Topic: Alex Jones does real issues (gun rights and anti-depressant drugs) a dis-service - page 3. (Read 5449 times)

Who said anything about pointing? Owning, yes. Carrying, yes. Pointing? No. I should also point out that for all your speech and democracy, you're still subjects of a queen.

The right to bear arms is what protects the right to free speech.

I'm taking this quote, but it's a general answer (I'm not a fan of posts with tons of quotes in them).

From my own experience and living in a country that support a group of professionals being armed (police and army mainly) and the general population being disarmed(except for hobbies, like hunting), it works pretty damn well. It's not perfect, there is occasional slip-up, I agree. But you would be surprised how crime is not that problematic, how guns mass murdering occur rarely and how the homicide rate is pretty low.

Also, keeping guns as a way to counter government tyranny....I think it's a pretty shitty argument. For the last 250 years, we've been conquered and had many(Many!) conflicts with the english/canadian government. In 1995, there was missing 30 000 votes to make the Quebec province a country and split up Canada. Imagine if 30% of the US population was on the verge of splitting your country, that was the equivalent back in 1995. I know what it is to live under a government that is not really your own, that decide for themselves first and don't care about your interests. An example? Afghanistan war. Quebec voted against at 75%, rest of Canada voted for at 75%. We ended sending soldiers over there that got killed, for something we were clearly against. Our history is full of those examples (world war 1 and 2, Canada goes into war, send French-canadians on the front line cause we're a good meatshield).

But we're not taking arms or equipping our population with guns. Why? I think freedom of speech and "freedom of weaponry" are not compatible. Either you speak, either you shoot, you can't do both. If a person talks freely, people will listen to his speech. If a person talk pointing a gun, people will focus on the gun. The only speech will be what the weapon say. We were never armed in our history, our speeches were never useful in the short-term, but made great victories in the long-term.

We have different philosophies, you had your country by taking arms, we're aiming at getting ours by using democracy and freedom of speech. It's not about which one is better, it's about the results you want. Different philosophies gives different results in the end. The only thing I know is that for those nations out there who are oriented towards pacifism, democracy and freedom of speech, your philosophy is really unattractive and scary.

There is no "going back and forth" with a lunatic liberal like Piers Morgan.

You mean this kind of going back and forth right? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DNg664njk8

I think this is the part you don't understand.  Did he go back and forth with this man?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC4JJWUtzkc

 No, he insulted him and spewed propoganda.  All Jones did was beat him to it if anything.

You've never watched any of Piers Morgan's previous debates, have you?

You are wrong there.  They could of calmly went back and forth armed with their messages and facts and the audience could of made a decision to who was more persuasive. 

Mr. Jones went way overboard to a point where you could not even process the information over his red-meat slogans.   I can imagine another way this could of gone.

Alex Jones did the proper thing. There was going to be no debate ... Piers Morgan has an agenda and it got snuffed out by Alex Jones it was the proper way to go about it.

Now, give him a little credit, maybe he's just afraid of a few pounds of blued steel.

Well, you see, that's the thing: It wasn't a lie. The incidence of violent crime in the UK did go up after the gun ban. Do I need to bring up the same article Jones did? Jones is a loud, ranting asshole, but he's got the facts on his side. Morgan is a loud, ranting asshole, too, but the difference is he's arguing entirely from emotion.

Yeh he's reall good at that. 

I think there's a lot more going on than you are aware of. If you take a listen ( at your leisure) of the likes of max keizer or gerald celente who are actually a lot more palatable: you'd know the guy wasn't actually talking shit.

Well, now I've seen it! But I don't see the point you want to make. Lott is caught lying by Morgan and....?


Like I said, I don't really know him. All I saw was Alex Jones screaming at the interviewer, being completely impolite and disrespectful and also making some petition to deport him. And you're happy to give guns to people like this? No wonder you want a gun in your house when you know you have those Alex Jones with 52 weapons living in your country.

Have you seen this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DNg664njk8

It's easy to seem sane in comparison to Jones, which is, I assume, the reason he was invited on.

 

Just saw the video, this is going to be a classic! Freako "I want my guns wahwahwah" screaming shit, attacking medical pills and thinking the US government blew up the 9/11. No wonder you guys want to keep your guns when you're as paranoid as this dude.

I don't really know Piers Morgan, but he's made of ice. Not even flinching while the crazy screamed at him for 15 minutes. I would have probably punched Alex Jones in the face after 2 minutes. Or maybe not...since you know, he have guns and 2nd amendment and stand your ground, he would have the right to kill me. 

Anyway, all this just show that your 2nd amendment is more important than the first one.

 I really don't know. . I guess his model is still working more then it is harming. .Must be

Me too, I used to enjoy listening to him on certain subjects from time to time but his ranting really turned me off even though his information, facts and messages were generally spot on.  I wonder if his friend and colleagues have said anything or if that is taboo?

If jones changed his Ranting a lot more fucking people would listen to him . And another thing the guy doesn't fukn listen when he has a guest.
They guys is Fully living in his own universe. . And, if he had more communication skills like * listening * maybe people would give him more time of day. . I don't disagree with his subject. i think they hold absolute truth. But ffs alex  " Calm the f k down. . Ranting outburst is not communicating . I followed him for a while but i couldn't agree with  the mad outbursts all the time. . he's getting the truth out there but in the coarsest way possible. A disservice . Yes . But he's still getiing the truth out there * cringe *. Fucking well educated though.

First article reviewing the debate:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Vox-News/2013/0108/Piers-Morgan-vs.-Alex-Jones-on-gun-control-Who-won-wild-debate

Opportunity blown when Alex Jones was penciled into the schedule.

@Myrkul - Yeah, they are both Alarmists.  Still I see it as a blown opportunity to real discuss these issues. 

To be fair, Jones is as much of an alarmist as Morgan is, just on different issues, with a different target demo. Putting these two in the same room was a recipe for a shitstorm, and I'm not at all surprised to see that is exactly what happened.

A much more reasonable discussion (at least on the gun advocate side) is with John Lott, and Ice-T actually makes some damn fine points (though not to Piers).