Deport Piers Morgan

[mikexmoran]

Do you not understand, or do you refuse to understand?

I've never been a good liar. Not for lack of trying on occasion.

I do not understand the need for private citizens to own automatic weapons or concealed weapons. One could probably make a decent argument for security firms and such, but I haven't heard the argument made in general that I understand for private citizens.

I think I understand why you might word your post the way you did. It was probably easier to challenge the integrity (or that of the post anyways - I don't think it was personal) of my comment than to make the case.

There is an obvious problem with the Constitution. The 2nd amendment is too vague for current times. It should be amended. I do not interpret it as a means for providing for a state militia. I believe it means that citizens should be able to own weapons and it should be unrestricted. That is my interpretation and I'm not a lawyer. I think we should restrict ownership of automatic and concealed weapons more than we do today.

That is one problem. The other problem is regardless of what you do with the laws, what do you do with the millions (I'm guessing) of weapons that are out there?

 

[Johan]

The problem are gangs and the illegal acquired and owned weapons by these as well as the illegal aliens that are in gangs. Count how many drive by shootings and murders are accountable to gangs during the 80's-90's-00'? Far more than you can think.

Yeah, problems are ALWAYS due to immigrants, citizens aren't responsible of anything that goes wrong in any country...
As far as I know, Lanza, Holmes, Page, Engeldinger, Johnson and Caffall were American citizens...

 

[Mayhem]

I've never been a good liar. Not for lack of trying on occasion.

I do not understand the need for private citizens to own automatic weapons or concealed weapons. One could probably make a decent argument for security firms and such, but I haven't heard the argument made in general that I understand for private citizens.

I think I understand why you might word your post the way you did. It was probably easier to challenge the integrity (or that of the post anyways - I don't think it was personal) of my comment than to make the case.

There is an obvious problem with the Constitution. The 2nd amendment is too vague for current times. It should be amended. I do not interpret it as a means for providing for a state militia. I believe it means that citizens should be able to own weapons and it should be unrestricted. That is my interpretation and I'm not a lawyer. I think we should restrict ownership of automatic and concealed weapons more than we do today.

That is one problem. The other problem is regardless of what you do with the laws, what do you do with the millions (I'm guessing) of weapons that are out there?

I'm not doubting your integrity. There are political issues like guns and abortion that for all the debate, no one ever changes their mind. As a HuffPost reader and commentor, I get into a lot of enduring discussions with people who have long since made up their minds regardless of what is said in the discussion.

You keep saying "automatic". There is a very real difference between it and "semi-automatic".

Concealed weapons is an interesting issue. They are needed to help keep people safe from crime/attack when they are out of their home. State to state, there are very real laws/regualtions/requirements. But I would be fine with allowing licensed citizens to carry openly.

The 2nd Amendment has been around for well over 200 years. I don't think there is a problem with it, or if there is, why wasn't there a similar problem 70 years, 50 years, 30 years ago? Guns were much more easily obtained, especially by untraceable means, then than they are now.

And your last sentence hits the nail right on the head.

 

[mikexmoran]

I'm not doubting your integrity. There are political issues like guns and abortion that for all the debate, no one ever changes their mind. As a HuffPost reader and commentor, I get into a lot of enduring discussions with people who have long since made up their minds regardless of what is said in the discussion.

You keep saying "automatic". There is a very real difference between it and "semi-automatic".

Concealed weapons is an interesting issue. They are needed to help keep people safe from crime/attack when they are out of their home. State to state, there are very real laws/regualtions/requirements. But I would be fine with allowing licensed citizens to carry openly.

The 2nd Amendment has been around for well over 200 years. I don't think there is a problem with it, or if there is, why wasn't there a similar problem 70 years, 50 years, 30 years ago? Guns were much more easily obtained, especially by untraceable means, then than they are now.

And your last sentence hits the nail right on the head.

I don't think we're too far off. We might argue over some details (auto, semi auto, or may conditions of concealment...maybe). I think we did have problems 70, 50, and 30 years ago. I seem to remember some bad guys out gunning the good guys at times. I'm thinking we just have lots more people per acre and that helps add fuel to the fire.

I don't think there was any problem with the second amendment. However, I think there is now. I believe the times have changed and require more stricter gun laws. The amendment gives a legal argument to not restrict gun ownership. Today, I believe, that is a problem.

I'm not sure what the answer is that would resolve the problem. I think we can at least fall forward towards bettering the situation.

 

[Mayhem]

I don't think there was any problem with the second amendment. However, I think there is now. I believe the times have changed and require more stricter gun laws. The amendment gives a legal argument to not restrict gun ownership. Today, I believe, that is a problem.

I'm not sure what the answer is that would resolve the problem. I think we can at least fall forward towards bettering the situation.

The times have changed. I just saw on the TV that "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3D" is coming out soon. And there's the "Saw" movies and others like it. Do we really have to wonder why people have become so desensitized to violence, even to the point that they want to commit it? Is this really that much of a stretch? But no, let's blame the guns that have been around for a century (semi-automatic, large capacity). Let's take the easy way out. And let's ignore the real problems with our society.

 

[TheSpokenWheel]

I can't believe the white house still bothers with this website. Seriously, nothing will ever come of this other than more publicity for the guy you're all scrutinizing. He won't be deported, just like half the country didn't secede after the election. 25k signatures is nothing, especially when its simply to deprive a man of his rights. I don't watch Piers Morgan, and I don't really know where he stands on everything. This is because within a few minutes of hearing him rant, I knew he was a bloated, attention seeking set of flapping gums that isn't worth listening too (just like Rush Limbaugh). Just fucking ignore him.

 

[mikexmoran]

The times have changed. I just saw on the TV that "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3D" is coming out soon. And there's the "Saw" movies and others like it. Do we really have to wonder why people have become so desensitized to violence, even to the point that they want to commit it? Is this really that much of a stretch? But no, let's blame the guns that have been around for a century (semi-automatic, large capacity). Let's take the easy way out. And let's ignore the real problems with our society.

I think we're both saying the same thing in terms of the cause not being any one thing. Mixing violent video games, violent movies, mental illness, and relatively easy access to an AR 15 and that could lead to trouble.

I'm not sure if I'm for or against the "right" to own semi-automatic weapons. ( I put the work right in quotes because you can define that from easy access to long process to own) Comparatively the US has the highest gown ownership by citizens than any other country. It becomes sad and infuriating when we point them at each other.

 

[PierreDK]

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it". Voltaire

"Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently". Rosa Luxemburg

"Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear". George Orwell

 

[mikexmoran]

Off topic, but I think these are the same guy.