FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Alex Jones and Piers Morgan

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Has anyone seen this "debate"?

Jones is such a fucking tool!

http://metro.co.uk/2013/01/08/pro-gun-advocate-alex-jones-rants-at-piers-morgan-in-studio-debate-3342681/

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

afro.. sorry its all i can think of lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well Alex jones is sort of right, I do follow his shows , but you should see who piers Morgan mixes with then you mite understand what Alex jones is going on about, but I do agree there should be some sort of control, also piers Morgan has been seen visiting the infamous lodge which could indicate some truth to what Alex jones is saying

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"afro.. sorry its all i can think of lol "

I swear if I ever meet you you're leaving with a red bottom

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"afro.. sorry its all i can think of lol

I swear if I ever meet you you're leaving with a red bottom "

promises promises

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Alex Jones is a loud, brash man who thinks if he shouts enough and insults enough, people will listen. He's trying to blame medication and video games for all US gun crime. Morgan is right about one thing, and I hasten to add, he isn't my favourite person - why does any individual need to own a semi-automatic weapon, and why on earth does Alex Jones feel the need to own 50 weapons, I can only assume he has ammunition for each one! After seeing his outburst, I wouldn't trust him with a stick, let alone a gun!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Well Alex jones is sort of right, I do follow his shows , but you should see who piers Morgan mixes with then you mite understand what Alex jones is going on about, but I do agree there should be some sort of control, also piers Morgan has been seen visiting the infamous lodge which could indicate some truth to what Alex jones is saying "

my mate has been watching Jones' YouTube shows while I've been round and I just couldn't help but laugh at what he was spewing out of his noise hole. He incites fear in his listeners.

"Infamous lodge"?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"afro.. sorry its all i can think of lol

I swear if I ever meet you you're leaving with a red bottom

promises promises "

Oh I like to keep mine.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Has anyone seen this "debate"?

Jones is such a fucking tool!

http://metro.co.uk/2013/01/08/pro-gun-advocate-alex-jones-rants-at-piers-morgan-in-studio-debate-3342681/"

They both have points and both are fools and are far better on the other side of the pond than this side.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Piers Morgan shouldn't be allowed to open his mouth. He's ignorant to the facts involved and his opinion is ill-informed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Piers Morgan shouldn't be allowed to open his mouth. He's ignorant to the facts involved and his opinion is ill-informed."

Yet Jones is allowed to spit venomous shite?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I never said that. But he's far better informed about the subject matter than Piers Morgan is.

Piers just thinks he's right, when infact he's miles off base with a lot of his facts regarding firearms and the US 2nd amendment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aturasqCouple
over a year ago

Hertfordshire

I am lost what is the "infamous lodge" ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

well i think none of you actually listen to alex jones but only hear shouting from him,if you are going to comment on him and the supposed shite which he says then please get your facts right.

90% of what alex jones says on his radio shows is correct and happening, the usa government have given and giving the TSA more powers to control the population,and this means take away the populations guns and other rights under there constitution, which means citizens without guns makes things easier, but this is just one thing going on and as i said in earlier post why would piers morgan been seen meeting at the lodge which he denied.

there is plenty more but please listen to what alex jones says and check the facts its all on the web on official sites

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *r mrs pCouple
over a year ago

taunton


"I am lost what is the "infamous lodge" ?"

Swingers club ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I am lost what is the "infamous lodge" ?"

sorry Bohemian Grove is the lodge

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago

carrbrook stalybridge

thank god thought this was gonna be some sort of one show kinky video but its the wrong alex jones

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I never said that. But he's far better informed about the subject matter than Piers Morgan is.

Piers just thinks he's right, when infact he's miles off base with a lot of his facts regarding firearms and the US 2nd amendment."

He's a Brit in America and he's on tv.

He'll be happy his name's being tweeted and googled no doubt.

Thing is he's kinda dug himself into a hole as he'll probably not work in the US after this.

I just think of how Britain reacted after Dunblaine. People were happy to hand over their guns. The yanks seem to cling to their constitution quite a lot.

Personally I think that only shotguns and pistols and a hunting rifle should be allowed in homes. Who needs a .50 cal bolt action rifle? Nobody.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I never said that. But he's far better informed about the subject matter than Piers Morgan is.

Piers just thinks he's right, when infact he's miles off base with a lot of his facts regarding firearms and the US 2nd amendment.

He's a Brit in America and he's on tv.

He'll be happy his name's being tweeted and googled no doubt.

Thing is he's kinda dug himself into a hole as he'll probably not work in the US after this.

I just think of how Britain reacted after Dunblaine. People were happy to hand over their guns. The yanks seem to cling to their constitution quite a lot.

Personally I think that only shotguns and pistols and a hunting rifle should be allowed in homes. Who needs a .50 cal bolt action rifle? Nobody."

For long range, big game hunting (bears for instance) a .50 cal is perfectly acceptable.

I hunt regularly, probably 69% of the meat I eat is shot and butchered by me. I like long range shooting, mainly because its more sporting and have shot deer in excess of 1200 metres. My rifle of choice for this is the Accuracy International AX-.338. A .338 calibre bolt action rifle with a 5 round magazine. I also own a .223 semi automatic hunting rifle and 2 shotguns (a 410 and a 12 bore).

None of these weapons are classes as assault rifles yet the .223 operates in exactly the same manner as he weapons Piers Morgan claims to be assault rifles, the only difference is the way it looks (and magazine capacity under British law).

The .338 is the exact rifle that a British sniper used to make the world's longest sniper shot in afganistan (just over 1.5 miles), yet it just looks like a bolt action rifle.

In light of Dunblane and the banning of cartridge fed handguns, it was easy. Handguns weren't common or protected by British law and they were VERY tightly regulated and easily checked. So it was an easy job for the police to get them off the streets.

The US though, is completely different. There are a lot (billions) of guns legally owned and used appropriately. There are, however more illegally owned firearms. If the police collected all the legal weapons, the public would be defenseless and the criminal element would control the streets.

Did you know that under Clinton, when certain types of gun were banned, crime involving firearms increased (sounds obvious I spose, but I mean car jackings, muggings, drive by's and gang related, you get the picture). Once those restrictions were allowed to expire under Bush, violent gun crime dropped significantly because the law abiding public were able to protect themselves and it offered a deterrent.

There's a point in there somewhere, I think...lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I actually mean't 40% of the meat I eat. I have 69 on the brain!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And one more thing, just for clarification.

An assault rifle, by definition is a fully automatic rifle used by armed forces (fully automatic meaning multiple shots fired with one squeeze of the trigger, a machine gun) regardless of calibre. All of which are illegal to own in the US to average citizens, although there are some private owners granted licence to own them (gunsmiths and range owners for example)

Semi-automatic is a single shot fired by a single squeeze of the trigger, regardless of calibre, looks or whether its gas operated or blowback operated.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ixson-BallsMan
over a year ago

Blackpool


"

Did you know that under Clinton, when certain types of gun were banned, crime involving firearms increased (sounds obvious I spose, but I mean car jackings, muggings, drive by's and gang related, you get the picture). Once those restrictions were allowed to expire under Bush, violent gun crime dropped significantly because the law abiding public were able to protect themselves and it offered a deterrent.

"

He actually stated this in the interview, and in my opinion made some interesting and intelligent comments...but he let himself down by coming across as a belligerent and intimidating (not heard his shows only this interview).

He made the comment that the USA's problems are more about a dysfunctional society, and greed of the elite few, this may be backed up by (i'm not sure where I heard it) that Canada has more guns per populous than the USA but very little gun crime?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In one corner you have a smart arse inbred yank talking shite in the other a smart arsed brit in my view talking bit of sense in that usa needs gun control anyone who cannot see that beats me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Chris Rock made a good point. Even though I'm not really a big fan.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=OuX-nFmL0II&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DOuX-nFmL0II&gl=GB

If that doesn't work (I'm on my phone) the look for Chris Rock gun control

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs

[Removed by poster at 09/01/13 00:40:27]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs

I don't always agree with Piers but some really need to know what is being asked for before spouting off.

He doesn't have an argument with the 2nd amendment, although some Americans have bastardised it for their own personal preferences.

Amendments have been added before for example prohibition and slavery to name 2.

He is asking for the banning of Assault rifles with high capacity magazines. Greater control/licensing regarding the ease of sale of these weapons and others; especially at gun fairs!

And those with mental impairments to be cared for properly.

Freedom of speech is enshrined and don't forget it..

So 105k have called for his deportation, seems 300+mil haven't!

Also see:

Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal backed banning assault weapons on Tuesday, saying guns like the M4 and M16 belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets.

Way to many Americans believe in this end of days, mass home invasion and the government taking control and its all scaremongering by the NRA and its cronies.

Remember the guns used at Sandy were owned by a responsible person.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs


"I never said that. But he's far better informed about the subject matter than Piers Morgan is.

Piers just thinks he's right, when infact he's miles off base with a lot of his facts regarding firearms and the US 2nd amendment.

He's a Brit in America and he's on tv.

He'll be happy his name's being tweeted and googled no doubt.

Thing is he's kinda dug himself into a hole as he'll probably not work in the US after this.

I just think of how Britain reacted after Dunblaine. People were happy to hand over their guns. The yanks seem to cling to their constitution quite a lot.

Personally I think that only shotguns and pistols and a hunting rifle should be allowed in homes. Who needs a .50 cal bolt action rifle? Nobody.

For long range, big game hunting (bears for instance) a .50 cal is perfectly acceptable.

I hunt regularly, probably 69% of the meat I eat is shot and butchered by me. I like long range shooting, mainly because its more sporting and have shot deer in excess of 1200 metres. My rifle of choice for this is the Accuracy International AX-.338. A .338 calibre bolt action rifle with a 5 round magazine. I also own a .223 semi automatic hunting rifle and 2 shotguns (a 410 and a 12 bore).

None of these weapons are classes as assault rifles yet the .223 operates in exactly the same manner as he weapons Piers Morgan claims to be assault rifles, the only difference is the way it looks (and magazine capacity under British law).

The .338 is the exact rifle that a British sniper used to make the world's longest sniper shot in afganistan (just over 1.5 miles), yet it just looks like a bolt action rifle.

In light of Dunblane and the banning of cartridge fed handguns, it was easy. Handguns weren't common or protected by British law and they were VERY tightly regulated and easily checked. So it was an easy job for the police to get them off the streets.

The US though, is completely different. There are a lot (billions) of guns legally owned and used appropriately. There are, however more illegally owned firearms. If the police collected all the legal weapons, the public would be defenseless and the criminal element would control the streets.

Did you know that under Clinton, when certain types of gun were banned, crime involving firearms increased (sounds obvious I spose, but I mean car jackings, muggings, drive by's and gang related, you get the picture). Once those restrictions were allowed to expire under Bush, violent gun crime dropped significantly because the law abiding public were able to protect themselves and it offered a deterrent.

There's a point in there somewhere, I think...lol"

America has the highest number of gun related shootings/crime in the civilised western world! More guns = more gun crime! Not less!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xodussxMan
over a year ago

sheffield

There is another petition for the yankees to keep Pierce over there as we dont want him back here

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well amazes me you have the cry for gun control but one of the us agencies got caught selling guns to Mexican drug gangs, don't see piers asking about this I wonder why

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I never said that. But he's far better informed about the subject matter than Piers Morgan is.

Piers just thinks he's right, when infact he's miles off base with a lot of his facts regarding firearms and the US 2nd amendment.

He's a Brit in America and he's on tv.

He'll be happy his name's being tweeted and googled no doubt.

Thing is he's kinda dug himself into a hole as he'll probably not work in the US after this.

I just think of how Britain reacted after Dunblaine. People were happy to hand over their guns. The yanks seem to cling to their constitution quite a lot.

Personally I think that only shotguns and pistols and a hunting rifle should be allowed in homes. Who needs a .50 cal bolt action rifle? Nobody.

For long range, big game hunting (bears for instance) a .50 cal is perfectly acceptable.

I hunt regularly, probably 69% of the meat I eat is shot and butchered by me. I like long range shooting, mainly because its more sporting and have shot deer in excess of 1200 metres. My rifle of choice for this is the Accuracy International AX-.338. A .338 calibre bolt action rifle with a 5 round magazine. I also own a .223 semi automatic hunting rifle and 2 shotguns (a 410 and a 12 bore).

None of these weapons are classes as assault rifles yet the .223 operates in exactly the same manner as he weapons Piers Morgan claims to be assault rifles, the only difference is the way it looks (and magazine capacity under British law).

The .338 is the exact rifle that a British sniper used to make the world's longest sniper shot in afganistan (just over 1.5 miles), yet it just looks like a bolt action rifle.

In light of Dunblane and the banning of cartridge fed handguns, it was easy. Handguns weren't common or protected by British law and they were VERY tightly regulated and easily checked. So it was an easy job for the police to get them off the streets.

The US though, is completely different. There are a lot (billions) of guns legally owned and used appropriately. There are, however more illegally owned firearms. If the police collected all the legal weapons, the public would be defenseless and the criminal element would control the streets.

Did you know that under Clinton, when certain types of gun were banned, crime involving firearms increased (sounds obvious I spose, but I mean car jackings, muggings, drive by's and gang related, you get the picture). Once those restrictions were allowed to expire under Bush, violent gun crime dropped significantly because the law abiding public were able to protect themselves and it offered a deterrent.

There's a point in there somewhere, I think...lol

America has the highest number of gun related shootings/crime in the civilised western world! More guns = more gun crime! Not less!"

The weapons used at the school shooting were not assault rifles, they were semi automatic. Similar in looks to an assault rifle, but the same operation as a hunting rifle.

More illegally held guns equals more gun crime, and armed population equals a deterrent.

Once you break down the figures regarding firearm injuries/deaths, the real figure regarding criminal acts involving firearms is actually considerably lower than Morgan claims.

The weapons used at the school massacre were owned legally, but not by the person who carried out the killings. He obtained them by killing his mother, after trying to buy guns and being refused (the law worked). Anyone who would kill their own mother to get his hands on a gun is pretty determined and would have gotten his hands on one regardless.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They may well have god points, but I could not watch this the whole way through as I hate shouty people!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I never said that. But he's far better informed about the subject matter than Piers Morgan is.

Piers just thinks he's right, when infact he's miles off base with a lot of his facts regarding firearms and the US 2nd amendment.

He's a Brit in America and he's on tv.

He'll be happy his name's being tweeted and googled no doubt.

Thing is he's kinda dug himself into a hole as he'll probably not work in the US after this.

I just think of how Britain reacted after Dunblaine. People were happy to hand over their guns. The yanks seem to cling to their constitution quite a lot.

Personally I think that only shotguns and pistols and a hunting rifle should be allowed in homes. Who needs a .50 cal bolt action rifle? Nobody.

For long range, big game hunting (bears for instance) a .50 cal is perfectly acceptable.

I hunt regularly, probably 69% of the meat I eat is shot and butchered by me. I like long range shooting, mainly because its more sporting and have shot deer in excess of 1200 metres. My rifle of choice for this is the Accuracy International AX-.338. A .338 calibre bolt action rifle with a 5 round magazine. I also own a .223 semi automatic hunting rifle and 2 shotguns (a 410 and a 12 bore).

None of these weapons are classes as assault rifles yet the .223 operates in exactly the same manner as he weapons Piers Morgan claims to be assault rifles, the only difference is the way it looks (and magazine capacity under British law).

The .338 is the exact rifle that a British sniper used to make the world's longest sniper shot in afganistan (just over 1.5 miles), yet it just looks like a bolt action rifle.

In light of Dunblane and the banning of cartridge fed handguns, it was easy. Handguns weren't common or protected by British law and they were VERY tightly regulated and easily checked. So it was an easy job for the police to get them off the streets.

The US though, is completely different. There are a lot (billions) of guns legally owned and used appropriately. There are, however more illegally owned firearms. If the police collected all the legal weapons, the public would be defenseless and the criminal element would control the streets.

Did you know that under Clinton, when certain types of gun were banned, crime involving firearms increased (sounds obvious I spose, but I mean car jackings, muggings, drive by's and gang related, you get the picture). Once those restrictions were allowed to expire under Bush, violent gun crime dropped significantly because the law abiding public were able to protect themselves and it offered a deterrent.

There's a point in there somewhere, I think...lol

America has the highest number of gun related shootings/crime in the civilised western world! More guns = more gun crime! Not less!

The weapons used at the school shooting were not assault rifles, they were semi automatic. Similar in looks to an assault rifle, but the same operation as a hunting rifle.

More illegally held guns equals more gun crime, and armed population equals a deterrent.

Once you break down the figures regarding firearm injuries/deaths, the real figure regarding criminal acts involving firearms is actually considerably lower than Morgan claims.

The weapons used at the school massacre were owned legally, but not by the person who carried out the killings. He obtained them by killing his mother, after trying to buy guns and being refused (the law worked). Anyone who would kill their own mother to get his hands on a gun is pretty determined and would have gotten his hands on one regardless."

But what about the shootings in colorado and the mall or college?

I'm sure that automatic weapons were used

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And to think he started out so innocent singing Walking in the air

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I never said that. But he's far better informed about the subject matter than Piers Morgan is.

Piers just thinks he's right, when infact he's miles off base with a lot of his facts regarding firearms and the US 2nd amendment.

He's a Brit in America and he's on tv.

He'll be happy his name's being tweeted and googled no doubt.

Thing is he's kinda dug himself into a hole as he'll probably not work in the US after this.

I just think of how Britain reacted after Dunblaine. People were happy to hand over their guns. The yanks seem to cling to their constitution quite a lot.

Personally I think that only shotguns and pistols and a hunting rifle should be allowed in homes. Who needs a .50 cal bolt action rifle? Nobody.

For long range, big game hunting (bears for instance) a .50 cal is perfectly acceptable.

I hunt regularly, probably 69% of the meat I eat is shot and butchered by me. I like long range shooting, mainly because its more sporting and have shot deer in excess of 1200 metres. My rifle of choice for this is the Accuracy International AX-.338. A .338 calibre bolt action rifle with a 5 round magazine. I also own a .223 semi automatic hunting rifle and 2 shotguns (a 410 and a 12 bore).

None of these weapons are classes as assault rifles yet the .223 operates in exactly the same manner as he weapons Piers Morgan claims to be assault rifles, the only difference is the way it looks (and magazine capacity under British law).

The .338 is the exact rifle that a British sniper used to make the world's longest sniper shot in afganistan (just over 1.5 miles), yet it just looks like a bolt action rifle.

In light of Dunblane and the banning of cartridge fed handguns, it was easy. Handguns weren't common or protected by British law and they were VERY tightly regulated and easily checked. So it was an easy job for the police to get them off the streets.

The US though, is completely different. There are a lot (billions) of guns legally owned and used appropriately. There are, however more illegally owned firearms. If the police collected all the legal weapons, the public would be defenseless and the criminal element would control the streets.

Did you know that under Clinton, when certain types of gun were banned, crime involving firearms increased (sounds obvious I spose, but I mean car jackings, muggings, drive by's and gang related, you get the picture). Once those restrictions were allowed to expire under Bush, violent gun crime dropped significantly because the law abiding public were able to protect themselves and it offered a deterrent.

There's a point in there somewhere, I think...lol

America has the highest number of gun related shootings/crime in the civilised western world! More guns = more gun crime! Not less!

The weapons used at the school shooting were not assault rifles, they were semi automatic. Similar in looks to an assault rifle, but the same operation as a hunting rifle.

More illegally held guns equals more gun crime, and armed population equals a deterrent.

Once you break down the figures regarding firearm injuries/deaths, the real figure regarding criminal acts involving firearms is actually considerably lower than Morgan claims.

The weapons used at the school massacre were owned legally, but not by the person who carried out the killings. He obtained them by killing his mother, after trying to buy guns and being refused (the law worked). Anyone who would kill their own mother to get his hands on a gun is pretty determined and would have gotten his hands on one regardless.

But what about the shootings in colorado and the mall or college?

I'm sure that automatic weapons were used "

If they were automatic then they were illegal, therefore illegally owned/acquired.

Interesting to note that many of the worst types of these incidents are in states that don't allow concealed carry. There is at least one state that requires the head of each household to own a defensive firearm (I forget which state but will check) and the incidents of home invasion and similar types of crime is considerably lower than in neighbouring states where they don't have this requirement.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top