CNN’s Piers Morgan Signs Off With Final Blast At U.S. Gun Laws

Piers Morgan falls squarely into my definition of subversive. CNN sucks for giving him a platform!! Spade.

reply to post by Boscov

s. I see no militia. I know none who are militiamen.

So what, just because you don't see them, then they are not there?

After the election of President Obama, small local militias began popping up again, as the Southern Poverty Law Center and others have documented. SPLC counted 1,360 active patriot groups in 2012, many of them militias

www.thenation.com...

While I am not advocating people to join a militia, because lets face it there are many militia's that are radical and hurt the cause for which they are fighting, while others have our constitutional rights at the forefront of what they are standing for.

So yes, there are many militias out there and you can join one any time you would like.

He does not understand why his brother a British officer would want US troops in a trench with him.

Many in the US military learned to shoot long before joining the military and this is one thing that makes the US military so good at what they do.

Its just like General George Smith Patton, Jr and his saying that he would take all the farm boys he could get because they knew how to shoot.

During the Vietnam war US troops were 3 times more likely to be killed if they were from a big city. the farm boys had a big advantage in knowing how to shoot and move in the woods.

Yeah little chap come stop us, right after tea time bring it

Agit8dChop
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

people with sound judgement are right to question Americas psychopathic obsession with guns.
but as long as its your people reaping what you sow at schools, theaters and malls.. then who are we too stop you!

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I kinda liked this progressive scum bag.........Not really. He could always go back to the UK and get a good job. Oh wait they hate his guts also.

beezzer
reply to post by Boscov

 

I don't have illegal firearms.

I just have "undocumented" firearms.

Just like we don't have illegal aliens... Now we have undocumented Democrats...


@ some of the other comments in the thread -

There are restrictions placed on the 1st amendment when it comes to language that could cause a threat to others - IE the classic argument of yelling fire in a crowded theatre. I think the point some miss in this area is the distinction between a public space and a private space.

If you enter a movie theatre you are in fact entering private property that is open to the public. For all intents and purposes you can be asked to leave without cause by the property owners / managers.

The other part people confuse is protesting.

If a people come together to protest something, and in the process of that protest they block a sidewalk / street, they can be arrested. The arrest is not because of the protest itself, but the actions that shut down a public right of way. A persons ability to protest is guaranteed up until the point that protest interferes with the rights of others who are not protesting.

The golden rule applies - Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.

As for the argument about a well regulated militia - All US male citizens are required to register for selective service. For those who are not US citizens - All US males must register with selective service when they turn 18 and must keep that information updated to the age of 26 (if I remember right). The purpose establishes the ability of the Federal government to know how many people are of combat age. If a war were to break out and the draft is reinstated, the selective service registration is used for call up.

If the Federal government passes a law which states I can be called up for military service, then by extension my argument is I am part of a "well regulated militia".

The US Supreme Court had 2 major rulings, one in 2008 and one in 2010. In 2008 SCOTUS ruled against Washington D.C.'s gun laws when it came to who could own, transport and how they are secured inside a private residence. The court struck the law down, implying gun control in that manner violated the 2nd amendment. In 2010 Chicago's gun laws were just as ridiculous. A court challenge was made in which the Supreme Court finally answered the question to the age old argument -

The 2nd amendment applies to the individual.

It would be funny if someone shoots Piers right in the ass

crucified
It would be funny if someone shoots Piers right in the ass

I agree. But there are some people worth going to jail over.... and Piers isn't one of them.

I've never watched him but I'm really tired of hearing about him so I'm glad he's gone.
Perhaps he can return to England and be a food critic? That seems to fit what I've heard of him---able to make a big to-do over nothing.

I just do not understand how the crimes of a few can be justification for infringing on the Constitutional rights of many. If the 2nd amendment had no purpose, then I could understand abolishing firearms, or something to that effect. But the 2nd amendment has a very specific and very noble purpose. It is the insurance policy for the people, plain and simple. And the history of the US has shown its citizens that the government can very easily infringe upon their civil liberties. It has happened numerous times, and probably happens every day in one way or another.

I assume that people think just because our society has advanced in some ways that the government could not, or would not, ever crack down on the people in a brutal fashion, suspend their liberties, or something to that effect. It could happen quite easily. Take something that is happening recently with the infringement of our right to privacy by the government. What can anyone do about it? If the government wants to do it, they will, plain and simple. You, the citizenry, have no recourse. The only recourse is through the system itself.

So if things continue the way they have, because the infringement of our rights as a whole has gotten worse as time has progressed, a day could arrive where the only recourse the people have is armed rebellion. And it may sound silly at this moment to some, but it is not. The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, understood this, and this is exactly why they included the 2nd amendment. If anyone has ever read some of their personal correspondance, this matter is addressed extremely well. If the police or military or even private contractors are ever turned loose on America, one would be glad to have the 2nd amendment.

Remember what happened during Katrina? There were private contractors with assault rifles who basically invaded the entire New Orleans, ON THEIR OWN. They had no government contract at that time. Some don't realize how easily something as mundane as that, although it isn't really mundane, could escalate in the blink of an eye. Especially if the military were involved.

JiggyPotamus
So if things continue the way they have,

Gun restrictions have been loosened...

the only recourse the people have is armed rebellion. And it may sound silly at this moment to some, but it is not. The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, understood this, and this is exactly why they included the 2nd amendment. If anyone has ever read some of their personal correspondance, this matter is addressed extremely well. If the police or military or even private contractors are ever turned loose on America, one would be glad to have the 2nd amendment.

Its a silly notion, and let me tell you why.
If the government decided to suddenly turn on the people, it would be spears against tanks.
Lets be real. You are out there with your semi assault rifle in the woods -playing- army. you got some old surplus camo a few hundred rounds, and maybe a sidearm 9mm.
On the other side, the ah-64 apache longbow is fueling up. a few mraps are circling your little funtime encampment. all are waiting for the initial payload from perhaps a ac-130h to drop down some trees and scorch the earth. perhaps drop a daisy cutter on you. then some troops get in position for the fleeing half dead rebels, cutting them in half with their m240b's. This is little more than a training exercise against the rebels. not even breaking a sweat. Hell, if there was ten thousand rebels in the hills, it wouldn't pose more than a mild inconvenience.

You cannot win a violent battle with the us military playing backyard soldiers...
Stop pretending it even remotely effects your safety as some sort of freedom fighter.

If your going to get into the argument, know what your arguing for...home security, and because its fun and legal.

rebellion. pfft...have better luck shooting spitballs..at least then you won't anger them enough to drop a small yield tactical nuke on your town.

Legislation is how rebellions take place..thats it. no GI-Joe fantasies..lets deal with reality and shut off red dawn for your understanding of military dynamics.

In regards to my personal feelings about the 2nd amendment, I on principle stand for it in some form. commonsense restrictions of course (well regulated milita does have the word regulated in it)..I am not a fan of guns personally. more of a sword and bow kinda guy.

ANNED
He does not understand why his brother a British officer would want US troops in a trench with him.

Many in the US military learned to shoot long before joining the military and this is one thing that makes the US military so good at what they do.

Its just like General George Smith Patton, Jr and his saying that he would take all the farm boys he could get because they knew how to shoot.

During the Vietnam war US troops were 3 times more likely to be killed if they were from a big city. the farm boys had a big advantage in knowing how to shoot and move in the woods.

edit on 29-3-2014 by ANNED because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-3-2014 by ANNED because: (no reason given)

A lot of truth in this statement. To this day I can still remember my drill sergeant asking me where I was from because of my thick country accent, then proceeding to demand that I score very high in my marksmanship tests simply because I was a country boy from the south. So I did, not that I'm bragging or anything.

Let him take all the final shots he wants...as long as they are FINAL.

Sadly, I don't think we have heard or seen the last of him. He may return to Britain, but the hatred for him there is worse than here. I can't see him on any Canadian networks. Obviously FoxNews is out. MSNBC wont take him either. Australia?

Wait a minute...the internet. Webcast with Larry King, Jesse Ventura and Piers Morgan....ugh

Where will he land next, and how long will he last?

reply to post by beezzer


That should be a bumper sticker, t-shirt, hat, billboard, and on a letter to every member that holds a public office.

Undocumented..... Holy Cow that''s Perfect!!!

reply to post by Boscov


First let me say you have it backwards, it's the abuse of the law that has paved the way for ignorance. The ignorance that thinks a criminal that has decided to take ones life is going to obey a gun law of, registration, confiscation, or regulation. You are ignorant if you think the energy wasted on the control of citizens and their firearms is as important as the energy that could be spent both financially and medically as heart disease. You are ignorant if you think the 100's of millions of firearms wouldn't make a difference in a war with any power let alone the American Military. BTW it's not the American Military I worry about it's the Blue Beret Military that concerns me. Ho Chi Minh thought he had a chance, and seeing today's climate of government control the only reason you still have a firearm is because the US citizenry still has an overwhelming chance. If the liberal democrat policy of registration then confiscation would work then there wouldn't be a single drug addict in the US, after all they are completely illegal.

Registering, regulating, controlling, and confiscating firearms from a honest citizen doesn't protect the citizens it only protects a tyrannical government and criminals.

alienreality


What really bothers me is knowing that Peirs home of England has outlawed saying anything against politicians now. You can be arrested for saying that The Prime Minister of England is immoral, unethical and is just a lying little slag who harms his country just by waking up every morning.
So It is a good thing I don't live in the UK.

Where did you get that outright tripe from ? The 18th century

We are always slagging the scum in charge. If it was illegal here the courts would have a busy time!
Look il do it here:
David Camroom and all members of parliment are all useless pieces of crap and a waste of oxygen.

The queen is a useless old hag who wastes tax payers money.


Report me to the police if you will, nothing with become of it.

Bassago
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Piers Morgan is finally gone? I'm so sad...
.
.
.
.
OK that's a lie.

Personally I couldn't care less except for the fact it's just rude to go into another country and then spout off about how wrong he thinks our rights and priorities are. I think we should talk Alex Jones into going on BBC and telling the UK they need to demand their guns back.

What guns ? It's only ever been a minority of people in this country who have owned guns....and they still do. We have never needed guns like the US just larger underpants.

This is blighty here and just to say "please don't send him back" unless its on a plane that doesn't have enough fuel and a couple of wonky engines and a suicidal pilot

but really he should stay out of topics like that, its one thing to have an opinion but its another to try and ram it down peoples throats at the behest of your paymasters when probably he goes out shooting everytime he's back over here bagging a few pheasants etc on his estate

Ohh I thought we got rid of this clown Piers Morgan for good years ago, I just hope he doen't return to England, can't you Aussies take him in.