John Walsh vows to continue Piers Morgan's Gun-Control campaign on CNN

Walsh will be much more effective at making this argument than Piers for the simple reason that he is much more likable.   From The Wrap:

Besides hosting “America's Most Wanted” and advocating for victims’ rights, Walsh has been a longtime advocate of background checks and other safety measures. He said he would continue that fight now that he is joining CNN as the host of “The Hunt,” a new show about catching fugitives. . . .
“I am the guy that has seen both sides of the issue,” Walsh told reporters Monday. “I own guns. I'm the father of a murdered child. I've done nothing but track violence in America since my son was murdered. We have a serious problem with guns in this country. And we refuse to address it. And the NRA solution to arm every grammar-school 80-year-old teacher with a gun is absolutely ludicrous,” he said.
Walsh said the NRA is so deeply in the pocket of the gun industry that “they're not a lobbyist on Capitol Hill, they're a gun manufacturer rep.” He also said Vice President Joe Biden recently agreed with him that politicians are “scared s—less” of the NRA. . . .

Just because background checks work well in theory doesn't mean that the current system actually works that way.  You can find out some of the problems with the background check system here and here.

Obviously the claim that the NRA wants to arm everyone in schools is a gross exaggeration.  The NRA proposal was to arm uniformed guards, something that Bill Clinton had supported when he was president, and something that I thought was a mistake because armed guards are likely to be the first target.

On polls Walsh says:

“I said to Joe Biden, '90 percent of Americans are for a responsible background check for a gun, and you know what this Congress has done? Not voted on it, not brought it to the floor, not introduced a bill,'” Walsh said. “I said, ‘They're all scared shitless of the NRA, aren't they?'” . . . 

You can find out why his claim is incorrect here. 

Not that anyone is surprised, but is this the appropriate forum for a TV news anchor?: Piers Morgan with the Brady gun control people

Everyone knows Piers views on gun control.  How could you not know his views?  Yet, I wonder if it is appropriate for a TV news anchor to make an appearance at the Brady Campaign.  The screen picture is taken from a video at USA Today.

The appearance occurred last year and also got coverage at the Hollywood Reporter.

Note on Piers Morgan ending his show on CNN with a speech on guns

Below is the relevant text of Piers Morgan's comments.  Here a few comments.

1) Doesn't Piers recognize the irony that the Aurora movie theater and Newtown shootings both occurred where guns are banned?  That the movie theater shooting occurred in the one movie theater out of seven showing the Batman movie near where the killer lived?  That these attacks generally keep occurring where guns are banned?

2) Piers directly attacks the notion that more guns mean less crime.  But he never in all his shows dealt with the evidence that when guns are banned murder rates go up, except in one show where he and Christiane Amanpour were dishonest about the facts for the UK.

3) In classic Piers, he attacks his opponents in the most personal terms: "cowardly," "bullied," attacking his opponents as motivated by making profits for gun makers ("death and profits for the gun manufacturers").  What is gained by Piers constantly attacking his opponents this way?  He may never understand that is what many found objectionable.

With Piers continually repeating the same first two points over and over again, you would think that he would be embarrassed that he doesn't have a direct response to these two points.

This is the final episode of Piers Morgan Live. After 3yrs, 2months, 11 days and over 1000 shows, I am departing to spend more time with my cricket bat.  . . .
And I want to say something more about that before I bow out. . . .
As my brother, a British Army colonel, says, “You’d always want an American next to you in a trench when the going gets tough.”
But that’s where guns belong – on a military battlefield, in the hands of highly trained men and women fighting for democracy and freedom. Not in the hands of civilians. The scourge of gun violence is a disease that now infects every aspect of American life.
Each day, on average, 35 people in this country are murdered with guns, another 50 kill themselves with guns, and 200 more are shot but survive. That’s 100,000 people a year hit by gunfire in America.
Now, I assumed that after 70 people were shot in a movie theater, and then, just a few months later, 20 first-graders were murdered with an assault rifle in an elementary school, the absurd gun laws in this country would change. But nothing has happened. The gun lobby in America, led by the NRA, has bullied this nation’s politicians into cowardly, supine silence. Even when 20 young children are blown away in their classrooms.
This is a shameful situation that has made me very angry. So angry, in fact, that some people have criticized me for being too loud, opinionated, even rude when I have debated the issue of guns. But I make no apologies for that.
As Sir Winston Churchill said: “If you have an important point to make, don’t try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time – a tremendous whack.”
My point is simple: more guns doesn’t mean less crime as the NRA repeatedly says. It means more gun violence, death and profits for the gun manufacturers. And to those who claim my gun control campaigning has been “anti-American”, the reverse is true. I am so pro-American that I want more of you to stay alive. . . .

My take on Piers Morgan's show being cancelled: Piers Morgan’s Revealing Rancor

My new piece at National Review Online starts this way:

Sunday’s announcement that Piers Morgan had lost his show at CNN was hardly unexpected. 

The ratings for the coveted 9 p.m. time slot were abysmal, dropping last week to just 270,000 viewers — about one-eighth of what Fox News’s Megyn Kelly got in the same time slot. 

 Some, such as Variety magazine, have speculated that the low ratings are due to Morgan’s single-minded push for gun control. That might have something to do with it, but much more is going on. 

In all the thousands of television and radio interviews that I have done over the years, my appearances on Morgan’s show have generated more immediate e-mails than any other show that I have ever been on. 

The response made one thing immediately obvious: Only the most diehard gun-control advocates watched his show. But even some of them were unwilling to listen to his abuse. . . .

Piers Morgan's CNN show cancelled -- some thoughts

The Daily Mail in the UK is reporting that Piers' show has been cancelled and will only run for "a matter or weeks."

. . . Three years after taking over for Larry King, ratings for Piers Morgan Live are a fraction of rivals such as Fox News and MSNBC causing network president Jeffrey Zucker to decide to pull the plug on the British journalist. . . .
Plans for a replacement are underway, but Morgan and the network are in talks about him remaining on the air in a different role.
‘That’s run its course and Jeff and I have been talking for some time about different ways of using me,’ said Morgan, whose contract with the network ends in September.Morgan gained a reputation for taking a polarizing stance on issues such as gun control which didn’t chime with an American audience and lead to an online petition last year to deport him over his views. . . .
In another debate on gun controls, Morgan shouted down economist John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime and branded him a liar for claiming gun crime trends in countries such as Britain supported his thesis. . . .

On Piers' claim that I was a liar, please see my response available here.

For other past posts I had on Piers see these.

--Piers Morgan goes on rants against those who appeared on his show, making fun of my scars from surgery

-- Erik Wemple: Piers Morgan, gun-control thug

--Erik Wemple: "CNN’s Piers Morgan, talking himself into trouble"

--Video of my appearance on Piers Morgan's Show on CNN last night

--Doesn't Piers Morgan want a review of his forthcoming book? What are you worried about Piers?
--The complete video of my appearance on Piers Morgan's CNN show last night
--Erik Wemple: "Why is gun advocate John Lott doing his best work on CNN?"
--Probably the weirdest interview that I have ever had

--A useful discussion that I had with Piers Morgan on how gun laws help cause these mass public shootings

--A piece that I had in the Philadelphia Inquirer about Piers Morgan

--My appearance with Ben Ferguson on Piers Morgan, discussing DC Navy Yard Shooting, notes on some mistakes by Piers

Question: So will Piers have me on again one of his last shows so that he can get his frustrations out?

Reading the New Republic for its entertainment value because one apparently can't expect them to be too accurate

I guess that I have a hard time understanding why anyone would read the New Republic for anything other than entertainment.  Here is their discussion on my interactions with Piers Morgan:

Morgan’s current determination is hard to deny. His effectiveness is less clear. For one thing, there’s the way he handles guests. Morgan tends to let hotheads like Jones rant unchecked (ostensibly to expose their insanity, though after a point, he is just giving them a bigger platform). But then he steamrolls authors and academics whose logic is actually worth debunking. Take economist and gun-rights proponent John Lott, whose head Morgan permitted to occupy one side of a split-screen while he talked over him for ten minutes. Lott, author of the book More Guns, Less Crime, attempted feebly to interject, but Morgan wasn’t having it. “I am going to keep talking, so I suggest you keep quiet,” the host informed the guest. To which Lott replied, shoulders slumping: “I don’t see what the point of having anybody on is if you’re going to talk for ninety percent of the time.” And still Morgan barreled on. . . .

The quote from me was made at 10:59 into this video.  As far as I tell my shoulders didn't slump and I didn't stop responding, but I suppose that it the New Republic's attempt at trying to prove that I somehow felt defeated. In addition, I would like to believe that at least viewers learned that gun bans caused murder rates to rise and that Piers was very selective in the data that he picked.

Out for only three weeks and Piers Morgan's book is only ranked at 44,040 on Amazon

How is it possible that someone in the 9 PM time slot on CNN every evening and having done a huge amount of other media can only have his new book at 44,040 rank on Amazon?

With weekly meetings, Obama administration gearing up for big gun control push to coincide with Newtown anniversary

Newtown might not be planning any town wide events to mark the shooting tragedy last December 14th. but the Obama administration and gun control groups are still planning enough.  From the Associated Press:

The leader of the board that governs Newtown, Conn., says it will not host any townwide events to mark the anniversary of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. 

First Selectman Pat Llodra says the community is choosing to remember and honor the victims in ways that are "quiet, personal and respectful." . . .

Information on the Obama administration plans is available from Politico:

Officials from the White House Office of Public Engagement, which reports to senior Obama aide Valerie Jarrett, are now carrying the administration’s gun control efforts. OPE officials hold a regular meeting with the major gun control groups known as the Gun Violence Table.   

The weekly sessions often include OPE Director Paulette Aniskoff or official Paul Monteiro along with representatives from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Moms Demand Action, the Center for American Progress, Organizing for Action and Americans for Responsible Solutions. 

The groups are coordinating a November lobbying effort and planning events to commemorate the first anniversary of the Newtown, Conn., massacre last December. . . .

As I have written about before, the White House is apparently still deeply involved in the push for gun control at the state level.

“What’s happening now is a necessary and appropriate drilling down into states both to push the ball forward at the state level,” said Arkadi Gerney of the Center for American Progress, who participates in the sessions. “Also, that’s the best way to move the ball forward at the federal level.” . . .

The coordinated events include a nationwide bus tour sponsored by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the Bloomberg-funded effort, a series of Americans for Responsible Solutions stops by former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, and some 200 local Organizing for Action events in August. . . .

The article also had information on the exact timing of the federal push is discussed here:

The groups and the White House are considering events pegged to Dec. 14, the anniversary of the Newtown shooting, which launched Obama’s gun control push. The Brady Campaign is planning four days of events the second week of November, including what its president, Dan Gross, called the largest gun control lobbying day ever at the Capitol and a day of speeches from prominent officials at the Mayflower Hotel. 

Gross said the Brady Campaign also is planning to commemorate Nov. 30, the 20th anniversary of former President Bill Clinton signing legislation that required background checks for commercial gun sales. That event, Gross said, will remind gun control supporters that it took seven votes over six years to become law. . . . 

The rest of the article mentions that while Biden is still involved publicly with the gun control issue, he is not participating in the weekly White House meetings.

Piers Morgan viciously attacked Alan Gottlieb for his "guns save lives" day, but any guesses whether Morgan will attack gun control advocates for their own push for gun control on that day?



Meanwhile, a "news" article in the New York Daily News makes this point:

The heartless gun nuts who hoped to make the anniversary of the Newtown massacre “Guns Save Lives Day” have changed their callous plan. 

The rallies, organized by the Washington state-based Second Amendment Foundation, will now be held one day later, on Dec. 15, which happens to be Bill of Rights Day. 

“We will not politicize the day, and we hope (gun-control advocates) will not politicize and push their anti-civil rights agenda on the 14th,” the group’s founder and executive vice president, Alan Gottlieb, told the New Haven Register.
“We’re going to show that we are sensitive.” . . . .

I have checked this author's other articles and they seems like pretty straightforward news stories. 

A useful discussion that I had with Piers Morgan on how gun laws help cause these mass public shootings

This is a clip from a show that I did with Piers immediately after the Newtown tragedy.  If I had an extra minute, I would have explained why gun free zones increase crime: law-abiding citizens are disarmed relative to criminals, and the bans actually make it easier for criminals to commit crimes.  That said, I am frequently asked why I appear on Piers' show.  I hope that clips such as this indicate even in the few times that I can talk I get facts out that otherwise wouldn't get into the popular discussion.

Erik Wemple: "CNN’s Piers Morgan, talking himself into trouble"

Erik Wemple has this discussion at the Washington Post blog of Piers' recounting of his interviews with Larry Pratt and myself.  The  piece is somewhat long, but part of it is hear:

Jonathan Wald has a difficult job. He’s executive producer of Piers Morgan’s show on CNN, a set of duties that include taming a volatile and sometimes rude television personality. In an “extract” from his new book “Shooting Straight: Guns, Gays, God and George Clooney”published in the Guardian, Morgan describes an incident when Wald’s counsel came into play. 

On Dec. 18, 2012, just after the Newtown massacre, Morgan hosted Larry Pratt of the Gun Owners of America. They brawled on air about gun restrictions, with Morgan advocating more of them and Pratt on the other side. He told Morgan: “America is not the Wild West you’re depicting. We only have problems in our cities and in our schools where people like you have been able to get laws on the books that keep people from being able to defend themselves.” . . . . 

Bold text added to highlight a question: Relevance? Lott wrote today that the eyebrows mocked by Morgan are “deformed because I had a tumor removed from my forehead when I was a child. Piers was literally just a few feet from me during these interviews and could easily see my scars.” Best not to belabor the physical appearances of your guest.

Piers Morgan goes on rants against those who appeared on his show, making fun of my scars from surgery

Here is Piers Morgan's discussion in The Guardian newspaper.  I am tired of being called part of the "gun lobby," but Piers attacking my eyebrows, seriously?  My eyebrows are deformed because I had a tumor removed from my forehead when I was a child.  Piers was literally just a few feet from me during these interviews and could easily see my scars.  I looked at the video and I also can't see any half-smirks on my face.  The discussion in Piers Morgan's piece started at about 4:20 into the clip.  Piers' misleading and inaccurate numbers on gun murders in Britain are available here.  From The Guardian:

We'd booked a pro-gun author called John R Lott, whose book is More Guns, Less Crime.  

"He fired over 100 rounds and killed 20 children," I told him. "Twenty children! At what point do you gun lobby guys say: 'We get it. It's time for change'?" 

"Right, it is time," he replied, to my astonishment. 

"Time to do what?" 

"To get rid of some of these gun laws that cause –" 

"To get rid of gun laws?" 

He nodded. "Look at what has happened. All these attacks this year have occurred where guns are banned. Look at the Aurora movie theatre shooting …" 

Unbelievable. This clown had actually come on my show on the night of this dreadful atrocity to advocate getting rid of existing gun control laws? I stared at Lott, who has weird pointy bushy eyebrows, and a permanent sneery half-smirk on his face. I wanted to reach across the desk and slap it off him. "There are about 35 gun murders a year in Britain," I shouted. "There are nearly 12,000 murders a year from guns in this country. When are you guys going to focus on that and stop telling me the answer is more guns? It is not the answer. Three hundred million guns in America isn't enough for you? How many more kids have to die before you guys say we want less guns and not more?" 

Lott said: "How else can you stop someone from shooting people?" 

And there, right there, was the utter insanity of the pro-gun lobby laid bare. They genuinely have no idea how you stop someone shooting people unless everyone else has a gun too. 

It's like the wild west has been beamed into modern-day America. And it's as terrifying as it's stupid. . . .

Of course, Piers makes multiple mistakes on the data.  When he wrote this book or did the show, the latest FBI UCR data was for 2011.  In that year, there were 8,653 firearm murders, not 12,000.  One could say that over the last four years that it has bounced around 9,000 firearm murders.  He also gets the number of gun murders wrong in the Britain, which was 73 in 2011 (including Scotland, England and Wales) and, unlike the US, they only count firearm murders where a conviction occurred.  Obviously there is still a big difference, but my response would still be that Britain's murder rate was even lower prior to their gun laws.  That the murder rate or gun murder rate has been very low in Britain before they had any gun control laws, but Piers would never deal with this issue.  Of course the substance here is more important than the specific facts (though it does show that Piers has a desire to embellish), but he never deals with the arguments of those on the other side.

The complete transcript of the conversation that Piers and I had is available here.

MORGAN: You just tried to make out, it's just an average old gun. He fired over 100 rounds and he killed 20 children. Twenty Children between five and 10. At what point do you gun lobby guys say, we get it? It's time for change?  

LOTT: Right, it is time.  

MORGAN: Time to do what?  

LOTT: To get rid of some of these gun laws that cause --  

MORGAN: To get rid of the gun laws?  

LOTT: Look at what has happened, all these attacks this year have occurred where guns are banned. Look at the Aurora movie theater shooting.  

MORGAN: What the hell has that got to do with it? Seriously? What has that got to do with it?  

LOTT: You never let me explain. Can I say something?  

MORGAN: -- gun-free zone.  

LOTT: Look at the movie theater one, for example. There were seven movie theaters showing the movie "Batman" movie within a 20 minute drive of where the killer lived. Only one of those banned guns. He didn't go to the movie theater closest to his home. He didn't go to the movie theater with the largest screen. He went to the one movie theater that banned guns. Now if you look at bans generally, you can't point to a place, Chicago, D.C., where we ban guns -- murder rates and violent crimes went up afterwards. In the U.K. and Jamaica, Ireland, island nations that have banned guns -- you can't find a place where murder rates have actually gone down. They have gone up usually by large amounts.

Doesn't Piers Morgan want a review of his forthcoming book? What are you worried about Piers?

By the way, if people read my original twitter post, I wasn't demanding that he send it to me for free.  I was only asking that he "pls send me a copy, I would be happy to review it."

UPDATE: Erik Wemple, "CNN’s Piers Morgan disses potential book reviewer"

Authors know not to turn down publicity for their books. Reviews, blog posts, chats, word of mouth — all of it can help propel your opus up those topseller lists. Never turn down an opportunity. 

Unless, perhaps, you’re a CNN personality crusading for tougher gun laws and the fellow offering a review is a frequent on-air opponent. Such was the scenario that unfolded on Twitter today, with that CNN personality being, of course, Piers Morgan and that on-air opponent being John Lott, author of “More Guns, Less Crime.” . . .  

Perhaps this is a branding thing for Morgan. Bill O’Reilly has claimed the maverick brand; Rachel Maddow the brainy brand; Sean Hannity the ideological purity brand; Ed Schultz the blowhard brand; and so on. That leaves the nasty brand wide open.

UPDATE: February 24th, 2014, from part of Erik Wemple's column on Piers losing his show.

My appearance with Ben Ferguson on Piers Morgan, discussing DC Navy Yard Shooting, notes on some mistakes by Piers

In this discussion Piers claims that an AR-15 rifle was obtained from a gun store in Virginia.  Well, it turns out that he may be wrong.  From NBC Washington:

Sources told News4 that surveillance footage showed that he began his attack with a shotgun, but was found with a 9mm pistol and an AR-15 assault rifle.
NBC News correspondent Pete Williams is reporting Alexis purchased a shotgun in Lorton, Va. during the past week or so.
The suspected gunman appeared to have seized firearms from two of his victims as he moved through the building along the Anacostia River in southeast Washington, where 3,000 Navy employees go to work each day, many of them carrying authorized firearms.
Next to Alexis's body was an ID of a man who used to work at the Navy Yard. Some investigators believe the suspected gunman used that ID to enter the area, which is accessible only through guarded gates, but he may also have shot his way in, Williams reported. . . .

As to the problems with the Mother Jones "study" that Piers was alluding to please see this link available here.

As to Piers' claim that I support armed guards in schools and other places.  From a piece that I wrote at Fox News:

The alternative of hiring uniformed armed guards is not only costly, with one armed guard costing more than the cost of training and equipping over 20 employees, but also relatively ineffective as they are usually the first victims shot (e.g., see here and here). . . .

UPDATE:  Even CNN is not reporting that Piers' categorical statement that an AR-15 rifle was obtained from a store in Virginia is wrong.

It has been called the most popular rifle in America, and it briefly returned to the spotlight after Monday's shooting at the Navy Yard: the AR-15.  

A U.S. law enforcement official said Monday that gunman Aaron Alexis unleashed a barrage of bullets using an AR-15, a rifle and a semi-automatic handgun. Authorities believed the AR-15 was used for most of the shooting, the official said. The news prompted Sen. Dianne Feinstein, one of the strongest proponents of a ban on assault weapons like the AR-15, to issue a statement the same day asking, "When will enough be enough?"  

However, federal law enforcement sources told CNN Tuesday that authorities have recovered three weapons from the scene of the mass shooting, including one -- a shotgun -- that investigators believe Alexis brought in to the compound. The other two weapons, which sources say were handguns, may have been taken from guards at the Navy complex. . . .

Final note: It is interesting to do these shows on remote sometimes.  In this case there was apparently an over 2 second delay between when Piers would say something and I would hear it and presumably the reverse was also true.  Apparently, it takes some time for the signal to go up to the satellite and come back down.

Some commentary on our discussion.
From Mediaite.
From Politico.
From the Washington Post.
From the Huffington Post UK.
From MediaBistro.
From BizPac.

A couple of notes on Piers Morgan's show from Monday night

"305 post conviction since 1989 have been exonerated."  These exonerations also involved many crimes that occurred long before 1989.  Even just since 1989 there have been over 32 million violent crimes committed between 1989 and 2011.  I could look up the number of people convicted over that period of time, but even if it is about six or seven million, the exoneration rate is so trivial the only conclusion is that the legal system has obviously been working very well.  It is probably lower than 0.005%.  Suppose that only a quarter of those cases have DNA evidence available.  The exoneration rate is still no higher than 0.02%.  To put it differently, at least over 99.98% of the violent criminals were guilty.  That is not perfect, but it is hard to think of a system that has that low of an error rate.

The saving money claim from eliminating the death penalty is completely specious.  One thing that Ms. Clifton didn't include in her numbers is that there are plea bargains that occur because prosecutors have the death penalty as a potential threat.  If someone is obviously guilty of a murder and he is going to get life in prison either way, the criminal is going to trial.  It gets him out of prison for a week or two and he gets something different to do.  Murder trials, even when the penalty involves life in prison, are extremely costly.

On the gun issue, I would have said: the murder rates vary across countries for lots of reasons, but one thing is clear: gun bans cause murder rates to rise.  They still might be lower than the US, but they were even lower before they had those gun control laws.

The complete video of my appearance on Piers Morgan's CNN show last night

The interview that went from about 9:12 to 9:30 PM ET started off reasonably enough, but it quickly devolved into a mess.  The problems started when Piers began realizing that he was losing the debate.  At that point he started raising his voice and talking over me.

Erik Wemple at the Washington Post has a discussion of the appearance that starts this way:

CNN last night showed a sense of humor as Piers Morgan battled with gun-rights proponent John Lott (“More Guns, Less Crime“) on the fine points of mass shootings and their prevention. A chyron hit the screen repeating a question that Lott had posed: 

“Lott: Why am I on?” . . .  

Morgan’s high point came at the very end of the segment, when he was bidding adieu to Lott:

MORGAN: Mr. Lott, thank you for joining me again. I look forward to talking to you again about this. As you know, I disagree with you passionately. But I respect your right to have your opinion.

Bolded text added to highlight Morgan’s brilliant linguistic precision. Lott is free to have his opinion, just not express it on his show.

The Blaze has a discussion available here, News Busters available here, and the Washington Times available here. 

CNN host Piers Morgan on Wednesday repeatedly talked over guest John Lott Jr., who was trying to present and correct several myths and misstatements about gun facts, ultimately telling him: “I’m going to keep talking so I suggest you keep quiet.” . . . 

Celia Bigelow with American Majority Action explains the benefit of an AR-15 for self-defense to Piers Morgan

MORGAN: Explain to me why you believe you need an AR-15 style assault rifle. 

CELIA BIGELOW, DIR. OF CAMPUS ACTION, AMERICAN MAJORITY ACTION: Well, I personally bought one for self defense. One, they're lightweight. They're quite accurate. I can shoot them much more accurately than a handgun or a shotgun.
And three, these -- I'm going to pull a David Gregory right here and I can hold up my 30-round magazine right here, because it's actually legal in Virginia. But I want a gun that can hold a lot of ammo because if I'm faced with an intruder or multiple intruders that come into my home, I want to make sure I have enough ammo to get the job done, especially if they're armed.
So I want -- they essentially serve as an insurance mechanism to make sure that I have enough rounds, that if multiple intruders come in and they're armed, I don't have to take the time to reload.

The interview provides an example of someone using an AR-15 for self-defense.  Here is another case that just occurred.

This week, two students at the Rochester Institute of Technology in upstate New York used an “assault rifle” that may soon be banned by law to frighten away armed burglars who had broken into their home.
Local station ABC 13 reports that the students, Christopher Boise and Raymond (no last name given) were awakened in the wee hours Tuesday morning to noises coming from the basement.
Boise got up to investigate and found two men, one with a gun pointed at him, at the bottom of the stairs in the lower level of his apartment.
Hearing Boise’s cry of alarm, Raymond instinctively went for his AR-15 rifle, which he kept legally for self-defense.
When the men came to Raymond’s door, they saw the barrel of his gun at the ready and fled immediately.
“Nothing was taken and no shots were fired,” the station reports.
Police officials confirmed that the gun was legal and Raymond had acted rightly in protecting his property. . . . 

Suzanna Hupp on Piers Morgan

Just as an aside, there are two OECD countries that have higher murder rates than the US does.  I would also not have conceded that we have more guns per capita than other countries.  Finally, it is wrong to think of there being some representative US murder rate.  78 percent of US counties have zero murders in any given year.

Piers' claims about Australia are simply false.

CNN Officially decides to report Opinion as News

Personally, to me it isn't a question of having an opinion, that doesn't bother me.  What bothers me is the lack of civility and dishonest behavior.

CNN president Jeff Zucker told CNN New York staff today that he supported Piers Morgan's decision to speak in favor of gun control, sources at the network tell POLITICO. 

During a town-hall meeting with staff, Zucker was asked about CNN expressing opinion, something it has traditionally tried to avoid. Zucker said he was in favor of it where it was appropriate, citing Morgan's stance on gun control as one example, sources said. . . .

Ben Swann on Piers Morgan’s homicide statistics

This is a well done take and it uses similar information to what I have used previously (see for example here).
Two notes:
1) The Small Arms Survey data that he refers to that purportedly measures gun ownership rates is highly dubious.  The organization that put them together is a gun control organization and they want to make it look like there is more murder in high gun ownership countries.
2) I need to point out that my work has tried to argue that cross-sectional analysis is rarely very useful (MGLC, chp. 2 and The Bias Against Guns, chp. 5).  Still that is something that most people do.

Responding to Piers Morgan's interview with Alex Jones

After Piers Morgan contacted Dylan Byers over at Politico today about his interview with Alex Jones, I just could not resist also emailing Byers.  Here is what Byers reported on my exchange with him.  For Piers discussion with Byers see:

CNN host Piers Morgan just called to discuss his interview last night with Alex Jones, the conservative radio host and gun advocate who went on a tirade against Morgan, gun control legislation, and a litany of government conspiracies.
"He was the best advertisement for gun control you could wish for," Morgan told POLITICO.
"That kind of vitriol, hatred, and zealotry is really quite scary. I didn't feel threatened by him, but I'm concerned that someone like him has that level of influence," Morgan said. "There's got to be a level of discourse that can rise above what happened last night. It was undignified, unedifying." . . .

Is Piers Morgan really serious about saying that someone else's behavior is "undignified, unedifying"? I tweeted the same point last night, but Piers has been guilty of the exact same behavior. 

Meanwhile, CNN is considering moving Piers out of the coveted 9 PM time slot.