Over 48,000 Sign Petition To Deport Piers Morgan

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I

Incorruptible

Lifer
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/12/2...tion-to-deport-piers-morgan-over-gun-comments

Over 48,000 people have signed a petition to deport piers morgan over comments he made about gun control. In a "debate" with Larry Pratt, morgan decided to throw insults instead of using facts.
The petition was started because morgan wanted to subvert the 2nd Amendment.

U.S. citizens can file a petition on the White House website, Whitehouse.gov, if they collect at least 25,000 signatures within 30 days. The White House is then obliged to issue a response.

piers morgan is wrong for what he said but they wont deport him or any other punishment.

So what do you think the White House say to this and what should happen to piers morgan?

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/12/2...tion-to-deport-piers-morgan-over-gun-comments
 
I

Incorruptible

Lifer
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
But I thought that free speech/1st Amendment rights aren't protected under PRIVATE CORPORATIONS according to some idiots on here

Its funny how there were cases with people voicing concerns with private employees making comments there were people on here who said it was alright.
 
Jaskalas

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,659
9,965
136
ctark said:
See first amendment.
Click to expand...

There's something to be said about this.

Under the basic premise of upholding the first amendment, I've no evidence before me that would weigh greater than it on this matter. Ergo I cannot support an effort to use a government function to punish this person.
 
buckshot24

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
I don't think the government should deport him for being an idiot, I'd prefer the market to kick him off the air. Although I'm not too sure the first amendment applies to Piers since he isn't a US citizen.
 
MomentsofSanity

MomentsofSanity

Lifer
Jan 25, 2011
17,061
9,531
146
Incorruptible said:
But I thought that free speech/1st Amendment rights aren't protected under PRIVATE CORPORATIONS according to some idiots on here

Its funny how there were cases with people voicing concerns with private employees making comments there were people on here who said it was alright.
Click to expand...

And yet again you show your complete ignorance of what the First Amendment actually means in the face of so many trying to educate you.

His employer is free to take any action against him they'd like. The government is not. Do you understand yet?
 
I

Incorruptible

Lifer
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
buckshot24 said:
I don't think the government should deport him for being an idiot, I'd prefer the market to kick him off the air. Although I'm not too sure the first amendment applies to Piers since he isn't a US citizen.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It would be better for the market to kick him off the air
 
IronWing

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,692
33,561
136
buckshot24 said:
I don't think the government should deport him for being an idiot, I'd prefer the market to kick him off the air. Although I'm not too sure the first amendment applies to Piers since he isn't a US citizen.
Click to expand...
The first amendment applies to persons, not just citizens, so the speech of non-citizens is protected.
 
buckshot24

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
IronWing said:
The first amendment applies to persons, not just citizens, so the speech of non-citizens is protected.
Click to expand...
When it was drafted it didn't apply to Indians or slaves.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Petitioning the government by non citizens is sort of weird. I don't think its as cut and dry as you've stated. Also, I don't think the first amendment protects speech of some guy living in France so "persons" is way too broad.
 
her209

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Throckmorton

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
buckshot24 said:
Slaves were counted as 3/5ths of a person so the constitution considered them "persons" yet the first amendment didn't apply to them.
Click to expand...

They were considered "persons" for representation, to inflate the numbers of representatives that slave states had. It would be like they considered livestock to be people. It doesn't mean they were considered human beings or even fractional ones.
 
waggy

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
idiotic all around. from his comments to the petition.

he has the right to say it. as much as i think he is a dingelberry for it he has that right. I have the right to turn him off when he comes on. CNN has the right to fire his ass.

though is he a citizen of the US? if not then his rights should be limited anyway but that is another discussion.
 
waggy

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Throckmorton said:
They were considered "persons" for representation, to inflate the numbers of representatives that slave states had. It would be like they considered livestock to be people. It doesn't mean they were considered human beings or even fractional ones.
Click to expand...

yeah. surprised people did not know that..
 
Engineer

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Agree or not, 1st amendment covers his butt. Now CNN could fire him should they want to. Not sure if he is helping or hurting their ratings (i.e. revenue) right now. Will see next month.

but I do wonder....would 48,000 people at AT sign a petition to have you not post on AT again? :hmm:
 
Last edited:
buckshot24

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
Throckmorton said:
They were considered "persons" for representation, to inflate the numbers of representatives that slave states had. It would be like they considered livestock to be people. It doesn't mean they were considered human beings or even fractional ones.
Click to expand...
I'm well aware that slaves were considered "persons" (even fractionally) as part of a compromise to form the union. However, whatever the reasoning behind the inclusion of slaves in the 13th amendment as "persons" doesn't change the fact that the constitution counted them as "persons" and yet they were not protected by the first amendment.
 
buckshot24

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
Anyway, there probably is case law establishing the first amendment rights of legal residents.
 
R

RabidMongoose

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
He seems more American and worthy of US citizenship than many native born Americans. He should stay and maybe the people who signed the petition can self-deport.
 
Londo_Jowo

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
Had the OP not posted this I would have never known what Piers Morgan said. I've never watched his show and have no intentions wasting my time anytime in the future. He's no different than any other clown with a opinion show on one of the major media outlets.
 
O

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Awesome. Maybe he will understand just how engrained the 2nd is in this country. It is not a (D) (R) issue. It is an American issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom