129 votes

Piers Owned Again by Ben Shapiro: Thursday, 1-10-13

In another loss chalked up for Piers Morgan, Ben Shapiro of Breitbart hands him a Constitution and crushes him in a debate. Way to go Ben! Links thanks to No sheeple/sharpsteve

Part I:


Part II below

Part 2:


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Name your son "Ben!"

It seems to be a magic word of some sort.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

It should now be obvious to

It should now be obvious to all that Pier Morgan hates the constitution when he says "your little book".Unbelievable!

Stop Giving Piers Any Views

The guy is a shill. An overpaid talking head put in place on national broadcasting to espouse the views of a tyranical regime. I detest how he uses the giffords, aurora, and sandy over and over again. In my mind, all three were violenct acts staged by the government, all in effort towards manipulating public perception enough to allow their attack on the second amendment succeed.

It literally sickens me that they have brought out Giffords again to do her act....now she has a pronounced limp, but at least she doesn't have to play the role with the droopy eye anymore. The limp is enough to demonstrate the shot to the head she suffered in their show.

The enitre arugment doesn't make sense

Adam Lanza, according to the news, carried a Glock and a Sig into the school. The Bushmaster was left in his car. Who shot the children with an assault weapon and why now are people claiming the children were shot with an assault weapon? If the children were shot with an assault weapon, I would advance that Adam Lanza didn't shoot them based on the weapons Adam Lanza was reported to have brought into the school.

Why is there still conflicting information on what gun was used?

I have heard the rifle was in the car trunk, then it was a shotgun in the trunk, then it was the rifle in the school, were the hand guns even fired? I am not as knowledgeable about guns as some of you, but what difference does it make what type of gun was used? When is the official police report going to be released?

Wow, he's good!

I may not agree with Shapiro on everything, but I thought he did an excellent job of showcasing the holes in Piers' logic! Thanks Ben!!


Which hole?

He agreed on some laws. Agreed to background check every gun exchange on the planet, unlawful if guns are unlocked, calls Morgan pro-gun while asking why not ban handguns too. Good? I don't see it. Agrees to get gun out of hands of bad guys? What does that mean, bad guys?

The night is far spent, the day is at hand.
And those who have not heard shall understand.

Uh, he pointed out Piers'

Uh, he pointed out Piers' fallacy about banning guns in that most gun murders involve a handgun yet Peirs is not calling for the ban on handguns (though he later admitted he would like that but it wouldn't go over [yet] with Americans.) He also clearly made his case that Peirs is a bully with his guests and a hypocrite - inviting them on for a debate then shouting them down and ridiculing them and then claiming they are bullies when they don't agree with his point. Ben made many other salient points despite his disappointing agreement with incrimentalist restrictions on gun ownership.

I'm getting

really tired of Jews always leading the debates considering they are behind most things.

Luke 3:38
Isaiah 43:3-5

I don't think Ron Paul would approve of your comment

Ron Paul always makes the point that he sees people as individuals, not as members of groups. That's why he favors individual rights, not group rights. For what it's worth, I'm Jewish and a staunch Ron Paul supporter.

Never occured to me

I heard a rousing defense of an individual's right to own a firearm to possibly confront a tyrannical government someday, if needed. Shapiro did us proud with clear and concise argument. He was well informed, and he was composed. This was one of the best defenses of our liberties I have ever seen or heard.

All you heard was a Jew.

Grouping people does not

Grouping people does not serve the purpose of liberty. Wee are not groups of Americans we are Americans in a melting pot. Government groups people. We should not accept it and we should certainly not participate in it. Bad form on your comment here.

“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.” ― Henry Ford.

I disagree

I disagree. Why such over representation from 2% of the population?

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within." ― Marcus Tullius Cicero

Luke 3:38
Isaiah 43:3-5

Because they're typically

Because they're typically well educated, career oriented and politically active.

If I were to speak with a Jew about something like what a great place Texas is, a typical response is something like, "Oh yeah, my cousin's a doctor/lawyer out there."

Morgan had the NERVE to call the Constitution "your little book"


If I sound like Alex Jones then I'll take it as a complement.

SOMEONE has to scream when an ENGLISHMAN of all people belittles our own law of the land.

OF COURSE Morgan hates the constitution - How can he help himself. MOST Brits probably inherently hate it because it initially was born out of our fight (and victory) against English tyranny.

Even today they get all ga-ga over the "royals."

But OUR country (and Constitution) said F.U. to royal bloodlines.

It said you get your rights from GOD - NOT from some stupid idea that if your parents were of "royal" blood, you were someone special with more human rights than anyone else.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

Not all English people believe that

Let's try to not group people together like that. Same with the ant-Jewish comments.


Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine

he's no alex jones

but he was ok.
piers should be able to buy as much sudafed as he wants at walmart while waiting the 2 or 3+ hours that it takes to get a background check to buy a gun.

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
Rand Paul 2016

We need to allow more concealed carry in states

so that if Obama send goons again to kill off dissent, they will be able to retaliate and fight back, its happening already, we have to sick together and preserve our liberties

Shapiro, not so good for freedom.

First off, I can understand quite well why there is more violent crime in Great Britain than just about any other place on earth if all the people there behave and disrespect others just as Piers Morgan does.

I don't trust Shapiro. He talks eloquently but he compromises on our rights. He approves readily government back ground checks. Shapiro also brings up left and right views which seems to play into Morgan's hands toooo well for me, Morgan brings out Reagan's quote just a little later from a sheet of paper laying conveniently to his right. Morgan gleams, "Famous recent right wing president agrees with me." Nice for his resume, wasn't it?

Shapiro also falls for the gun takers term assault weapon used by the recent mass shooters. Shapiro uses a fear of government tyranny fifty years or a hundred years from now as being justification of ownership of AR-15s, kind of loony. He says if a gun owner doesn't have guns locked up it should be against the law.

He appeases Morgan, "We're talking about laws you and I can agree on, I don't know why your disagreeing with me here."

Shapiro says, "I know you're pro second amendment why don't you want to ban hand guns which are also killing young people?" This doesn't make sense to me why Shapiro would tea up Morgan with this question.
All he had to say about the hand guns at the mass shootings was if the rifle would jam he would simply use the hand guns instead so why not ban all guns Mr. Morgan?

I also have a problem with denying criminals gun ownership who have served their time. Many times felony laws deny someone the right to own a gun for what I think are unjust reasons. Being a felon doesn't mean that you would necessarily misuse a gun. IF you are an ex-felon then you too may need to protect yourself, I wouldn't deny you that right.

Shapiro wants back ground checks for everyone everywhere, i.e. gun trade shows. He also expects the government to protect those gun owner databases. Very trusting Shapiro is of our government now but oohhh you just wait 50 years from now you'll know why not too.

It's interesting how quick Shapiro says, "Don't lump me in with Alex Jones". Yet, AJ and him both fear the government, at least they both will 50 years from now according to Shapiro.

Shapiro's phrase is one which tends to lower ones defenses, "We have to calibrate laws and get guns out of the hands of bad people."

Well, there's better spokes persons out there for our 2nd amendment. It for sure isn't the Morgan appeaser Shapiro. Don't trust him at all. Sorry, and I didn't bother with the second clip.

Have a blessed day.

The night is far spent, the day is at hand.
And those who have not heard shall understand.

He brought up some valid points

But on the whole I agree with you. He's too much of a compromiser. I also believe that most of these issues should be handled at the local not Federal level. Something everyone seems to forget.


Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine

Let's recognize a major

Let's recognize a major victory. Piers has now brought on 3 guests who are all well versed on the 2nd amendment to defend our rights. He states his position, and he does allow the guest to state theirs. When a guest gets excited and keeps going, Piers quiets and lets them speak.

Sure he uses crap logic and insults, but he's a great deal better than Hanity or O'Riely who are afraid to even hear differing opinions.

Piers may be on the wrong side. But these 3 interviews have given the public an accurate picture of the issue. We can't blame Piers if that public is too stupid to see the truth. And it appears they aren't.


Typical mainstream right winger, willing to give a little ground at a time. Give me more Alex Jones and Larry Pratt.

"All our words are but crumbs that fall down from the feast of the mind." - Khalil Gibran
"The Perfect Man has no self; the Holy Man has no merit; the Sage has no fame." - Chuang Tzu

This smug wanker

Is getting way too much press time. Don't fall into the trap. It's all about ratings.



"No physical quantity explains it's own existence, and no amount of time can consume an infinite series of events to bring you to the present, which means all of these somewhere have to be explained by one self-existent cause which is not physical."

Piers Morgan vs. Shapiro

So, Alex ("Deport British buffoon NOW!") Jones hands Piers Morgan his head in a one-on-one debate yesterday by being a loudmouth, and now a Ben Shapiro also debunks, by being quiet, rational, and thoughtful, the rationales of the firearms policies which CNN's resident BB (British Buffoon) so uncritically favors.

It is good to see even a "mainstream conservative" who so
convincingly refutes the British buffoon's baloney in front of millions of viewers!

Maybe poor BB's positions are simply indefensible on this issue!

I think that PM has seen better days in journalism. Maybe he ought to go back to the UK after all, even without any deportation proceedings, before he shows himself up as a complete nitwit, even to his fellow gun grabbers!


"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is not to be attacked successfully, it is to be defended badly". F. Bastiat

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, finally they attack you, and then you win"! Mohandas Gandhi

After Pearl Harbor, the

After Pearl Harbor, the Japanese PM wanted to attack the US mainland, but his generals told him they could not do that because there would be a gun behind every blade of grass. An armed populace deters a foreign invasion! While I agree with his point in the video, the one above is valid and harder to discredit because being armed saved us from being invaded just 60 years ago. Where are in debt, we will not always be a world super power, China will take that role by 2050, and we could be a ripe target for invasion at that time, only a well armed populace. will work to prevent that! This is how they should answer the question of why we need assault weapons

ummm..."assault" rifle's

ummm..."assault" rifle's weren't used in any of the mass shootings, "Semi-automatic" rifles were used.

Not sure he got owned. Ben

Not sure he got owned. Ben let him talk all over him, and didn't give better answers. He needs to bring Alex Jones back...

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...


Have you ever been in a debate club?

Ben completely wiped the floor with Piers in this interview.

"No physical quantity explains it's own existence, and no amount of time can consume an infinite series of events to bring you to the present, which means all of these somewhere have to be explained by one self-existent cause which is not physical."