Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Yamato

Piers Morgan Gets Angry and Throws His Notes

58 posts in this topic

Last night Piers was talking about the penetration of AR-15 rounds as the reason to ban them. With that ridiculous standard, we'd ban all rifles period, and most rifles before AR-15s. But he's throwing whatever crap on the wall he can to make his doddering little point that "AR-15s need to be banned." and "AR-15 rifles make America an Utter Wild West Hell".

I still won't sign the petition to deport him because I don't believe in government force control on principle, but I do want this human piece of anti-American garbage off the air. And firing him is a voluntary decision made by his employer. Maybe his employer is who needs to be compelled i.e. feel the heat.

Yes but signing a petition should be because the people want it not the gov,and as our employees they should at least take it seriously which they dont lol.I wont sign it for that very reason,they do not give a damn what we think as long as their message is being carried by the msm.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea right. Piers is the only going for them ATM. If you want him off the air everyone hold stop talking about him

Not sure how that could possibly get him off the air. Penning our complaints (especially at CNN dot com) sounds more appropriate than letting him continue his unconstitutional blather unchallenged.

Yes but signing a petition should be because the people want it not the gov,and as our employees they should at least take it seriously which they dont lol.I wont sign it for that very reason,they do not give a damn what we think as long as their message is being carried by the msm.

If the gov doesn't give a damn what we think then what is identifying ourselves to the government on a petition going to do for us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how that could possibly get him off the air. Penning our complaints (especially at CNN dot com) sounds more appropriate than letting him continue his unconstitutional blather unchallenged.

Because dude, it's CNN. Any complaints about him will be viewed as by right wing extremist therefore CNN views that as doing their job. Also why should they care for complaints when he is currently probably pulling the best ratings for them with thanks in part from people opposing their views and tuning in to see what he'll say next. Not me though, I'll catch clips on the net.

You speak as if the media has integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because dude, it's CNN. Any complaints about him will be viewed as by right wing extremist therefore CNN views that as doing their job. Also why should they care for complaints when he is currently probably pulling the best ratings for them with thanks in part from people opposing their views and tuning in to see what he'll say next. Not me though, I'll catch clips on the net.

You speak as if the media has integrity.

If you're right, and his opinions reflect the opinions of his employer, then they'll just replace him with someone else in kind when his ratings dip and nothing will improve anyway. So his ratings wouldn't make the difference one way or the other. It's too late to put our heads in the sand. CNN notwithstanding, people are influenced by the garbage they watch on TV. Allowing that to happen at the time and place it does is infinitely more costly to our country than my personal annoyance with Piers Morgan. I want him to lose the debate when and where he's waging it, with the end result of that being that he shuts up about it when his favorite new ratings-booster dries up.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that is why CNN have Piers, because he is that annoying, but what he does, boosts their ratings... People from all over the country will be mad at Piers, but they still tune in, and that's exactly what CNN need, getting Piers to debate with people who also have strong opinions. People don't show much interest in boring debates, they do however stop and tune into what can get people fired up...CNN know exactly how to boost their ratings, the more tune in, the better ..

PS...Piers Morgan is still annoying... lol

Edited by Beckys_Mom
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're right, and his opinions reflect the opinions of his employer, then they'll just replace him with someone else in kind when his ratings dip and nothing will improve anyway. So his ratings wouldn't make the difference one way or the other. It's too late to put our heads in the sand. CNN notwithstanding, people are influenced by the garbage they watch on TV. Allowing that to happen at the time and place it does is infinitely more costly to our country than my personal annoyance with Piers Morgan. I want him to lose the debate when and where he's waging it, with the end result of that being that he shuts up about it when his favorite new ratings-booster dries up.

Good points. It's kind of a catch-22 if you don't speak up. Nonsense must be countered with reason.

I think that is why CNN have Piers, because he is that annoying, but what he does, boosts their ratings... People from all over the country will be mad at Piers, but they still tune in, and that's exactly what CNN need, getting Piers to debate with people who also have strong opinions. People don't show much interest in boring debates, they do however stop and tune into what can get people fired up...CNN know exactly how to boost their ratings, the more tune in, the better ..

PS...Piers Morgan is still annoying... lol

Well they don't exactly know. Their ratings overall are abysmal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that is why CNN have Piers, because he is that annoying, but what he does, boosts their ratings... People from all over the country will be mad at Piers, but they still tune in, and that's exactly what CNN need, getting Piers to debate with people who also have strong opinions. People don't show much interest in boring debates, they do however stop and tune into what can get people fired up...CNN know exactly how to boost their ratings, the more tune in, the better ..

PS...Piers Morgan is still annoying... lol

Exactly! The same as what FOX news does...so I hear.

I wouldn't have any idea what any of them were doing if it wasn't on UM. :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they don't exactly know. Their ratings overall are abysmal.

In the US yeah, CNN hasn't figured out how to get good ratings in many years. Internationally they do alright.

Fox News Channel proves in my mind how collectively stupid we are as a country, to have news that misinformed and politically biased and have to watch it make such a meteoric rise to the top of the cable news network on its "Fair and Balanced" banner. Fox News grew up feeding its viewers 150,000 hours of Chandra Levy and Gary Condit nonsense and still nobody could figure out what a wasteful time-suck that was? If people don't have anything better to do in their leisure time but watch politically charged news on TV, I feel sorry for them. I also know they're not the ones that are going to take meaningful action to change the nation one way or the other. On the contrary, they're going to sit right where they are and keep it just the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do love how his argument is why does a citizen NEED a hundred round magazine. Umm... why does someone NEED to eat a banana in the morning or why does someone NEED to have a blue car instead of a white one. Why does anyone NEED any damned thing on Earth besides food, water, and air?

He's trying to shift the burden of the argument to the people who just want us to have freedoms. That's not the way it works in the US because we're assumed to have the right to do anything that isn't specifically prohibited. He's the one who wants to take away someone's freedoms, it's on him to justify that the lower chances of someone being hurt by the activity (in this case, people having a hundred round magazine instead of a pocketful of smaller ones) is of more value to society than the freedom he wants to take. The more guns there are, the more people will be injured by guns. There's no disputing that. This applies to ANYTHING that can hurt someone. For example, the more cleaning products people have under their sinks, the more kids and pets will get poisoned.

The bottom line IMO is that those who built this country felt that having a well armed populace was a boon to society, that it discouraged the government from abusing them and them from abusing each other. Again, my opinion, but I think trying to take the rights of millions who have never abused them because of a handful who have is ridiculous. The handful are criminals. In this clip Morgan keeps saying these were law abiding citizens who slaughtered people. They were criminals who decided to slaughter people. Maybe the focus should be on why they chose to slaughter people. Maybe the focus should be on how to identify slaughterprone people. I definitely don't think the focus should be on HOW these particular criminals chose to slaughter people.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Morgan is trying to hold on to his job. There's been quite the shake-up at CNN, and Morgan is not a ratings giant, being a complete idiot and all, therefore he stiffens his upper lip, polishes his 'I Heart Tyranny' button and let's 'er rip, hoping to attract ratings..

In regards to gun control...Piers should spend some extended time in one of the southern border towns. As a recent transplant to Arizona, I've heard stories about what the ranchers have to put up with, from border crossers and cartels, and I would not live on one of those ranches without a high power weapon that fires beaucoup bullets.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you guys suffer this eejit?

He's not at home in the UK cos we all know he' s a d??khead.

A darn good question!!

We could learn something from the Simpsons, remember "Attack of the 50 ft eyesores"?

Hey, Springfield! Are you suffering from the heartbreak of ... monster-itis? Then take a tip from Mr. Paul Anka!Paul Anka: [singing and playing electronic keyboard]To stop those monsters, one-two-three,Here's a fresh new way that's trouble-free,It's got Paul Anka's guarantee ... [winks]Lisa:Guarantee void in Tennessee.Paul Anka and Lisa:Just don't look! Just don't look! [repeat several times]

Just change "monster-itis / monster" to "Peirce Morgan-itis / Peirce Morgan"

If we ignore him, he might go away, maybe set up shop in China.

simsg669b.wav

Edited by Lava_Lady
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me exactly why they need an assault rifle within arms reach at all times?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask us that when you are asleep to wake up to a window breaking and the noise of someone downstairs. You can't quite reach a phone and you have a wife and daughter to worry about....that six shooter you keep? What if you can't hit the assailant in six shots? You think he/she will say "oh ok....I'll wait until you reload then we can try again." While trying to cause your family harm? I fully support the 2nd amendment. We were given the right to bear and keep arms against any threat close or foreign.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me exactly why they need an assault rifle within arms reach at all times?

Makes them "safer" and keeps away the boogey man... it is just of little use if you really need a gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me exactly why they need an assault rifle within arms reach at all times?

Well since assault rifles are only military issue one could suggest multiple reasons to keep an assault rifle within reach at all times. But you are talking about the oh so scary AR-15 I'm sure. Who said anything about needs? In America you can obtain things you don't need and be excessive about it if you like. It's pretty simple really. America isn't about to each according to his needs. I don't need most of the things I have. I have them because I want them and I can. Maybe somebody does need a rifle though. Needs are subjective to each US citizen and are not to be determined by anyone except the individual.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes them "safer" and keeps away the boogey man... it is just of little use if you really need a gun.

Them scary statists? I thought so.

Well since assault rifles are only military issue....

Woah right there matey. Assault rifles are only military issue? Last I checked, one could by a full auto assault rifle from a gun store with the right paper work and background checks. Of course, that's if you do so through "official" channels.

America isn't about to each according to his needs.

Didn't take long for the insinuation that I'm some sort of communist to come about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woah right there matey. Assault rifles are only military issue? Last I checked, one could by a full auto assault rifle from a gun store with the right paper work and background checks. Of course, that's if you do so through "official" channels.

Didn't take long for the insinuation that I'm some sort of communist to come about.

Ok, they're official military issue, hard to obtain, incredibly expensive to use consuming hundreds or thousands of dollars worth of ammo for mere moments of use and mostly in the hands of collectors, ex-military and well to do folks. Did you know that or are you still talking about AR-15's? If you're confused please google the difference.

Well I wasn't insinuating that. Was just making a point. Now I get the feeling you were expecting that. This isn't about needs. Would you question the needs of fast cars which are statistically equal or worse than the dangers of guns? We just shouldn't have to keep explaining ourselves for doing things we are allowed to do.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone just needs to slap this guy.

Back to the UK where he can stand trial for the phone hacking scandal. If CNN wants ratings, they should fire Morgan and hire Jones, ratings would be through the roof.

Edited by WoIverine
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, they're official military issue, hard to obtain, incredibly expensive to use consuming hundreds or thousands of dollars worth of ammo for mere moments of use and mostly in the hands of collectors, ex-military and well to do folks. Did you know that or are you still talking about AR-15's? If you're confused please google the difference.

I know what an AR-15 is. But you can't tell me that weapons such as a Bushmaster ACR or AK-47, isn't an assault rifle "because it's not military issue"? And how can they be hard to obtain when you can buy them directly from the manufacturer through approved gun stores after filling out the right paperwork? And that's for full auto assault rifles also. And that's before we get to informal trades with no papers or background checks or anything at all?

Well I wasn't insinuating that. Was just making a point. Now I get the feeling you were expecting that. This isn't about needs. Would you question the needs of fast cars which are statistically equal or worse than the dangers of guns? We just shouldn't have to keep explaining ourselves for doing things we are allowed to do.

Difference being, there are more guns in the US than there are cars that can do 200 mph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they don't exactly know. Their ratings overall are abysmal.

I read that from Piers Morgan took over from Larry King, the ratings were in fact much lower ( really low, hit it's lowest in over 21 years ) ... I then caught this for 2013 ..

In primetime, “Piers Morgan Tonight” is up +10% in Total Viewers but down slightly, -2%, among adults 25-54. The 8pmET edition of “Anderson Cooper 360″ is up slightly compared to last year, +5% in Total Viewers and +3% in the demo, but the 10pmET re-air of the program is down -20% and -27%, respectively http://www.mediabist...he-year_b164729

Simon Cowell is known to inject as much annoyance as possible to boost ratings for The X Faxtor and Britain / America's got talent ( Shows that I now can no longer stand.)... He loves to hear of bad press, he says - "There is no such things as bad press, it's all good publicity" .. He too hired people like Piers Morgan for those type of shows..I think it is obvious why..The more annoying the better including the annoying contestants.. Big Brother I detest that show, I will never understand why people tune in to watch it..

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what an AR-15 is. But you can't tell me that weapons such as a Bushmaster ACR or AK-47, isn't an assault rifle "because it's not military issue"? And how can they be hard to obtain when you can buy them directly from the manufacturer through approved gun stores after filling out the right paperwork? And that's for full auto assault rifles also. And that's before we get to informal trades with no papers or background checks or anything at all?

Difference being, there are more guns in the US than there are cars that can do 200 mph.

Maybe someone else can explain better. Not just anyone can go and buy a machine gun. They really aren't an issue here and the ones that are an issue are illegal anyways. How do you propose to stop criminal activity? Concern yourself with that and not the rights and abilities of American citizens and wether or not we need what we can have.

Uhm... A car needs to go 200 for you to consider it fast? You must race for a living. There are less cars and more negative car statistics compared to gun stats. Once again it sounds like you want to put a limit on what you deem acceptable such as the amount of guns we can have. Again,this is not to each according to his needs. This is to each according to what he feels like pursuing even if it's a thousand of something.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe someone else can explain better. Not just anyone can go and buy a machine gun. They really aren't an issue here and the ones that are an issue are illegal anyways. How do you propose to stop criminal activity? Concern yourself with that and not the rights and abilities of American citizens and wether or not we need what we can have.

Uhm... A car needs to go 200 for you to consider it fast? You must race for a living. There are less cars and more negative car statistics compared to gun stats. Once again it sounds like you want to put a limit on what you deem acceptable such as the amount of guns we can have. Again,this is not to each according to his needs. This is to each according to what he feels like pursuing even if it's a thousand of something.

Criminal activity is stopped, by the most part, by not making it economically viable. And if you mean gun criminality,that would be by drying out the grey and black market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They really aren't an issue here and the ones that are an issue are illegal anyways. How do you propose to stop criminal activity?

By having gun stores take in guns that people don't want anymore. That way, a licenced gun seller can resell the gun onto someone and go through the same procedures as if they were selling a new gun to someone.l

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By having gun stores take in guns that people don't want anymore. That way, a licenced gun seller can resell the gun onto someone and go through the same procedures as if they were selling a new gun to someone.l

That's already something people can do. It's a good thing bit it doesn't solve the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after losing yet another gun control debate.

It makes me sick!" he exclaims as he crumples up his interview notes and throws them across his desk in the direction of his guest Scottie Hughes.

[media=]

[/media]

Still, a snippy Piers Morgan, desperately nursing his flagging ratings on his prime time show, battles on in his bizarre nearly-possessed quest to infringe on America's right to bear arms:

“The best thing about Alex Jones is that 8 million people watched that video on YouTube. I would suggest it’s the smartest booking we’ve ever made. The attention that interview got exploded this issue back onto the agenda for the entire week leading up to what Obama did today.”

“The President of the United States espoused exactly what I’ve been saying for the last five weeks (referring to Obama's ban on "assault" rifles). No one can tell me we haven’t had an influence.”

Piers Morgan hates AR-15s and he'll seemingly stop at nothing to remove them from all homes in the United States.

piers-morgan.jpg

Can we just start ignoring this douche hat? His show sucks and has been in freefall since he took it over from Larry King.

He's just latched onto this gun control thing because he thinks it might save his job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.