Brooklyn Museum | Phillip Jones Griffiths
The Painting Of The Virgin Mary
The Painting Of The Virgin Mary
Things don’t seem to be going all that well for CNN’s imported pommy ranter Piers Morgan, after it has been revealed the show has been slowly going down the toilet since Morgan started his anti gun campaign.
The show, hosted by anti-gun crusader Morgan, continues to struggle in the Nielsens. And this month, the start of the Michael Dunn loud-music murder trial in Florida has put the issue of gun control back in the forefront. February has also produced six of the show’s smallest 10 audiences since it bowed in January 2011.
Tuesday’s telecast, which included coverage of the uprisings in Kiev and an interview with Rudy Giuliani, drew the show’s second smallest audience to date in the key news demo of adults 25-54 (50,000). It also drew just 270,000 total viewers, according to Nielsen, the show’s ninth smallest gathering ever.
“Piers Morgan Live” has fallen below the 300,000-viewer mark on seven other occasions in February. And while the Winter Olympics on NBC may be to blame for some of the audience loss this month, “Piers Morgan” is drawing just a fraction of the audience attracted by competing shows on CNN and MSNBC.
Opposite “Piers Morgan” on Tuesday, “The Kelly File” on Fox News Channel drew 2.07 million viewers (including 354,000 adults 25-54) while MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show” attracted 906,000 (including 227,000 in the demo).
“Piers Morgan Live” isn’t CNN’s only problem in primetime, of course, as the entire lineup has struggled and CNN topper Jeff Zucker has promised that 2014 would be a year of “shake up.” On Tuesday from 8 to 11 p.m., the network averaged just 64,000 adults 25-54 — not far from its all-time low of 57,000 in May 2000.
Morgan has long been an outspoken critic of U.S. gun laws, but the drumbeat has grown louder in the two years since George Zimmerman fatally shot Trayvon Martin. On his CNN show in December 2012, Morgan got into a heated exchange with gun-rights activist Larry Pratt, asking at one point: “You’re an unbelievably stupid man, aren’t you?” Read more »
Yesterday I had a guest post from David Garrett that provoked agreat deal of comment. Later on I read an article in the Sydney Morning Herald that suggests that we have much to learn from the New York experience:
New York has achieved twice the national rate of the decline in crime in the past 30 years while reducing the incarceration rate.
The tide turned when a Democratic mayor, David Dinkins, an African-American liberal in denial about black crime, was replaced by the city’s leading prosecutor, Rudy Giuliani. New Yorkers, who vote overwhelmingly Democrat, were so weary of crime they turned to a Republican.
Under Giuliani, the police began swamping areas where street crime was brazen. They conducted stop-and-frisk operations. They collected fingerprints. This raised the ire of civil libertarians and civil rights warriors but it had a dramatic impact.
Police identified what they called hot spots and although most of those frisked were black and Hispanic, the black and Hispanic communities benefited most from the new policies because they were disproportionately the victims of street crime. Giuliani was re-elected. After two terms he was replaced by another Republican, Michael Bloomberg, who later fell out with the party, but Republicans have been running New York for the better part of 18 years.
Professor Zimring concludes that the police, by inhibiting street crime, inhibited crime generally. They took away a milieu. This had the greatest impact on the greatest source of crimes – criminals coming out of prison – who found their old comfort zones were gone. This led to a reduction of crime, not because prisoners came out ”reformed” but because a reduction in criminal activity on the streets had changed the social environment. It created a virtuous cycle.
Recidivism declined. The incarceration rate declined. The police also took a more pragmatic approach to victimless crime, especially marijuana possession. This led to a further reduction in the prison population.
Ok he is not actually incarcerated but he shouldn't even be being prosecuted.
Greg Carvell was the innocent victim in what can only be described as an attempted assisted suicide. That the guy didn't die when shot is a crying shame.
If someone walks into a gunshop and tries to rob it they have a deathwish.
Greg Carvell has elected trial by jury to defend the stupid charge.
What is he charged with?
Possessing a firearm without lawful, proper or sufficient purposes.
WTF is that? He is a gun shop owner he can possess any firearm he wishes. This case shouldn't take more than about five minutes to settle.
Of course we can all do our bit to circumvent the process by commenting willy nilly about the case ad nauseum so that eventually the court has no chance but to abandon the case.
Go Greg, BTW I will be buying all of my firearm supplies from your shop from now on.
You can support Greg with his legal bills by going to a site set up for that purpose.
The cops have decided to charge Greg Carvell , the gunshop owner who blew away a machete wielding fool.
Typical. You get charged for defending your own property and life.
How come the cops can waste time charging this guy but don't even so much as waste half a second on thinking about charging anyone from Labour for their extremely long list of crimes.
Greg Carvell should have joined the Labour Party then he wouldn't even be in this predicament.
Go for a trial by jury Greg, there isn't a hope in hell of you being convicted then.