Posted on 12/04/2012 12:53:24 AM PST by South40
(Excerpt) Read more at i47.tinypic.com ...
Next thing I’m going over to Britain, getting a talk show, and I’ll tell the Brits how their laws should be interpreted. That should go over very well.
Delete the rest of the words in that headline starting with “debating” and you’ve got it.
Delete the rest of the words in that headline starting with “debating” and you’ve got it.
Piers Morgan debating the US Constitution is like me debating whether Ghegs or Tosks were more influential in the development of Albania
NOTE: Piers Morgan is the same guy the owner of Fox News used to run one of their British owned papers....the one closed down for their eavesdropping and recording of people illegally
Piers Morgan is more than welcome to try and take my guns away....dare him to
It’s cute he thought he could win that.
It’d be like me debating the Queen’s knickers.
“Why do the British worry so much about our laws? “
Exactly. Morgan is incapable of understanding the 2A.
Ten years ago it was CNN would have disappeared completely if not for airports and breakfast nooks in hotels.
Most of the hotels where I have stayed the last couple of years have switched to FOX. I suspect some airports have, as well, but I drive rather than fly if my destination is within...say...a thousand miles. These days airports are like hospitals i.e. necessary...I guess...but I will avoid them when I can.
Piers, just like most people must have never read the 2nd Amendment....
Most of the arguments about the Second Amendment made by both sides revolve around a single assumption - that the Second Amendment grants a citizen the right to bear arms. What both sides fail to understand is that the Second Amendment grants no such right, in fact, the Constitution grants no rights at all!
What the Constitution does do is identify what powers the people grant to the government. This is the whole purpose of the Constitution - to tell the government what it can and cannot do.
That is why Marxists Democrats like Obama hate our Constitution because it is a limitation on Government not a limitation on We The People.....
Read the Second Amendment closely, it doesn’t say the people have a right to bear arms but rather that the
government cannot infringe on that right.
I dont know about you, but I sure as hell dont want to live in a country where the only ones with guns is the government.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Thet’s it, that is the whole 2nd Amendment...where does it say that the government gives us any right? It doesn’t, it only says that the government cannot infringe on our rights.
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
~ Thomas Jefferson
The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it...
~ Thomas Jefferson
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.
~ Edward Abbey
No free man shall ever be deprived the use of arms .
~ Thomas Jefferson
Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government- that it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s protection against the government. — Ayn Rand
“Most of the quotes on the internet are bogus.”
~~Abraham Lincoln
I support your sentiments, but most of your quotes are internet inventions.
100% correct.
Really? Which ones?
Piers is only one mugging away from a change in attitude.
The 1st ammendment was created with manual printing presses in mind. I quess the goverment can dictate every other form of media.
“Exactly. Morgan is incapable of understanding the 2A.”
No surprise, he was born a subject and has the mentality of one. He cannot be expected to understand the thinking of free men.
The ones by TJ for sure. I’m pretty sure the Abbey quote is bogus too. A little checking is in order from time to time.
So many quotes just get collected and copied and pasted that they take on lives of their own. Folks make up a great quote, and to give it cred, they assign it to a founding father. Then the bogus quotes are copied over and over.
I almost used what turned out to be a bogus quote on treason supposedly by Cicero in one of my books, but I checked and it was bogus. You have to go to primary sources like this UVA site to sort out the wheat from the chaff. Somebody even sent me his new novel, and it had bogus TJ quotes sprinkled throughout. Yikes.
http://guides.lib.virginia.edu/TJ
http://guides.lib.virginia.edu/content.php?pid=77323&sid=573588
http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/tje/spurious-quotations
Libs always start their assertion with an authoritative strawman stated as a fact, then they build on that while ridiculing other contradictory information.
Undercut AND ridicule their base assertion, and not only does their argument fall apart, but it undermines their entire philosophy.
Piers got owned! Kudos to Carol Roth!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.