Sunday, March 17, 2013

Alex Jones Destroys Piers Morgan; Piers Cries Foul (needed a gun)

Let's face it, Piers lost regardless, on the merits of the facts and their logical conclusions, even when you remove the emotionality. And frankly Piers knew that he was trivializing, ridiculing and condescending and couldn't possibly expect Alex to ignore his passive aggression. And yes, Alex is hyper-informed with all the facts from all verifiable sources, while Piers kept ignoring cogent arguments, literally talking around him. Guns are not great, is the point, they are a necessary evil in a world where people will victimize you if you can't defend yourself. Instead of taking away our ability to defend ourselves, let's focus on the social causes of the organic growth of victimizers, then we won't need guns. Meanwhile, good luck when you drink in Scotland, and the only guy with a gun is a cop two kilometers away while someone with a knife takes you down!

You could say something 100 times to Piers and he would simply ignore it and refute it with an irrelevant fact that does not address yours. It's simple passive aggression, and to most it make the passive aggressor seem to be "civilized" while the other becomes legitimately irritated at being ignored and condescended to. Neither Jamie Bartlett  of the Huffington Post nor Piers have done anywhere near as much research of all side of the issues as Alex, so in both cases, debating him would be like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

I am sure many people will assume that calm equals correct, but everyone can identify with  Alex' frustration, before he even arrived, with Piers incessant irrelevance. People have got to actually listen to each other, and address logic with logic, or they can fully expect anger.

Piers Morgan Debates Alex Jones on Gun Laws,  2nd Amendment

Related Posts with Thumbnails