I could only make it until 2:19. This dumbass stated that the Police did not affect the Virginia Tech shooting when in fact the scumbag killed himself once he was faced with the prospect of having to face them. By that one incident alone, you can tell of just how disingenuous he is of any facts. This may sound cruel, but I would probably dance the jig if bloomberg were to suddenly have a heart attack.
Cho chained the doors. The problem was there was nobody inside the building with a gun besides him.
First, I know whats-his-name (I refuse to post his name) chained the doors. I’ve talked to one of the Responding Officers who ran up against it. Second, the scumbag shot himself once he realized he will be facing the First Responders within seconds. Third, I think you missed the point entirely.
So many states already have this, and even more – it’s not a big deal.
The crazy gun-grabbers preach horror and devastation which never materializes, but instead crimes go down, victims defend themselves, and violent criminals with weapons become nullified and afraid instead of disarmed, helpless good guys being terrified.
I love when hes called out on the school shootings numbers, and jsut drops the lie a second time.
I was pretty surprised he brought up their own stats, when it has been so clearly proven false. So when he did, I was determined to make it very clear to people in the audience who dont know this topic that it’s all propaganda.
Im glad you did. Hopefully if we do that enough, we can get people to actually think for themselves!
Why is this even a discussion? Any country that has a complete ban and one death from guns proves bans don’t work. Even one. Do it for the children.
Dear God, this idiot (I’m referring to Mark Glaze, of course) just keeps on lying and lying. For starters, I’ll provide the
PolitiFact piece that debunked the Everytown claim about the number of school shootings since Newtown (he actually claimed that the number was higher than what was listed in the original report) .
Second, he made the typical claim about how there was an armed guard at Virginia Tech and Columbine. I have a few things to say here: a) There have been shootings that were stopped by someone armed with a gun. Gun control advocates like to claim that these each involved someone with police and/or military experience, but there were at least a few incidents where that wasn’t the case, such as this incident in Philadelphia  and there were plenty of other incidents where civilians without guns stopped a guy with a gun . b) Also, they’re overlooking ignoring the value of an armed citizen (regardless of military/police experience) being nearby when a shooting occurs. We have empirical evidence of what happens to people in these shootings when they are unarmed, so if people without guns can do it, why not allow them to have guns? c) It’s also worth mentioning that the police qualification excuse is a myth .
Next, he stated that “in the United Kingdom, they are not more or less mentally ill, their treatment is not better or worse.” Now, I may be going a bit off topic here, especially since I don’t know what he identifies as politically, but gun control advocates are usually liberal and/or Democrats and they typically speak nothing but praise of the U.K.’s National Health Service, but when talking about guns, suddenly it’s about as good as the American system. Talk about talking out of two sides of your mouth. However, it’s worth noting that mental illness is not the thing that we should be focusing on  . He then goes on to claim that the U.S. murder rate is 25 times higher than that of the U.K. Not true, the U.S. murder rate is five times higher than the U.K.’s . Still significant, but not nearly as much as he claimed. Now, even if he only meant the murder rate involving guns, that’s still wrong. While the difference is more significant , it’s misleading. It makes you sound like you only care about gun-related murders rather than all murders. In any case, the murder rate in England has always been lower than the U.S.’s murder rate, even before their gun control laws were passed .
Y is it when you’re having a debate on an important issue you have like 3 min. To debate it, and always out of time? Next time they invite you Emily just tel the no unless you can get appropriate time, at least 30min. Serious issues deserve serious time
Ron, in order for that to happen, it would have to be the ‘Emily Miller Show’ 🙂
LOL– I never even thought of that option. Yes, if I had my own show, I could debate gun control the whole time!
In order for this to happen, your next book would have to be titled ‘How Emily Got Her Own TV Show’ *smirk
Why not talk to Cam who does the NRA show. Maybe he could give a half hour with what’s his name, then post it everywhere – http://www.nranews.com/cam
Well there’s the answer, The Emily Miller hour! Love it , now let’s pick a network and get some sponsors 🙂
That’s just not how TV works!
Mark did a decent job of making Emily chase his falsehoods.
Total users online: 7
Guests online: 7
Registered online: 0;