Piers Morgan: The Second Amendment was clumsily written, it’s time for a debate to rephrase it

Piers MorganRed Alert Politics – by Melissa Quinn

CNN host Piers Morgan is well known for his outspoken anti-gun stance and is hardly a supporter of the Second Amendment. But Morgan took a shot at the Founding Fathers on Friday, saying the Second Amendment was “clumsily written” and calling for a debate to rephrase it.

Morgan spoke to an audience at the National Press Club and discussed his new book, “Shooting Straight: Guns, Gays, God and George Clooney.” The CNN host has gained notoriety for calling for more gun control, especially since the shootings in Aurora, Colo., and Newtown, Conn., and Morgan didn’t disappoint, addressing what he says is the evolution Second Amendment and the Constitution.  

“That to me shows you how clumsily worded, and I say that with great respect for the Founding Fathers, that Second Amendment was,” he said. “The comma in the middle is perhaps the most dangerous comma ever written because it can be interpreted in different ways.”

The comma Morgan references creates the clause: “being necessary to the security of a free State.”

He pointed the evolution of the Second Amendment, saying when written by the Founding Fathers, it meant not the right to bear arms “in their own lives,” but to bear arms as part of a well-regulated militia. But, as the NRA rose to prominence in the 1970s and 1980s — when “very right-wing people took over” — and President Ronald Reagan took office, the Second Amendment was redefined.

“They redefined it as an individual’s right to bear arms, no longer as part of a well-regulated militia,” Morgan said.

But he didn’t stop there. Morgan went on to say the Constitution — like the Bible — is not a sacred document, but an evolutionary one. And because of that, he said, it’s time for a discussion to rephrase the Second Amendment.

“When you’ve got so many amendments anyway, you say it’s a sacred document, it’s fine but it’s a bit like saying the Bible is a sacred document. And I speak as a good Irish Catholic,” Morgan said. “…I think you just have to look at it not so much as a sacred document but as an evolutionary document, hence the amendments that have already taken place. I think there is quite the argument to have a debate … a debate on whether the wording of the Second Amendment should be rephrased.”


By  /// October 18, 2013

Melissa QuinnAbout Melissa Quinn
Melissa Quinn is an Associate Editor at Red Alert Politics. She grew up in sunny Florida and graduated with a Bachelor of Science in journalism from the University of Florida. She currently works as a general assignment reporter and has written for the Daily Caller, Fox News and Fox Nation. She loves to spend time at the beach, scuba dive, watch college football and cheer on her beloved Florida Gators. She currently resides in Washington, D.C. You can follow her on Twitter at @MelissaQuinn97.


21 thoughts on “Piers Morgan: The Second Amendment was clumsily written, it’s time for a debate to rephrase it

  1. When are we going to throw this self-inflated moronic butthead out of OUR country? Let this fool go back to England and spew his crap there!

  2. Your not even a citizen of the U.S. you sack of shit. We don’t care what you think anyway so take your crap back to England. I think the saying there is PISS OFF.

  3. Who the f&%k does this piece of crap limey think he is? The second amendment was PERFECTLY written, is NOT open to any debate, and this stinking little British faggot can go pry his nose back up the Queen’s rectum and mind his own goddamn business.

    I really hope this son-of-a-bitch suffers a slow, and agonizing death.

  4. I see it as debating a special ed (the short bus) student. Like arguing with paint thinner. CNN already fired this guy, so why is he still here?

  5. A Britt………..Englishman……….What the Hell does he have to say about anything in America…….??
    He certainly has no authority on us, For Damn Sure………..
    throw the guy out of the country…..
    Just like the Mexicans come here and tell us what to do……..
    The Israeli’s do the same.
    When is this country of ours going to cease taking orders from others who aren’t even one of US?
    Cease fighting rich man’s wars with the lives of our young people?
    Bring all the U S Military home to stay home……
    throw out the World Bank………..
    Manufacture our own products and goods….
    Provide well paying jobs in so doing.
    Get rid of the Federal Reserve…….which is unconstitutional anyway!
    This list could be very long, and some americans wonder what happened to us.
    Well, there is a list of the biggest problems, right there.

  6. A well regulated militia is We the People, jackass. Just read some Madison, Jefferson, Washington or Coxe. You’ll find out exactly what they meant you wormy little sack of pus. We’re all supposed to be armed and ever watchful of usurping little wretched tyranny whores like yourself, Piers. You’re not welcome here scumbag. Go spew your lies somewhere else.

  7. ““That to me shows you how clumsily worded, and I say that with great respect for the Founding Fathers, that Second Amendment was,” he said. “The comma in the middle is perhaps the most dangerous comma ever written because it can be interpreted in different ways.””

    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.

    That sentence says it all. In my opinion Piers is a liar. He is trying to assist in the unlawful disarmament of the American people. That makes him a traitor – read Vieria’s “Dare Call It Treason” – since he owes loyalty to the USA while he is here. Not only is he a liar, but it shows that Piers (along with many of “our” representatives) has no knowledge of the US Constitution. The second amendment comes with duties assigned to the congress to carry out in order to meet the lawful requirements of the contract they are agreeing to when they take office and say the oath (which is also a requirement of the office).

    Exactly what part of the CONTRACT “our” representatives agreed to that they are, and have been, ignoring that has to do with the Second Amendment

    These are the duties assigned to the congress:

    Constitution of the United States of America, Article I, Section. 1: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

    Article I, Section. 8, starting with Clause 11: “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”.

    The congress has the ASSIGNED duty – as part of the contract to be able to occupy the position they are in – to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal – which is using private citizens in their own privately owned crafts to defend the USA and her people from attacks both Domestic and foreign.

    Clause 12: “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.

    The money that the congress has illegally spent beyond the lawfully allotted time of two years is a crime, the Misappropriation of Funds: misappropriation – the intentional, illegal use of the property or funds of another person for one’s own use or other unauthorized purpose, particularly by a public official… It is a felony, a crime that is punishable by a prison sentence.

    “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years” is really straightforward, and no misunderstanding of the words can be used as an excuse for disobeying that duty. No standing army except in times of war, and ONLY the congress can declare *war. War must be declared by congress to be a lawful war the US military are used to fight in. War cannot lawfully be “declared” against a tactic such as the “war against terror” or the “war against drugs”; both are not wars and not even the congress can declare a war against a tactic.

    *War defined: ‘Open and declared conflict between the armed forces of two or more states or nations’. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/war.

    Clause 12 was put in as a duty of congress because, as James Madison, the Father of the US Constitution warned: “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare”.

    Clause 15 another duty which requires the congress: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and REPEL INVASIONS”. (caps are mine)

    This clause is very straightforward also. The militia of each state is taxed with the defense of the USA and her people, not just with the defense of their state; and they are to be armed with weapons that can repel any invasions bearing modern weapons of war. Congress is required to provide those military grade weapons for the militias.

    Clause 16 also makes clear that the ARMING OF THE MILITIA OF EACH STATE is a duty the congress is REQUIRED to carry out: “To provide for organizing, ARMING, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.

    The US Congress is under the obligation by the supreme law of this land to arm each state’s militia with the type of arms that will “repel invasions”- the same arms as the modern military uses. Each state has the duty to train the militia in the proper use of those arms.

    The question arises often – “Are you saying that the State Militia should have jet fighter-bombers?”

     Planes, missiles, drones, etc, all are what the militia needs and must be trained in. Everything and anything that an attacking force might use! If they might be used against the American people here in the USA by enemies foreign or domestic, then it is exactly what each state’s militia must be supplied with by the congress; and trained in the use of by each state.

    Instead they are arming those who were blamed for Nine Eleven with military arms and US dollars; foreign “rebels” which is also treason against the USA. Those same “rebels” are then using US military arms against our family members that are serving in the US military.

    As all can now see, not only is the militia lawful and a standing (permanent) army not lawful; but the Congress is REQUIRED – under the contract they agreed to in order to get into the position they are occupying – to arm the militia of each state.

    Who are the militia? Every able-bodied person over the age of 18 years old. Since they might be called out to defend the USA or their state from attack from domestic enemies or foreign at any time they MUST keep their weapons with them. They must attend be fully trained in the use of those weapons – which is the job of each state.

    As Madison, the Father of the US Constitution said in Federalist No. 51, at 323: “In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments (referring to the states and the federal government), and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments (executive, legislative, and judicial – within both the state and federal). Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself”.
    When your state governor, and /or the rest of the three branches of the state government does not carry out the duties as they are required to by the US Constitution and the State’s constitution, both being backed by a solemn oath – remove them as no longer meeting the LAWFUL requirements of the position they are occupying. They have broken the contract that let them occupy the position they are in. Replace them with someone who will carry out the legitimate governmental duties. Prosecute those who deserve it. If it takes a constitutional Sheriff to do this task because of resistance to giving up the position, then so be it. If that sheriff needs to use the (trained) militia to carry out an arrest – it is the Sheriff’s right and a rightful aspect of his duty.
    It is past time to hold congress to its assigned duties – they must arm every state’s militia starting now. The states must start training the miltia so that they can repel domestic and foreign enemies. If they do not, the congress can be fired, as can each state’s represeentatives, for breaking the contract of the posititon they are occupying. Of course there are many laws that also apply here:

    5 U.S.C. 3331: “An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services shall take the following oath: ‘I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.’”

    5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take before assuming office.

    5 U.S.C. 3333: “…an individual who accepts office or employment in the Government of the United states…shall execute an affidavit within 60 days after accepting the office or employment that his acceptance and holding of the office or employment does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title. The affidavit is prima facie evidence that the acceptance and holding of office or employment by the affiant does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title.”

    5 U.S.C. 3333 requires the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law.

    5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our CONSTITUTIONAL form of government”. (caps are mine)

    18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath of office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

    The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311.

    Executive Order 10450 provision specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.”
    Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States – each state still has its republican form of government and the federal government – which was created for a specific purposes (foreign matters and to see to it that the states traded fairly with each other). Basically Executive Order 10450 and 5 U.S. 7311says that any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other then by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

    It is against the laws of OUR nation to even register arms of individuals. Remember the US Constitution specifically assigns the duties, and LIMITS what can be done. The Bill of Rights is unalienable:
    “Those rights, then, which God and nature have established, and therefore called natural rights, such as life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws to be more effectually invested in every man than they are; neither do they receive any additional strength when declared by the municipal laws to be inviolable. On the contrary, NO HUMAN LEGISLATURE HAS THE POWER TO ABRIDGE OR DESTROY THEM, unless the owner shall himself commit some act that amounts to a forfeiture.” (Commits a crime. Once the sentence is served all of that individual’s natural rights returns to that person.)

    Inalienable rights: “a right according to natural law, a right that cannot be taken away, denied, or transferred”

  8. Why is this guy still alive? 300 million Americans and not so much as a Tomato thrown in his face.

    How come not one person in this entire country has managed to follow this guy home and make him accidentally fall through a trap door with a hemp rope accidentally tied around his neck?

    I mean seriously. Come on, people.

  9. I’ll make this short. I could rant on but I really believe it comes down to this. Ratings. Before this all started he was all but finished officially with his program. He originally came in to replace Larry King in that time slot which was up against Hannity and blah blah blah and so forth and so on in the cable network wars. In short, he failed. I mean he failed badly and he knew it, CNN knew it and plans were being considered to make a change which was in and of itself a serious challenge to his ego. (Okay I am ranting a little bit here but plan to cease very soon). Here’s the deal. By taking it to this level he is catching more attention of those in the pro liberty corner and those more government intervention cure all corner that before were dissing him for being a foreigner meddling where he should not be meddling. Now, he has both groups watching his bs. Those pissed off and those hailing his antics. His ratings are slowly moving and talks have been shelved to a wait and see how it goes position. Personally, I don’t believe he is being genuine in his position at this level. It’s a little much, ya think? Ratings. That’s what it amounts to, I believe. Hey, he’s got you talking about him…right? The man you love to hate. Oh, and for those who don’t know, higher ratings equal higher advertising revenue which equals more money. My brief unintended rant has come to close. Have a wonderful day.

    1. And if you hang the bastard, those ratings will only go up for a week and will be permanently dead afterwards, until they find some other idiot to fill his shoes and the whole story continues all over again. But at least we will have left a message to all of those other future treasonous wannabes.

  10. it has not ever been redifined attorners try to twist words and get sheep to beleive there bs its written a little longer in the north dakota constitution and some bs was added to it later but here it is
    Section 1. All individuals are by nature equally free and independent and have certain
    inalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring,
    possessing and protecting property and reputation; pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness;
    and to keep and bear arms for the defense of their person, family, property, and the state, and for
    lawful hunting, recreational, and other lawful purposes, which shall not be infringed.”

    to bear means to use not to have and collect state in this does not mean the “state of” the corporate fictional person shall not be infringed means no reistrictions rules codes statues can change what you can or can not have nor how it is used when it is used who can have who many not have ect ect ect ect

    The U.S. Constitution and 44 States have Constitutional provisions enumerating the Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms

  11. “That to me shows you how clumsily worded, and I say that with great respect for the Founding Fathers, that Second Amendment was,” he said.

    You were clumsily conceived, in the back seat of an abandoned car on skid row, for a two dollar crack hit.

    You really should try to get back to your roots, twit.

Join the Conversation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *