On Piers and Guns

Looks like Piers Morgan has been on a desperate crusade lately talking about his missed opportunities to understand Americans' "obsession with guns."  Making the rounds on Fox News with Megyn Kelly, the British snob stated that rather than attack gun owners and the 2nd Amendment as he did for years on CNN, he should have instead opened up a two-way discussion so as to understand what it was about guns that riled up American gun owners.

Here's what Piers said verbatim:  "I think I became too aggressive.  I think I didn't listen to the other side as much as I should have done.  I think there is a culture of gun ownership in America which I didn't afford enough respect to."  If he had to do it all over again, "it would be a much more two-way conversation I would have with people to try to understand why America has an obsession with guns, as many people see it and how you get to a place where there is more safety involved in guns than perhaps there is now."

Okay Piers, let's have this two-way discussion.  There is such a force, kind of like gravity, that is called freedom, and nothing in the world can actually stop it.  It's part of nature.  Like the wind or a wave.  It's there.

Freedom allows the people to do things that makes them great and industrious.  Freedom also allows people to defend what is rightfully theirs.  Guns, like the bow and arrow, are simply tools for added measure to ensure that freedom.

Of course, with guns comes responsibility as well as respect.  You protect your own domain and I protect mine, and if you need assistance in protecting what is your, then simply make a request and I'll come right over and vice versa.

Included in the U.S. Constitution are what's called the Bill of Rights where the Founders, wanting to protect freedom, simply codified and enshrined for posterity a natural right with the words "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Now I don't think Piers has given up his challenge against gun ownership.  He is clearly anti-gun, and you can hear it in this interview.  He's quite upset at the massacre at Sandy Hook elementary school shooting that killed 26 children and teachers on December 14, 2012.  I was upset as well and so was the nation.  Nobody looks forward to seeing little kids and their teachers mercilessly gunned down inside a school in a Gun-Free School Zone.

Says Piers, "To me, it remains unconscionable that a country of the power and magnificence of the United States of America could allow twenty first graders to be blown to pieces in their classrooms." He continued, "The bottom line is absolutely nothing has been done to stop that happening again.  I find that extraordinary."

First, let's understand that Piers is a statist, and so he blames the United States for allowing the Sandy Hook massacre to happen because in his view there just isn't that much gun control.  If there was gun control, Sandy Hook would not have happened, right?

But what about the Gun-Free School Zone?  Shouldn't that have deterred Adam Lanza?  No, for the simple reason that laws against murder didn't deter Lanza from committing the act of matricide in the first place prior to the school killing.

So in the end, I'm left to wonder just what kind of "guns movie" is Piers going to make?  Will he focus on the vatos locos, bloods and crips and other assorted gang-banging creatures and toothless Appalachian moonshine distillers to make his point that guns are bad?

Or, is Piers truly serious about understanding America's sacred obsession with freedom and its guarantor, the 2nd Amendment?