gun laws could wind up preventing “good guys” from defending themselves during trouble. Morgan responded by calling Pratt an  “unbelievably stupid man.”

PRATT: “It seems to me that you’re morally obtuse. You seem to prefer being a victim to being able to prevail over the criminal element. And I don’t know why you want to be the criminal’s friend.”



Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!


MORGAN: “What a ridiculous argument. You have absolutely no coherent argument whatsoever. You don’t give a damn, do you, about the gun murder rate in America? You don’t actually care.”

Not long after the show, Morgan took to Twitter to let our some more anger. He tweeted the following: “Still seething after tonight’s show. Just can’t understand the mentality of those who insist the only answer to #Newtown is MORE guns.”

Did you like this? Share it:
Piers Morgan Loses it on Gun Lobbyist Larry Pratt by

Tagged: , , , ,

Posted by on December 19, 2012. Filed under Breaking News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
  • http://www.jdjournal.com/2012/12/19/piers-morgan-loses-it-on-gun-lobbyist-larry-pratt/ Peter Wright

    Piers.
    You are being a demagogue. People hate guns because they hate guns. You hate guns. So, you are on one side. Other people do not hate guns and many of them are willing to discuss their reasonable regulation. I don’t know anyone, including Mr. Pratt, who would not accept regulation of firearms in the face of cogent argument for doing so. But not do so because they were demagoged into submission. That does not work in America and never will. But, what you think are arguments to ban fire arms, as presented by you, are unfounded. Everything you have suggested as what America ought to do to stop such things as happened in Trenton Connecticut, would not have stopped one single mass massacre you are all a buzz about. The statistics show that it would have not stopped anything. Just like cocaine, heroine, crack and marijuana, we have squeezed the legal market out of existence, yet they remain multibillion dollar businesses. The Palestinians in the Gaza Strip show that you can do the same thing with guns but with medium range rockets. So, Guns, qua guns, are not the issue in these cases. The gun regulations will not do what you say it will do and since it is obvious that you have not thought your arguments through, it will not do what you believe you will think it will do when you finally take time to think about it.

    You hate guns and all the people who don’t hate them and will not accept your demagoguery. Your embarassing ad hominym attack on Mr. Pratt demonstrated the most criticized amateurish debate style that we have seen on an otherwise “respectable” information program. Whether the arguments for or against your position are delivered by Mr. Pratt, Mother Teresa, Ghengis Kahn, Musoline or Jesus Christ, they would stand or fall on their merits. Are all the premises understandable and correct and accepted by the community of listeners you are addressing? Do you have a back stop argument just in case you find that your listeners are indeed hostile to your emphymeme? Is there a logical syllogistical progression from your fully accepted premises to the argument? does it lead of necessity to your conclusion?. Your arguments, such as they were, were devoid of the Logos, Ethos and Pathos of a well crafted argument, whether for debate, rhetoric or education. You employ enthymemes which you pull from the air but their acceptance of which are nevertheless the sine qua non for the logical progression of your arguments to their conclusion. Mr. Pratt made some excellent points, points that when presented on other TV and Radio shows, were accepted for their apparent strength against the anti-gun people like you. On an even footing, the arguments of the anti-gun people do not fair well. No surprise there. They never have before. They do much better when the preacher is preaching to the choir. Your burden was to make a cogent agrument that addressed Mr. Pratt’s points and you not only failed to do that, apparantly your obvious frustration came because you couldn’t. If that were not the case, then you need to patch up your style, because it made you look very, very bad. The debate about the Trenton, Conn. shootings and what can be done there as contrasted with the debate about gun control in this contry, are two entirely independent debates. To people like myself who have tried to make sense of both debates, you and your side always lose bacause you are not only simply demogogue the argument, but under analysys there simply is no coherency to them. Like a bad prosecutor, you do a kind of bad exegesis of the facts, not unlike your average fire-and-brimston preacher, you take some unrelated facts from here and some other facts from there and some statistics from here and some more from there and hope on hope that this mess you have strung together would not change the mind of a single person with a brain in his head. Pratt’s point is simple. If the law was passed that required Pratt to turn in his gun, he would turn it in, but the burglar who breaks into his house and threatens him and his wife will not have turned in his gun. So, you lose and so does Pratt and his wife. In your case, you lose your awful argument as it’s meritless presumption fall into the dust bin of history. In Pratt’s case he and his wife lose their lives. If you wish to polish your debate tactics, I could recommend a half-dozen very good, not excellent books on debate and rhetoric and you need to read all of them in order to avoid another embarrassing personal episode as you had with Mr. Pratt. Honestly, you were making Bill O’Reilly sound like a paragon of lucidity. Frankly, I was shocked. I suppose I was lulled into complacency by your cream-puff interviews. When you get out of your depth, the best thing is to accept the fact you are not up to the task and hope that in the future someone can take on Mr. Pratt who at his level of knowledge and sophistication which is miles above yours.

  • http://www.jdjournal.com/2012/12/19/piers-morgan-loses-it-on-gun-lobbyist-larry-pratt/ Peter Wright

    So, far, without contradiction, I stand by my statement.

  • http://www.jdjournal.com/2012/12/19/piers-morgan-loses-it-on-gun-lobbyist-larry-pratt/ Peter Wright

    No new comment.

  • Doug Leblanc

    I just happened to stumble onto this site.
    Blows me away how paranoid Americans are. Your society is completely formed around the television. You have all these cable news media stations who’s ratings are unbelievable due to that fact that they manufacture ‘news’ to sell. Any story about a ‘home invasion’ is magnified and analysed by 16 people employed by the news station to soley make a story to fill in the gaps.
    What a grand way to do that, huh? Use the publics fear of personal safety to sell advertising space to corporations…and the public doesn’t have a clue! Your fear of black men, brown men, red men and yellow men is mindboggling. I think you are really scared now because the white race has now slipped into the visible minority which gives you a sense of insecurity you can’t handle. Years and years of propaganda aimed at you about how the other races are ‘out to get you’ have permeated itself into your psyche that you can’t distinguish rational fear from manufactured ones.
    So what’s the answer? Arm yourself against the fear. And you are pretty open about your fear. I find it amusing how you boast about how brave you are when your fears are so obvious and you cry like little babies about “it’s us or them”, which is essentially admitting to the entire world that you are a snivelling cowards who hides behind guns.
    So what do you think is going to happen when a black guy gets riddled full of holes from a paranoid person such as yourself or Mr.Pratt simply because the person was in the wrong place at the wrong time? Your fear of other races will be your demise, because a race riot will more than likely ensue and remember “they all have guns and their sole purpose is to kill you and take what you’ve got”.lol!
    The rest of the free world’s hope is that you turn off your fear propagandizing news media, get it through those ultra thick skulls of yours that not everyone is out to rob you and start enjoying the little time you have left on this earth instead of living in fear with your semi just an arms length away. Every day I am so thankful I don’t live in your country because of your irrational paranoia.

  • jon warner

    Thanks for the realistic evaluation of our news media, Doug.
    I am a natural born anglo citizen and I agree with you completely.
    I am also a Republican.
    However the so-called “Republicans” who are the power brokers of the party have changed the basic goals of the party to fit their own selfish agendas. These agendas appear to be racial hatred,no taxes for the rich, and more hatred to inspire fear in the common man.
    With a little bit of luck we may be able to move away from this muck before we start a global war.

    Unfortunately, I really don’t see this happening.

  • browns32

    Morgan is the typical pseudo-intellectual liberal bully who resorts to insults and name calling when he can’t control the conversation.

  • Ray

    United States of Paranoia

  • joe cool

    Shutup Morgan tou silly english twat. Go home to England and take your stupid family with you.

 

 

Job of the Day
Capital Markets Counsel 3 Attorney
USA-NC-Charlotte

Wells Fargo & Company, a diversified financial services company, is seeking an experienced capital markets Attorney to join its Law Department in its Charlotte, NC office. The individual selected...