Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Gwyneth Paltrow Trial, Paul O'Grady Tribute, Ban Transgender Athletes, School Shootings becoming the Norm

Episode Date: March 29, 2023

On tonight's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers looks into whether the Gwyneth Paltrow trial was even worth it and pay tributes to the late, great Paul O'Grady. Should other sports be following swimming lead, after banning transgender athletes from female competition, Piers delves into that. Also Piers looks into whether another school shooting is just becoming the norm in America. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 522, Virgin Media 606, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and the app.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tonight on Pierce Morgan, uncensored. Probably had a better ski outfit, though, I bet. I still have the same one. I can't do it, is it? No. Star-struck lawyers, courtroom theatrics, and an Oscar-winning A-List are accused of skiing recklessly. Is the trial of Gwynedd Paltrow,

the most bizarre and pointless celebrity showdown in history? I'll ask that queen of common-sense, Sharon Osborne, and will pay tribute to the late Great Point. low grading. World Athletics bans transgender athletes from elite competition should all other sports now follow. We'll debate that. Thus, as harrowing details emerged on the Nashville school shooting, which left three nine-year-olds dead. I'm going to ask two Americans, is this now the new normal for your country? More children get killed by guns every year in America than anything else now. Live from London, this is Pearce Morgan Uncensored. Good evening from London. Welcome to Pierce's

Morgan uncensored, there's a common assumption that the world is never to be going nuts. The list of books, brands, movies, songs, ideas, products, people, and words deemed offensive grows ever longer. Those of us huddled together on the tiny island of common sense will be gradually submerged by the rising tide of lunacy until the two-spirit penguins are in charge of the zoo. But recently, I've been feeling the little green shoots of optimism. There's a recovery from Wokeloma. There's a growing dossier of evidence that actually most people don't think like these idiots

and have had enough of all the woke nonsense. At the end of last week, Sebastian Coe, the president of the World Athletics Council, one of Britain's greatest athletes, made this announcement. The council has agreed to exclude male to female transgender athletes who have been through male puberty from female world ranking competitions

from March the 31st. Well, hallelujah. How's it taken miss long? Athletes born male with their biggest, stronger male bodies and superior muscle mass cannot compete against women fairly. It's just not equal. Thus, a victory for common sense. Last month, the British Prime Minister Richard Sunax startled me by saying this. The world's most controversial question, bizarrely, has become, what is a woman? Yeah, of course I know a woman, is adult, human, female.

Incredible. That was a question that stumped Secere Stammer, needed of the opposition. It stumped Supreme Court justices in America. It stumped poor old Nicola Sturgeon, who's now lost her job because she just couldn't work out what a woman is. A politician finally having the guts to actually say the obvious and not worry about being condemned immediately is a vicious bigot because he's not. Another victory of the common sense. The shocking case of Ila Bryson, the double rapist who transitioned to become a woman

after reaching trial and then demanded a place in a female prison where he would have been surrounded by people he could then attack, as he had done before, united the country in disbelief. Only Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister of Scotland, didn't get that memo. Trans women are women,

but in the prison context, there is no automatic right for a trans woman. So there are contexts where a trans woman is not a woman? No, there is circumstances in which a trans woman will be housed in the male prison estate. It's cruciating to watch one of the most successful women in modern politics literally end her career by not being able to stand up for women's rights. And that complete failure of basic common sense led to her departure.

Well, days later, one of the titans of British politics was on the political scrap heap. Isn't that a lesson for everybody else? If you go against common sense, eventually there will be a lot of, a day of reckoning. This week's students at a US university have been protesting the decision to invite the state's governor Glenn Yonkin, potentially one of the presidential candidates for next year, to make a speech. His crime is being a Republican. He's actually a reasonably moderate Republican. Six thousand of these snowflake students have signed the petition to stop him. But remarkably, instead of bowing to this juvenile mob who just want to sit in their little tank,

talking to each other about the same things that they all agree on, as we've become accustomed to, they've gone ahead and invited him anyway. Another victory for common sense. And when reporters discovered that so-called sensitivity readers were purging classic novels by Roald Darl Daly and Fleming, Agatha Christie, and so on, cleansing them, even Eden Blight and got brought into this, cleansing them of apparently upsetting content,

the public said, no, shut up, stop this madness. We couldn't find anybody to come on this show to defend, it. Finally, the penny's dropping. And then we have the Guardian, the global home of history bashing, logic-defying, virtue-signalling, wokery, who've now had to issue a grovelling, massive, front-page apology for itself for being a bunch of racists founded by somebody who employed slaves, which even the most humorless, hard-nosed, signalers of virtue have been forced to admit It's actually very entertaining and amusing for the rest of us. And even Hollywood seems to be finally stirring too.

Today, Jennifer Aniston lamented the fact publicly that many young people say friends was offensive. The number of people saying, I can't believe it, but I actually agree with Piers Morgan, is reaching historic levels. It's getting very busy on common-sense island. I think we're going to need a bigger boat. Well, I'm joined now by the perfect person, actually, Talk TV presenter, superstar, great friend of mine, Sharon Osborne. I love you, Pierce. You know what?

We've had to fight this fight, and it's felt a lonely battle, isn't it? I mean, just for basic common sense. And I always say to people, I think 90% of the public have always agreed with me and you about this kind of stuff. But there's this sort of huge megaphone on social media which skews what people believe is the master. thinking. Yeah, and also that people, you know, goes against wokeness, you get barrage with assaults, you know, on your

social media, your life, you just get, you know, a barrage by, you know, crazes. Death threats. We both had them. Yeah. We both had death threats for expressing honestly held opinions that weren't remotely racist, transphobic, sexist, homophobic, or any of that. We aren't those things. But you've got to be able to challenge stuff for a democracy. Otherwise, if you don't, what are we? We're not a democracy anymore, are we? Nope. Not at all. And, you know, as far as women go, I think it was Alice Cooper who wrote,

only women bleed. Right. I mean, this whole thing where politicians like Nicola Sturgeon, who was an amazing trailblazer for women's politics, right? Right, you were. And became a massively successful First Minister's column, but got frozen into this trap. But hold on, hold on. Is it just me? But when I first read about this criminal who'd gone back dressed in pink

and had the worst wig I'd ever seen. Anyway, it looked like his mum had dressed him up as a... Well, he was scatming everybody. He was scatming the world. His ex-wife came out of the woodwork and said. And said, the guy's just trying it on. Of course. He's not transgender.

He just doesn't want to be put in a male prison as a rapist. He's a castler and a thief and everything else. But the thing is, it's like, who could see that? everybody but But her 60% of all the trans prisoners in Scotland apparently

something like 60% They're not trends Well no They only transitioned after their conviction Yes Of course they did Because they want to get out of a male prison

And get into the easier female prison It's the get out of jail free card Isn't it? That's always been my point about it Is you've got to start from a position of protecting women's rights and women And you don't do that by allowing rapists and sex offenders

to put their hands up and say, actually I'm a woman and then get put with women who they can attack. That's the opposite of protecting them. It's insanity. And who couldn't see that this guy is taking the piss out of the system? Look at him. I know. It turned out Nicola Sturgeon couldn't. Because she tried in a torturous way to defend it.

And actually, in the end, she lost the support of the people of Scotland. Because most of them just... I mean, I'd be to Scotland a lot. I love Scotland, love the people. And they were like, what the hell are you talking about? Look at him. Look at him. He's winding you up. He's a scam artist. Like, look. And it's the same with sport, you know, this big thing by SEPCO.

Oh, don't. Finally, they're going to get to grips with this. Because it's not about not wanting transgender athletes to have a chance to compete. They should be able to. But they should either compete against their own biological sex. So if you were born a male, biologically, you can't dispute science. If you're born a male and you transition, compete against man. testosterone alone.

Right. Without having shoulders this big, feet this big, and you're going in to swim against somebody that's five foot two. We saw that Leah Thomas, the one who's six foot three, very muscular, very well-built, towering over her rivals on the podium. I couldn't look at the picture. She won one race by 56 seconds. It's nuts.

It was insanity, and it's like, how can you not laugh? Look at this podium picture. And you see, I don't blame Leah Thomas. Leah Thomas has transitioned. Fair enough, I respect. I don't mind calling Leah Thomas, Leah, she, that's fine. But I do object to these women trying to catch her who've got no chance just because of their biology.

She's looking down on everybody. It's like, look, yeah, I don't blame her for doing what she did, but you're absolutely right. Put her with the men. Well, we're going to debate that later. I want to talk about one woman who may be almost indefensible at this stage, which is Gwyneth Boudre. This case, this is all over $300,000.

I'm like, what are you doing? Why would she let this go to court and not settle? Let's have a little look at some of the highlights or low lights. May I ask how tall you are? I'm just under 5.10. Okay. I am so jealous. I think I'm shrinking, though.

You and me both. I have to wear four-inch heels just to make it to 5-5. They're very nice. Oh, thank you. I was yelling at him. Pretty loud. Pretty forceful. I was pretty upset.

Right? You're small but mighty. Actually, you're not that small. And you're not trained in accident reconstruction? Me? Yeah. No. Neither am I.

You were wearing goggles, a helmet. Yes. Okay, kind of looked like everybody else on the slope. That's always my intention. Okay. Probably had a better ski outfit, though, I bet. I still have the same one. What am I watching?

This is a court of law. Where do I throw up? Where's the bucket? And my favorite moment was when she was asked about what she'd lost from this terrible incident. And she went, well, half a day skiing. I was like, what? I know, I know. Let's watch this.

Here we are. And he has deterred you from enjoying the rest of what was a very expensive vacation. Well, I lost half a day of skiing. Uh-huh. Yes. Okay. What are we watching? Why is she letting me, I met Gwynny's a couple of times.

I actually like her personally, but a lot of people have come out and speak. quite disparaging about it. Dylan Jones, our friend Ranji Keevon, when he's said he had a nightmare experience with her trying to interview her. I've interviewed her. She was very, very, very pleasant. Yeah, so I just can't understand what part of her has wanted to contest this. I don't get it. I just, I've thought to myself, why doesn't she just let her insurance company deal with it? She's insured against lawsuits.

Yes. You know, just let them deal with it back down. Why are you doing it? Has it been that bad of an experience that you feel that you want to be heard now? It's crazy. I just don't understand. I mean, they're all bonkers in there. The guy, was that the screeching sound engaged?

It's like we're watching some kind of asylum. What size shoe are you taking? It's like, who gives up what size shoe you are, madam? Who are you anyway? You know, I bet you had an expensive skis. I mean, what was she doing? It's the most bizarre. case anyway. I mean, there's not going to be any winner. Even if she wins, she loses,

right? And she wants a pound or something and that cost pay. It's all the thing's preposterous. On a more serious and sad point, Paul O'Grady. I want to show a little clip. He died age 67 overnight, suddenly. Incredibly sad, actually. He was really, I mean, there aren't many people I think live up to the phrase national treasure in Britain, but he's probably right up there. Let's take a little clip of Paul. I have Ozzy Osbourne as Chancellor. I tell you why, because at least with Ozzy,

the only cuts made would be the effing from his speech, that's all. Very nice, though, would say. Portuguese read from the Allentasia, which is basically the subtle heart of Portugal, before you get to the Algarb. Allentasia. And... ...said to me, you know what she said,

when you're old... ...chairs, got Matt. Buster died on Thursday, nice. He was riddled with cancer. He had cancer in his neck, and his face, and a tumour in his leg. a tune in his leg, and the kindest thing for me to do was to let him go. Well, whatever you know, boss, you're gone, but not forgotten, kid.

Give me a big tear. Come on. Well, and that's now the case for Paul himself. He was a great entertainer, unbelievably funny, completely outrageous. A bit like you. When you spent time with Paul O'Grady, he would say the most incredible things, but always with a cackle and a laugh. Warm-hearted, incredibly good broadcaster, but had a unique ability to just make people laugh.

both on camera and off. And adore him. I'd have never met anyone that doesn't adore, didn't adore Paul. He was such just an unbelievable human being. Loved his dogs, like you. It was a good man. And we've actually got a lot to be grateful to Paul for by default. It's a story not many people know.

But I finished newspapers suddenly. And Simon Cowell came up with this idea for a talent show. and he wanted to call it Got Talent. And he went to ITV here in the UK, and they came up with putting it around a vehicle around Paul O'Grady. And called it Paul O'Grady's Got Talent. So we all went down to do a pilot, huge success. Me, Simon Cowan, Thurn, Britain,

who was then doing this morning on ITV. And the contestants were the audience. And it was a great hit. And ITV were going to launch this in prime time. Massive thing for Paul. Massive thing for me. This was my big TV breakthrough. And at the last minute, Paul fell out spectacularly with ITV.

You and I, of course, would never behave like this. Never. At a massive falling out of them, called them a bunch of petty tyrants and said, I'd rather be sweeping the streets than work for ITV, which brought an abrupt end to my dream and the show. And then Simon Cowell sold the rights to America to NBC. They repackaged it as America's got talent. I went on that.

You then joined it after a season, number one show in America. And who knows that may have never happened. if Paul hadn't had a strok with ITV and walked off. And he had a great career over at, that's last one, America's got talent with the Hoff and Harry and various others. So he was a great talent and will be greatly missed, I think. And irreplaceable.

Yeah. There's nobody that could, you know, walk in his shoes. He's just an incredible human being. Well, he was the kind of guy. I always think there's two types of broadcast him, especially for live television. There are the type that when something goes wrong, they're paralyzed. They can't do anything.

They just can't move. And there are the types like Paul O'Grady who would revel in stuff like falling off his chair or something going wrong. He'd find it hilarious. And he would communicate his hilarity to the audience who would then all fall about laughing. And that's a real talent. Real. That's it. That's the difference between fake and real.

Well, he's authentic. And I always think you and I've had this discussion before, but authenticity is the key, I thinking on television. If people can see through you eventually, if you try and pretend to be someone you're not, they'll see through it. And Paul was exactly what you saw on television was what you saw when you met it. Exactly. All heart. Yeah. Great guy. Loved his dogs, loved his fans, loved his viewers, and it'll be greatly missed. Sharon, lovely to see you. How he referenced Ozzy? Everyone references Ozzy. How is Ozzy? He's good. He's doing so much better. He's I think I told you about it the other night,

but now it's been announced. We can talk about it. He's doing a show October 6 in America. He's doing... It's at the Cichella site, and he's there, and it's going to be a great show. Guns and Roses, Metallica, ACD, Ozzy. So the Rock is still rocking.

We haven't got to worry about Ozzie stopping Rocky. No, no, no. He never stopped. He's back. Please send him my best. It's great to hear, and it's lovely to see you. He wants to talk to you. Well, let's talk.

All right. I'm available. My answer with me, she says, if that's Ozzy, I'm here. All right? I'd love to talk to. Okay. Great to see you.

Love you. Well, coming next to night, as we discussed earlier, world athletics bands trans athletes from elite competition. Should every sport now follow to protect the integrity of women's sport? Welcome back to Pierce Morgan, Uncense. The saga of trans athletes competing in women's sport appears to be nearing what I would say is a common sense conclusion,

at least for now. Images like this of transgender swimmer Leah Thomas that we discussed earlier. kind of crystallize the absurdity and unfairness. Well, certainly that's what I think. Well, high-profile stories like that of Laurel Hubbard. He made the Tokyo Olympics as a trans weightlifter at the age of 43, nearly double the age of any of the other female contestants. Spark furious debate.

Well, last week, World Athletics announced that trans athletes will no longer be allowed to compete against women from the end of this month. They did it to protect fairness and integrity of women's sport. Critics said it's transphobic. That's their response to anything in this debate. and leaves trans women with nowhere to go, which is a fairer argument, which has to be resolved. When joining me now is British Shopper Champion Amelia Strickler

and Human Rights Campaigner Peter Tatchel. Welcome to both of you. Amelia, we had you on before about this, and you were very passionate about why this needed to happen. So I'd imagine you've really been pleased to see this development. 100%. A lot of women, especially in athletics, are really, really excited about this.

It's just about now making it go into grassroots and master's level where there is a lot of trans women competing in the women's category as well. So now that we've got the elite level, it needs to be all levels, all sports. So, Peter, it's complex for this, because I don't want trans athletes not to be able to compete. Let me just say that straight away. But I spent some time with Martina and I've rattled over in Florida last week, who's been recovering from double cancer and it was a very moving interview. But we actually had to chat about this as well,

because she's one of the most high-profile LGBTQ campaigners has ever been. And yet when she raised her head over the parapet about this and said, I just think it's a real problem and you can't allow this to continue, otherwise women's support will be destroyed, she then got, tried to be cancelled, and people abused her, they shamed her and so on, which I thought was completely ridiculous.

The idea she's not a friend of the transgender community because she's trying to stand up for what she saw is an unfairness for women's rights in spool. And I just thought that was terrible. What do you make of this ruling by Sebastian Coe and World Athletics? and how do we resolve all this? Well, the first principle is that sport has to be fair, and it's not fair if people have particular unique advantages.

So you would accept that? Well, I accept that, but I would also accept that not all trans athletes are the same. So some may have an advantage, and others may not. So, for example, I know a woman, a trans woman, who competes in a woman's football team. Among the team, she's one of the smallest and weakest of the team. No one can say that she has an unfair advantage. advantage. And equally, all athletes in elite sports have some kind of advantage. They may have

extra large lungs or hearts, long legs, tall height. Michael Phelps, that fantastic, brilliant swimmer, who won so many gold medals in the pool. Had an unfeasibly large wingspan. When he put his arms out, he was six inches longer than anybody else's reach. So, I mean, but he also had extra large lung capacity. Right. So I've heard this, Huge feet. Yeah, I think, look, it's not an invalid argument immediately that they're, you know, in all sport, you're going to get some people who are physical freaks, if I want of a better phrase, like Michael Phelps, who literally could do this and it's normally the same as your height or something, isn't it, the span? And he had six inches extra and massive hands, right? Obviously, you can help them in huge feet, I think, as well.

What's your response to that argument? But biologically, they're still the sex that they're competing against. you know, at the end of the day, reducing a testosterone level is not going to cut it because women are so much more than a testosterone level. You know, physiologically, you know, periods, whole other discussion. Well, that is certainly not to be. We're so much more than a testosterone level. So just reducing a testosterone level at the end of the day, I mean, it's not going to change

the physiological differences. Because a lot of these people, too, are, you know, they're training as a male athlete for a long period of time before transitioning. So they're having that higher testosterone level. And it's things like lung capacity as well, all these things which you get after, you know, having gone through puberty. They're real things which give most trans athletes an immediate biological advantage. That's my problem.

The other half of this is what, if they don't compete against women born to female bodies, what happens to trans athletes? Now, I think there's one of two things you can do. Either they compete against their biological sex, which most of them have done anyway, for many years, actually never as successfully as they do when they compete against women, which I think is the argument right there. Or you create an entirely new category. There are more and more, as you said at grassroots level, you create an entirely new category for trans athletes to compete against other trans athletes. Well, my starting point is there shouldn't be a blanket

ban on all trans athletes. There should be individual assessment. So where there are issues raised, that's never going to work, is it? No, of course it can. You can't make it one, you know, person by person by person. You can't. They're not that many trans athletes overall, and it's quite feasible. Actually, there are more or more of them. Well, there are, but there's still a very tough. There's already 13 in elite athletics. Really?

DSD athletes. So 13 elite athletes. You see, what my issue with is, they're going to start breaking women's records irrevocably. Because, I mean, Leah Thomas won one race against females. That's, you know, just to point of the argument, females, like 50 odd seconds. I mean, it was ridiculous. And then at the podium towers over these. This podium picture, no one can be happy about that.

That is clear advantage for a biological male. I'm saying where there is a clear demonstable, proven advantage, an unfair advantage, then of course that should not be allowed to take place. But I do think that individual assessment rather than a blanket ban is the way to go. Because then you penalise the ones who do have an unfair advantage, but you don't penalise ones that don't. So Amelia, it's interesting because in rugby, I think, in places like New Zealand's now, for example,

they do actually, because they recognize that some kids, when they get to 13, are twice the size of other 13-year-old kids, they now separate them in weight classes rather than age. So they put the ones who are a certain size, and they play rugby against each other, depending, but it's no longer about age. So is what Peter says, has it got any merit to do it this way?

I mean, I don't think me or many female athletes would think that was still appropriate because of the biological sex that is there at the end of the day. There's still so many physiological differences that you can't change. They're never going to have a period, right? Whereas every elite female athlete once a month has, in some cases, quite a crippling condition which they're going to get every month, which will affect their training, it will affect everything. Competitions, right?

Which I completely understand when women say that. That's not going to happen to a trans athlete. No, it won't. So they have that advantage regardless of their size. Yeah. But again, I say, don't have a blanket ban, have individual assessment. I think it's particularly unfair for intersex athletes like Casasomenia. Well, that's a different case. But it's very similar because it's about a mixture of male and female.

And it's not something they have chosen. It's something they're born with. I do feel, I feel it's not like the rapist situation in Scotland where I think they're literally scamming the system. I do have respect for people who transition. It's not about being transphobic at all. It's about... Yeah, but Kasta didn't transition. She was born.

No, no, I know. I know. I think that's a different case. But I think that they're very, very unique cases. I mean, there's hardly any of them, right? Well, there's the 13. That's the number that I'm mentioning. No, no, in terms of Kassas.

D.D. Yeah, sorry, that was the number I was referring to. 13 DSD athletes in the women's distance events. And three of them had gold, silver, and bronze in 2016 Olympics. So, I mean, we're, you know, clearly they have an advantage because they've done really, really, well for themselves. Or they might just be very good athletes. But you know, I take...

But they did go through male puberty. There's a debate going on here. And I think we need more science, more investigation. And I do think, as I said, it has to be fair. But World Athletics said we've seen the science. This is why we've made our decision. We've seen the science. Peter, I like your attempt to try and win this argument, but I think I don't agree with it.

Even Lord Coe said... He did. Even Lord Coe said it's not proven that they don't have an advantage. So, you know, it's a negative that Lord Coe and the World Athletics Federation are seeking to uphold. And I think that's a very bad way to go. Maybe, but I think the best way to do is to say stop, pause, continue investigating, but for now preserve the integrity of women's ball, right? I mean, that's where I think.

Please give us a shot. Yeah, please. In your case, literally. Literally. Yes. Great to talk to you both. Thank you both very much. Well, coming next to that is more harrowing details emerge about the national school shooting.

left three nine-year-old children dead. Is this now the new normal in America? Is this what it's going to be like? A million new guns are sold in America every month. A million. How does this end without endless more shootings? I'll debate that with two Americans who have very different views after the break. Well, three nine-year-old children and three adults arrived at the Covenant School,

the small private Christian Academy in Nashville, Tennessee on Monday, for what should have been a normal day. but by the afternoon all six of them were dead. They were killed by Audrey Hale, a transgender shooter who had seven legally held weapons, including assault-style rifles. Guns are now the leading cause, extraordinary statistic, the leading cause of death for children and teens in America. Clearly, it can't go on like this,

but how on earth does it not go on like this, given that a million new guns are sold every month in America? And this situation is getting worse all the time. Well, it's not for me to tell Americans what to do with their gun laws or their gun culture. But Americans have to sort of that, and they can't just keep letting schools being attacked like this. So I'm going to bring together two Americans with very different views to see if we can somehow find some common ground, which might possibly do something to help this situation. I'm joined by Fox News host and lawyer, Arodo Rivera, and Conservative talk show radio star Ben Ferguson.

Well, welcome to both of you. Heraldo, I'd look at your tweets whenever these things happen. And I could sort of share your general, I think, dismay that nothing ever seems to get done about this. And I've seen you arguing with people about it. But there's a real groundhog day feel now to this, where if the number of guns in circulation exponentially rises all the time and there are no new gun laws brought in, then how does anyone expect this to not just get worse? I just keep wondering, peers, when too much will be enough to motivate people to change the grim reality. There are more guns in this country now than there are people. There's been 130 mass shootings since the first of the year.

It is a horrifying situation. The gun lobby is so overwhelmingly powerful. It intimidates anyone who speaks out against it, as you yourself experienced during your time. here in the state's peers. It is powerful. It is, you know, formidable. It is very difficult to move. You know, they tend to duck down and stay out of sight for the raw impact of one of these particularly gruesome experiences. Then they resurface and fight off any changes, the state of Tennessee where this latest shooting happened. Anyone can have a gun.

Anyone can have a concealed weapon. There are no laws against it unless you are deranged or have some court order against you, neither of which Audrey Hale had. So we'll have more and more of these. It will happen again and again and again. We'll be horrified for a day or so and then move on. It's a situation there.

This is a cancer in America, and I don't know how you fix. Ben Ferguson, you and I have debated this, I think, for, I don't know, 14 years? A decade. 14 years probably since I joined CNN. You know, Sandy Hook, I felt at the time surely would change everything and nothing changed. And then we had exactly the same number of kids killed very recently in a mass shooting at a school, very similar to Sandy Hook, 20 again. And I realized this was really Groundhog Day.

And why should it change when, and... actually nothing gets done. I simply ask you one question, I think, which is I understand the Second Amendment. I understand that you believe, like many Americans, millions of Americans, that you have a right to bear arms. Okay. And I understand you can't take away 400 million guns.

There's too many of them out there. What I don't understand is why the rights of children not to be shot dead, which they're now being done in more numbers than any other cause of death, why those rights are not deemed to be. be above your right to have an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle? Let's start number one with the Constitution.

Shall not be infringed means shall not be infringed. So that's the first thing, and that's in our Constitution. Second thing is this. They're only AR-15. Well, Ben, Ben, Ben, on that point. Ben, Ben, hang on. Ben, on that point, on that point, it's a second amendment. It's already been-

Second thing they wrote. Right, right. But why can't it be amended? There have been 27 amendments to your constitution. Why can't it be brought up to speed with the reality of modern America? Because the founding father's peers understood, shall not be infringed, needed to be used, because, and I'm going to explain it. Yesterday, all of the media in the day before were saying it was an AR-15 that was used.

It was not an AR-15 that was used. In fact, the only AR-15 peers that was used in this shooting was by the police officer who took down the shooter. The shooter, she had a carbine. It was either a 9mm or a 40 caliber, which is a handgun that is the same exact caliber. So the question is, if we're going to have an honest conversation about this, then you have to say and know what you're talking about. There's also something else that's not true. People have been saying the number one cause of death in America of young people is gun violence. That is a lie.

They counted 18 and 19 year olds to get the number to be higher than it was over fentanyl. If you want to talk about saving kids' lives, then be intellectually honest about it. don't cook the books on the numbers. The number one killer in America right now of young people is fentanyl overdoses. It is not gun violence. They counted 18-year-olds as an adult and 19-year-olds, which are adults. So that's the second thing. So if you want to fix the problem, then we can't start with lies. The third thing, peers, is this. What you just heard a moment ago from Geraldo was also a lie about my home state of Tennessee. The idea that everyone can have a gun, that is a lie. I own a gun store in Tennessee. I train law-abiding citizens.

to protect and spend themselves. People bring us cookies and brownies because they're able to save their own lives after they are targeting. Would you have sold this woman seven weapons? Hold it then. Would you have sold the shooter in Nashville seven weapons? Would you have in your store

when you sell your cookies and your tea? Would you have allowed this person with emotional problem to purchase seven weapons? Let me answer the question. If you're going to ask it, let me answer the question. The gun laws are clear here. She did not break any laws before she broke the laws yesterday that would take away her rights to own a gun. Now, if we didn't sell her a weapon, then you would have said we're profiling somebody in the LGBTQI plus community and how dare you take away their right.

Bologna. Seven weapons? At what point at what point does a prudent, normal, ordinary gun seller say to the 26-year-old or 28-year-old? So how many, 28-year-olds? Wait, this is the sixth weapon I've sold you this week. This is the seventh weapon I've sold you this week. What do you want to, what do you think she's going to do with it? You cannot buy seven weapons in a week the way you describe it.

You're being disingenuous and you're full of crap. If you want to learn something and come to a compromise, then listen and don't just say something you know nothing about in Tennessee. If you come in to buy a gun, we have the right. If we think you're under the influence, mentally unstable, or you have a problem, or you seem like you're depressed. or you seem that you're under the influence of anything to say no. We say no to people all the time because we only want to sell guns to law-biting citizens.

Ben, let me jump in. She bought seven firearms guns at different types in five different stores. And this happens time and again. I would ask you this, Ben. I remember a time. I think it may not be the case now. But certainly for many years, I couldn't buy a Kinder Surprise chocolate egg in America.

They were my favorites. They were chocolate. with little toys inside. I couldn't buy them because they were banned across the United States. In fact, I know a former British Prime Minister who tried to bring some into America and

had them confiscated at LAX Airport because he wanted them for his nephews and he couldn't bring them in. They were banned. They were banned because there was a risk that a child might choke on the little toy inside the chocolate. Sure. And yet at the same time there are people all

over America wandering around arming themselves like Rambo. I don't get that. How can a Kinder Surprise chocolate egg have more restrictions than semi-automatic rifles? Explain. I would go to the real core of the issue here.

We have a mental health problem right now in this country, and people don't want to talk about that issue. You have a woman here who we have normalized the mental health issue because we're playing politics. Did you know the World Health Organization before all of the pressure came in? to get rid of a, quote, stigma around transgenderism used to categorize it as a mental health issue?

I have compassion. Wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on. No, you want to a minute. Ben, you don't think we have, you don't think we have mentally ill people in Britain? You don't think they have been in Spain, or Italy, or France, or Germany? I'm trying to make.

This is the problem. If you want to talk about mental health, then let's talk about mental health. She was obviously dealing with serious mental health issues, and we shouldn't normalize mental health. health to check boxes by saying that they're transgender in Uvalde. What about the shooter in Buffalo? What about the shooter in Parkland?

Again, mental health issues or mental health? Every week, every week we get one of these mass killings. Peters, let me just say one thing. What is clear from what had just this tragedy that has stricken Nashville and the rest of the United States. The thing that distinguishes it, unlike Uvalde, The officers were brave, courageous, bold, selfless. They ran to the shooter rather than running away from the shooter.

The Second Amendment is stupid, as currently construed by the courts. We have to live with it, however, because there's no way it's ever going to be rescinded. But one thing we can do is when people have the sickness, the obscenity to go and perpetrate violence with firearms. Let the cops go. Let's go. Let's go. Go in guns blazing. Well, I think, let the United States at least be distinguished by that. Yeah, I thought they were extremely courageous, those police officers. They were incredible. Well, hang on, in direct contrast to what happened at Avalei, where there were hundreds of them, there were just a bunch of cowards. Look, I've got to leave it

there. All I would say, Ben, I mean, Harald, Harald, thank you for saying what you say, because it's not a popular thing to do in America. But at some point, Ben, Americans have got to do more than they're doing. I don't know. I mean, you probably, maybe you don't care about how the rest of the world views this, but you are supposed to be the number one superpower in the world, a place we look up to and respect. I love America. I love Americans. I just can't get my head around this gun violence culture. Here's what I'm saying. I will say this. Let me make the point I'm making, Ben, you can't just have this going on and on and on and do nothing. You can't. Piers, last year in September, There was a bill before the Senate to add armed security to every public school.

Not a single Democrat voted for it because they cared more about playing politics with the gun control laws than they did about protecting children. If you want to protect these children, we do more to protect money in our banks in America. We do more to protect our money in our banks than we do children in our schools. All right. I've got to move on. Thank you both very much indeed. Haraldo, thank you. Ben, thank you very much. You can see, you know, how passionate this is in America

and how intransigent it is. There's not an inch given on this debate and nothing has changed in the 14 years I've been covering mass shootings in America. Sandy Hook was 2012. It's incredible. It's just going on and on and nothing happens. Well, next tonight, it should we pause our development

of artificial intelligence. Until we're sure the robots aren't going to basically take us over and maybe kill us all. I'll discuss that with people, currently identifying as humans. Next. I'm joined by my pack tonight, talk to be contributed to Esther Cracker

and the Daily Mirror's Associated to Kevin McGuire. I want to start with AI. I want to play a clip from an interview I did with Professor Stephen Hawking. This was the last television interview he gave it, turned out. I asked him, how would the world end?

What was the biggest threat? Here's what he said. Is artificial intelligence going to be the end of us? And if it's not, how do we best work with it? Ever since the start of the industrial revolution, there have been fears of mass replaced humans. Instead, the demand for goods and services has risen in line with the increased capabilities. Definitely, it's an open question if we allow it to... Well, very prescient because today, a thousand eminent people including Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Steve Wozniak, of course the Apple Genius was Steve Jobs.

other tech leaders call for a pause, a six-month pause in the out-of-control artificial intelligence race. Warning is a profound risk to society and humanity. Kevin, this is serious stuff. These guys know what they're talking about, and they can see the rapid rate of progress with AI could lead to exactly where Professor Hawking was warning. Yeah, and with any technology, it is who controls and benefits from it. And if you want a few corporations to be taking over your life, well, that's going to happen. And that's why I see the argument for the pause with Elon Musk.

I say, hang on, you've been resisting regulation and not giving up details of, for instance, Tesla systems. So he's resisted regulation in the past, but he wants it here. But I do think it's right. Because otherwise, it's going to have a huge impact on us all, and it's going to be a few big corporations in control. I mean, I've got to say, Esther, on one level, people have been worried about AI in relation to human jobs. And that's a completely understandable thing, where technology takes over human manpower. This is a bit more serious.

What they're getting at is what Professor Hawking was warning me about that time, which is actually it could just take us over. Yeah, they become so sophisticated that they effectively just become too sophisticated to control. I think it's a little bit too late for this. And I think that the incentive to actually push for AI is that the commercial incentive is too strong

to actually stop it now. I mean, it's quite rich that's coming from someone like Elon, and all of these people who have basically pushed for this. But on the other hand, who else is better equipped to warn us than people like Elon Musk? You get under the bonnet and these things and know how dangerous are. Yeah, they're concerned about a rival, aren't they? Or they're concerned about rivals. But I think we should be concerned.

Now, in question their motives, but I think we should be concerned about who controls and who benefits. Absolutely. And, you know, you don't want to stop human ingenuity, but when they're genuine threats to humanity, I think that's where you have to draw the line. We're talking about a genuine threat to humanity. The Guardian newspaper, which is a genuine threat to humanity. They've had to issue this extraordinary front-page groveling lead story apology. I mean, quite extraordinary, apologising for the fact their founder was up to his neck in racism and slavery.

The UNs responded and said that they wanted the UK government and the royal family now to start grovelling as well. Esther, I don't really get all this. I mean, I'll be really saying now that in the modern day we have to spend our entire time attoning for the sins of generations and generations ago. I mean, the only people concerned with this are the ones I can never atone enough. I'm just hoping that I get a cut of the lovely check that the Guardian is going to cut black people for the women's slavery. Because I never seem to benefit from it. Me and my friends never get money from it, which is very weird.

By the end of the day, you can never atone enough for something like this. The reality is no slavers or slaves are alive today to properly pay reparations to. And it's just kind of a self-defeating argument, but they just keep going on about it. Kevin, it is quite funny watching The Guardian self-flagellate like this. But there is a wider point. In San Francisco, they're talking about giving $5 million. to every black person who lives in San Francisco as reparations for slavery.

I just don't understand how this could do anything other than create new problems. But I don't think we should be afraid of discussing it and probing into... Why want all the apologies? What do they do? Any institution like they're all a family or company that dates back to the 19th century,

the Guardian, will have profited from exploitation. And it won't just be slaves. It will be people in the country at all. We're all going to have... You're going to have relatives, and I'm going to have relatives, and you'll probably have relatives, right? Everyone's going to have relatives who at some point will have employed slaves, right? And then there'll be the question about...

I doubt I doubt I have. I think I was on the poor... I don't really get a tiny violin up in... I was very generous with yourself. I was on the poor side of the track. I think we were just... Yeah, but you don't know, do you? No, well, if we...

If it found out, I'll say, ooh, they weren't very nice and they were bad. You owe me 50 quid. No, but you can. You do. You owe me wanting. I'll make sure you get some... some dosh. But you can see an institution like The Guardian, right, which takes principal stands,

I think has to face up to its history. And because the Scott Trust has a lot of cash, it can begin to make some amends. I'd like to see the Guardian. I'd like to see The Guardian then handing out a lot of money to people like Esther. I need to see my bank account. Very juicy

by Monday morning. There will be words. I would love to have been in the Guardian News news because they're so sanctimonious. They're all a bunch of woke virtue signals. By the way, most of them are stinking rich, right? They've all got about eight properties and millions of... I would love to have been there when they were told your whole front page tomorrow is a grovelling apology because your founder was a racist slave owner.

In the American Civil War, the Guardian backed the South, the Confederacy of slave owner. So it shouldn't be a great surprise to those like the Guardian now. Guys, I'll leave it. Thank you both very much indeed. What are you up to? Keep it uncensored. Very important. Good night.