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.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by dave_welch
I think that the people calling to deport PM are wrong and not seeing the point. Deporting him is not the right course of action
I'm not certain there are actual grounds for deportation, but would you mind telling us what you think is the point here? Did you mean that people who are angry at Piers for suggesting disarmament of American citizens do not see the point, or is it just the liberal point of view they don't see?
Let's just boil down the point to a minimum shalle we?
Progressives see gun control as a way to stop school shootings, and also a way to stop citizens from being armed enough to resist their Totalitarian agenda.
Conservatives know that gun control is a path to tyranny and that disarming citizens gives the govt more control.
Our Bill of Rights says we have the right to bear arms. It is simple. The reason for it is simple, it is to resist govt tyranny. That was it's purpose of inclusion. The Founding Fathers told us so, and they would know wouldn't they?
All this business of pretending it's about saving children is baloney. It is not. Hillary and Barack want to pursue the UN Small Arms Treaty so the entire world cannot resist the tyranny of the One World Govt.
I have just given you the microcosm and the macrocosm of gun control.edit on 13-1-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by WhereIsTheBatman
From what I just watched, there was no owning going on. Morgan let Ventura say his piece, played devil's advocate, and ended up giving Jesse his approval at the end, so why make out like he was really trying to rip JV apart and had it turned around on him? I'm far from a fan of Morgan's, but it seems some here just want to hate him because he's saying things they don't agree with, and that ain't the American Way, is it?
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by SpearMint
nope, wasn't me ... your post history says it was ... ThirdEyeofHorus ... but that's ok dear, i see you're stumbling all over yourself anyway
now pay attention closely, it was your comment that was incorrect.
they are still used today and are hardly inconvenient.
suppose you never heard of this cutter, eh ?
usmilitary.about.com...
armament on board the Eagle ... www.uscg.mil...
i wondered why you make such erroneous statements so regularly ... at this point, i'm guessing it has something to do with that 'intervention' you were harping about earlier.
hmmmmm, Floyd had a term for that ... comfortably numb ... yeah, that would fit your dilemma.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by SpearMint
Pay attention. Someone else (you, I think) brought up cannons, I was saying how inconvenient they were back then for a citizen to use and are therefore completely irrelevant
The point about the cannons was not about them being convenient, it was just the way of warfare during the Revolutionary War. Certainly a small handgun is much more convenient on the streets of New York, don't you agree? Personally I have learned some weaponless self defense but even Bruce Lee said that Kung Fu was not always adequate.
Anyway if it were not for the fact that the average colonial man was armed, the militias which won the war would not have formed. A well -regulated militia was not a standing army.
It is a waste of time when someone does not understand the purpose of the Revolutionary War and the Constitution, much less the 2nd Amendment. The Constitution is not going to stop because someone like you doesn't understand the point of it.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by SpearMint
civilian arms ???
which thread are you on ... this one is about Piers and his little book of tricks.
if you could stay on topic, that'd be helpful.
did you get your fill of cannons yet ?
that's why the cutter ... to satisfy your cannon curiosity.
now that we have your previous nonsense out of the way.
******************
if the Consitution is irrelvant, why not just dump Piers overboard ??
it's not like he's an asset.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by dave_welch
his crime is as obvious and serious as was Lennon's.
how is Piers any different ?
they're both activists.
they're both entertainers.
they both offended America.
they're both druggies ... what else is needed for Piers to be eligible for deportation ?
don't fool yourself, Piers isn't popular enough anywhere to be a martyr.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by SpearMint
it appears to be working well for the last 200+ years, why wouldn't it ?
oh, that's right ... you'd prefer we can't defend ourselves ... thanks but NO thanks.
how do you figure that ?
Americans don't go to other countries and then bash that country's culture in their public media, without consequence.
Americans are unique in that they are the combination of all known cultures, the assimilation of all cultures into a "melting pot".
Plus everyone in the USA, even illegals, have human rights that must be respected. Including speech.
I am glad we are having all of these discussions.