It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Piers Morgan "slams" down U.S. Constitution, says "Your little book" while getting baked.

page: 18
91
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by itbenickp

Originally posted by SpearMint
Think for yourself, the constitution is redundant and outdated.


No it is not, the founding fathers had the fore sight to put in the second amendment to oppose govt tyranny, THATS what the 2nd amendment is about. They wrote it becasue they knew that all govts get more elitist throughout the ages, they knew that all govts eventually turn on the governed. If anything the constituition is more relevant than ever before.


This is something that people can't seem to get their head around, if they wanted to, the 2nd amendment WOULDN'T STOP THEM. People act like it's some sort of magical contract.




posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
As someone once said , "Guns kill people like spoons make you fat."

This is something the anti-gun crowd don't seem to understand. Its almost as stupid as blaming violent behavior on video-games or movies. If you take them away, the demand and lust for violence is still there. If you take guns away, the desire to hurt and kill is still there. It doesn't solve anything.
edit on 12-1-2013 by TheReclaimer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Is it a coincidence that we have had all these shootings in the last 6 months?I don't trust what has been reported in the msm at all
Is it coincidental we are having debates on gun control?
Is it coincidental that Piers Morgan is taking on these issues?being a non citizen?And not for a second do I believe he cares about the American people.I don't know about you but I find that very odd.

I can say one thing though:I don't trust the msm,I don't trust Piers Morgan,I don't trust Alex Jones or most of the politically motivated high profile people in this issue.

There's something so off about all of this...I just can't put my finger on it



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   


I'm not from the States, but why exactly does a British journalist have a politically charged television show in the US? The stereotypical "arrogance" that Americans are known for, has absolutely nothing on the British. They define arrogance and this piece of $%#@ is no different.
reply to post by HIWATT
 


Yes it is clear you are from the States, it you actually that American "arrogance" has nothing on the British. Smacks of sheltered living...

Seems more Piers Morgan is the only British person you've ever actually seen.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos

Originally posted by ConservativeAwakening

I don't agree. I wouldn't say the post ww2 administration for the next 20 years did consciously want to take away rights. there was legitimate fear of the communist, or to be fair to the lefties, stalinist communist ideology sweeping into the states. Even pre ww2! killings, agitations, assassinations, it all happened, in the name of communism and a bolshevist style revolt. the government at the time only reacted to it, granted, in a pretty harsh way, but think about what COULD have happened if they weren't tight on the reds.


I would be interested to read more about this, sources are quite sparse over here on that subject as we never experienced it due, most likely, to Labour being voted into power as soon as the war ended.

Maybe as a result of that it has been my opinion ever since that the Red Menace scare was engnineered as a way in which the US Government could exercise a degree of control and direction over the population, having seen how the people united as one under the govt in order to defeat the Japanese and German threat, the conclusion being that nothing keeps the citizens in line like a common bogeyman, I noted the rise of the Chinese and the Muslim menace following the fall of the Soviet Union which is prevalent to this day and this seemed to reinforce my thoughts that the American Government needs the people to be scared of somebody.

If you can point to contradictory sources I would be fascinated to read them, thank you


Hmm hard to say where you would start to look for those sources. I just know that there were legitimate concerns that red ideology would begin to conglomerate into actual big movements across the country, there were some quasi-bolshevik bandits and gangsters, influenced by the prospect of better working unions, going around and in some cases attacking people, there were some political murders which led to the policies changing to brutal crackdowns on suspected communists. And honestly, they're really wasn't that much of a German threat to America, Japan was much more of a threat to them. The government faked evidence of some ultra plot by the nazis to invade the states through south america lol, Roosevelt even announced the lie on radio



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   


Rightly so IMO,as its not up to them but up to the UK. Even so,they at least have some clout being the mighty US Gov.
reply to post by Silcone Synapse
 


Clout being the "mighty US Gov"?

Off topic, but really, that's just dumbfounding.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Your right, in that words on a paper wont stop them. BUT Words written by our ancestors as a warning as to what COULD happen and what to do about it, helps us to stop them. If anything the 2nd amendment is probably the most prophetic of the amendments. But your continuing theory that the constitution is just a piece of paper is unsettling. I wont say absurd or stupid, just unsettling. The constituition is not just some piece of paper, it is the United States founding document, it is our guide book to how a government should be installed. Is the Emancipation Proclamation a useless piece of paper? The Declaration of Independence? The Bill of Rights? NO they are not, they are historic principles and fundamentals told to us by our fore fathers. The same fore fathers that had the courage and audacity to stand and create a new nation. It would have been easy for them to just accept taxation without representation, but they knew in their blood that the easy thing is not the right thing. They knew that if they didnt stand up and say enough is enough king george could have took and took and took. So no, dont ever say the constituition is just some piece of paper, fore are you not only offending me and what i stand for, and took an oath to defend BTW, you are offending the very principles of this nation.
edit on 12-1-2013 by itbenickp because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by itbenickp
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Your right, in that words on a paper wont stop them. BUT Words written by our ancestors as a warning as to what COULD happen and what to do about it, helps us to stop them. If anything the 2nd amendment is probably the most prophetic of the amendments. But your continuing theory that the constitution is just a piece of paper is unsettling. I wont say absurd or stupid, just unsettling. The constituition is not just some piece of paper, it is the United States founding document, it is our guide book to how a government should be installed. Is the Emancipation Proclamation a useless piece of paper? The Declaration of Indepence? The Bill of Rights? NO they are not, they are historic principles and fundamentals told to us by our fore fathers. The same fore fathers that had the courage and audacity to stand and create a new nation. It would have been easy for them to just accept taxation without representation, but they knew in their blood that the easy thing is not the right thing. They knew that if they didnt stand up and say enough is enough king george could have took and took and took. So no, dont ever say the constituition is just some piece of paper, fore are you not only offending me and what i stand for, and took an oath to defend BTW, you are offending the very principles of this nation.


Yea, HISTORIC. Once it was important, now it is not. If you could snap your fingers and all copies of the constitution disappeared do you think things would change? Nothing would change, people know their rights, other countries are doing fine (or better) without it. For this reason it is redundant, it's not stopping anything, it's just there giving the illusion that it actually influences the government.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by SpearMint
Well his belittling of the constitution is quite justified. It's outdated and treated like no one would be free without it. It could be destroyed today and there would be no difference, if anything it's a hindrance because it blinds people from reality while they protect their "freedom".


If you have a problem with this country and the documents that created it, don't let the door hit you in the azz while leaving it! You are a traitor to this nation if you believe what you say to be true!

edit on 12-1-2013 by ajay59 because: (no reason given)


Lucky I don't live in the US then isn't it? If I did though it wouldn't make a me a traitor, what I said is true.


No its not, while you are welcome to your opinion, it does not mean it is the truth. And belittling the Constituition of the United States while you are a guest in the United States is pretty ignorant. Add to the fact that he said that after spouting off about "his" 1st amendment rights while advocating gun control which infringes on the 2nd amendment. If the Constituition means nothing too him then "his" 1st amendment rights mean nothing. Meaning he has no right to saything about the whole damn thing.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by itbenickp

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by SpearMint
Well his belittling of the constitution is quite justified. It's outdated and treated like no one would be free without it. It could be destroyed today and there would be no difference, if anything it's a hindrance because it blinds people from reality while they protect their "freedom".


If you have a problem with this country and the documents that created it, don't let the door hit you in the azz while leaving it! You are a traitor to this nation if you believe what you say to be true!

edit on 12-1-2013 by ajay59 because: (no reason given)


Lucky I don't live in the US then isn't it? If I did though it wouldn't make a me a traitor, what I said is true.


No its not, while you are welcome to your opinion, it does not mean it is the truth. And belittling the Constituition of the United States while you are a guest in the United States is pretty ignorant. Add to the fact that he said that after spouting off about "his" 1st amendment rights while advocating gun control which infringes on the 2nd amendment. If the Constituition means nothing too him then "his" 1st amendment rights mean nothing. Meaning he has no right to saything about the whole damn thing.


Then explain how it is not.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Ok, snap your fingers and make all the copies disappear. But it would not be gone, because it lives in me, in my heart, in my soul. I swwore to uphold and defend it, and will so til the day i die. See to Constituitionalists like myself, its not a piece of paper, its an ideal, its a way of life. Something that i am finding you just do not understand. Is having a principle irellevant? Because that what the Constituition is, a set of principles, ideals, a way to live, the way to govern. Just because America has (admittedly) gotten off track does not mean that it is irrelevant. The U.S has dont its best to Destroy the Constituition, yet the Constituition has dont nothing but try to Strengthen America.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ConservativeAwakening
 


You have given me some food for thought regarding further research as, while I still think there is more than a ring of truth to the view I have held so long (and why wouldn't I) it would be good to see something from the Stateside perspective just to make sure I have a proper balance on what I've read before. I would be particularly interested in finding out the extent of the pre war perception of the Red Menace, as this would directly contradict my previously held view that it was purely a post war thing.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   
So many people missunderstand the point,i can't believe this is still the subject of debate,this is an American right,not an excersize on morality
If so why isn"t the trillions of dollars that have been stripped from the market and saddled as debt to the backs of current and future generations of Americans being questioned?
lets not confuse the point this is an American right as chopsticks are in China
The real brow raiser is this is being reviewed by the very body that is supposed to represent and protect the American people and its freedoms,keep your guns America.
edit on 12-1-2013 by all2human because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-1-2013 by all2human because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by itbenickp

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by SpearMint
Well his belittling of the constitution is quite justified. It's outdated and treated like no one would be free without it. It could be destroyed today and there would be no difference, if anything it's a hindrance because it blinds people from reality while they protect their "freedom".


If you have a problem with this country and the documents that created it, don't let the door hit you in the azz while leaving it! You are a traitor to this nation if you believe what you say to be true!

edit on 12-1-2013 by ajay59 because: (no reason given)


Lucky I don't live in the US then isn't it? If I did though it wouldn't make a me a traitor, what I said is true.


No its not, while you are welcome to your opinion, it does not mean it is the truth. And belittling the Constituition of the United States while you are a guest in the United States is pretty ignorant. Add to the fact that he said that after spouting off about "his" 1st amendment rights while advocating gun control which infringes on the 2nd amendment. If the Constituition means nothing too him then "his" 1st amendment rights mean nothing. Meaning he has no right to saything about the whole damn thing.


Then explain how it is not.


Myself and many others have explained why its not, yet all you come back with is "its all irrelevant" How many people of the world know that the United States has a constituition? A vast majority can we agree? How many People of the world know about the founding documents of any other country? A minority? It is the most famous document (apart from the bible) EVER WRITTEN. And its irrelevant?



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:42 PM
link   


I enjoyed this video as well where Piers is interviewed on a BBC show, "Newsnight", about what he is doing over here. It really says a lot about what he is doing (agenda) and why, as a journalist, he should stop. As a political activist? He should do whatever he wants.

Piers Morgan: "The guns issue here is so dangerous and so out of control that something has to give and if I can help frame the debate in a way that's constructive to getting new gun control legislation, then great."

Gavin Esler: "But framing the debate in a way that's constructive... You were telling gun proponents they were stupid."

Piers Morgan: "Well they were making very stupid comments" ...

Then he goes on to talk about those comments that he deems stupid.

Then Gavin brings up a good point.

Gavin Esler: "You can not be surprised by the vitriol... As a foreigner resident... In a foreign country... Telling them that you think their laws stink, which is effectively what you just said"

Piers tries to defend himself and Gavin cuts him off.

Gavin Esler: "but people will understand the arguments for both... but but...Everyone will understand the arguments, particularly over here, they understand exactly what you're saying... but you are now a political activist, you're not a journalist, are you...

Piers Morgan: "I don't mind what you call me. I'm very comfortable with what I'm doing and I'm going to continue doing it. If it makes me popular or unpopular isn't really the point. It's what I believe in."



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 

still seeking to prove a non-existant point eh ?
hmmmm, and you mistakenly believe that less firearm crime is equal to 'less violent crime', do ya ??
ok then, you are free to believe it.

such twisted statistics are abounding, please pick the right group that applies to your argument, as stated ...

You obviously can't look here, because there are no statistics

don't even say i'm putting words in your mouth, either.


"That experience in Australia is dwindling" Well that's just blatantly incorrect. Link your source.
ok, here's a couple.

link 1

The Australian Bureau of Criminology states its murder rate in 2006 with firearms was the highest ever at 16.3 percent. The ban started in 1997.

In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent, robbery 6.2 percent, sexual assault/rape 29.2 percent and overall crime rose 42.2 percent
thanks but i'll take my chances here.

link 2

Even the head of Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn, acknowledged that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime: There has been a drop in firearm-related crime, particularly in homicide, but it began long before the new laws and has continued on afterwards.

Moreover, Australia and America both experienced similar decreases in murder rates: Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9% decrease; without a gun ban, America’s rate dropped 31.7%.

all of which appear to be quite contrary to your statement here ...

However, statistics prove that gun prohibition works. Look at Australia

and since you can't seem to recall correctly, here's what i have actually said.

[color=amber] a gun is and can be leverage ... even without pulling the trigger

besides, impingement is still impingement regardless of the gender being impinged.
now, if you wish to discuss facts, i'd be happy to oblige, otherwise, enjoy your delusion



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


4. What am I supposed to answer? You haven't asked me a single question.
really ???

to help your memory along, answers to any of these would do and you could start with this one. the same one you insisted there were valid answers to share.


Tell me how I'm any less free than you are, simply because I can't own firearms?

then, either of these would do ...

any chance you guys want Morgan?

corrected yourself, where ?

or this one ... is Piers really worth the effort ?



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


But if I'm not mistaken, I've heard he used an AR-15, right?

Doesn't that stand for Assault Rifle 15?
yep, you are pretty mistaken indeed
that'd be ArmaLite rifle, as in the manufacturer of it


and that 'red scare', turned out to be not so much of a scare after all.
here's a few links for those curious.
blacklisted by history
ultimate vindication
venona papers



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


This is something that people can't seem to get their head around, if they wanted to, the 2nd amendment WOULDN'T STOP THEM.
maybe not but [color=amber]the Beauty of the 2nd Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it -- Thomas Jefferson.

come and get it big boy



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 

if you're really intersted, here's a few links to get you started ...
results 1
results 2
results 3



new topics

top topics



 
91
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join