the UK has a peition to make us keep Piers Morgan

By brendon December 27, 2012 @ 6:22 PM


According to CBS News today, over 80,000 people have now signed the petition to deport CNN host Piers Morgan back to England since he began calling for stricter gun control laws in the US.

Unfortunately, England has the internet too, and they got wind of this, and now they have a petition to keep him in the US, because “no one in the UK wants him back.” And their petition has a hand drawn brown and white picture of him and it’s nailed to a tree like a wanted poster for Robin Hood, so their probably gonna win this little contest.

(27) Comments

  1. avatar
    aldmare 12/27/2012 19:51

    He said something about the 2nd Amendment they didn’t like so they want him deported. I guess they forgot about the 1st Amendment.

  2. avatar
    The Mildly Tanned Knight 12/27/2012 21:01

    Actually, the 1st Amendment is about the GOVERNMENT not censoring you, so maybe some light reading (or pretty much any type of reading) would be a good idea for you.

    Morgan is a complete douchebag (with ratings that would embarrass a cable-access station. People are angry because he lies about the issue, then grandstands on the bodies of victims because he thinks it makes him sound smart.

    I agree with England. They should just turn off all the lights and refuse to answer the door.

  3. avatar
    aldmare 12/27/2012 22:34

    Yes, prohibiting the government from censoring me, in turn, guaranteeing me the right to free speech. A+ for trolling

  4. avatar
    Chris_EsT 12/27/2012 23:34

    What’s a peition?

  5. avatar
    redneckwordsofwisdom 12/28/2012 04:06

    Ben Affleck, Drake, Jennifer Aniston and Piers Morgan. I guess that sums up what this blog has become…at least on the days that something gets posted. Though I have to say, at least it wasn’t something about a Jonas Brother or Bieber.

  6. avatar
    underball 12/28/2012 11:24

    @The Mildly Tanned Knight

    Um, guy, I’m not sure you really understand the argument here.

    If people are petitioning the US Government to deport someone for exercising his right to free speech, simply because they don’t like what he said, then it would absolutely be a violation of the 1st amendment, as his opinion on Gun Control is protected. Any attempted deportation or Government administered sanctions taken against him for airing his opinions on this matter would constitute a violation of his 1st amendment rights. (and before you go off on a tangent, every legal resident of the US, even foreign nationals such as Morgan, are protected by the Constitution, not just US Citizens.

  7. avatar
    The Mildly Tanned Knight 12/28/2012 11:30

    The people are petitioning (i.e. expressing their free speech) to revoke the citizenship of someone who’s a foreigner being a douche. The government doesn’t deport people based on petitions. Therefore the people are expressing their displeasure in a way that is an attempt to embarrass the douche, but has no chance of the government acting upon it.

    Admare & underball = morons.

  8. avatar
    Hugh G. Rection 12/28/2012 11:32


    Piers Morgan can say whatever he likes. And, since he’s a foreign national, we can deport his ass anytime we feel like it, for any reason. Then he can be free to speak his mind somewhere else.

    He’s a stupid cunt who says obnoxious things, and everyone hates him. If he doesn’t like the 2nd Amendment, then he can get the fuck out of our country already. 200+ years ago, our forefathers kicked the living shit out of English fucksticks like Piers Morgan because they were tyrannical assholes, AND WE USED OUR GUNS TO DO IT.

    You want to give up your guns? Fine, go ahead. Don’t try and take mine, asshole.

  9. avatar
    underball 12/28/2012 11:47

    The people bragging about this petition are only embarrassing themselves, because they are demonstrating that the US education system failed them if they think the petition means anything.

    Morgan can’t be deported for this. The Constitution protects his right to free speech just like yours and mine. and the 2nd Amendment doesn’t trump the 1st. If the Constitution were inviolate and untouchable, it wouldn’t have been Amended 27 times already.

  10. avatar
    underball 12/28/2012 11:51

    Also – Guns are for cowards and pussies. Owning one for “protection” or “sport” is an admission that you’re a giant pussy who cowers in fear most of the time. It’s also a pretty good indicator that you’ve made some awful life choices that put yourself in harms way.

  11. avatar
    Tylerwoulddefinitelynotapprove 12/28/2012 12:06

    Everybody is missing the real point…


  12. avatar
    Hank Moody 12/28/2012 12:56

    “We should use England as a model for gun control.” – PIers

    “We agree, it makes it so much easier to stab everyone.” – English Criminals

  13. avatar
    LoK 12/28/2012 13:06

    underball…go fuck yourself, you have no idea what you’re talking about you misinformed little anal troll

  14. avatar
    underball 12/28/2012 13:26

    So much internet bravery up in here.

  15. avatar
    Squabbler 12/28/2012 13:56

    Piers, I mean underball, just registered today, fortuitously, perhaps, but regardless…

    Since we’re all constitutional scholars here, let me chime in with the what the freedom of speech aspect of the first amendment protects:

    The government (fed, state, local) cannot put your sorry ass in jail because of something you said, wrote, or in the case of the guy that flipped off a cop, used your hands to sign.

    That’s it.

    As for the grounds for revocation of a visa (and in Morgan’s case, a nonimmigrant work visa), this is straight from 22 CFR 41.122:

    41.122 Revocation of Visas.
    (a) Grounds for revocation by consular officers: A consular officer, the
    U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 9 – Visas
    9 FAM 41.122 Regs/Statutes Page 2 of 3
    Secretary, or a Department official to whom the Secretary has delegated
    this authority is authorized to revoke a nonimmigrant visa at any time, in
    his or her discretion.

    Also, there is no judicial review. If one of those folks decides its time to pull your visa, it’s pulled. End of story.

  16. avatar
    LoK 12/28/2012 13:57

    It has nothing to do with internet bravery it has to do with calling out the misinformation douchebags spout out while they know nothing of the subject

  17. avatar
    The Mildly Tanned Knight 12/28/2012 14:12

    It’s so funny to see Libtards like underball lecture everyone else on who’s embarrassing themselves, since he’s the same dipshit who thought that signing a petition to deport Morgan was a violation of the 1st Amendment.

    Hey retard, admit you’re too stupid to read and move on. And as for your claim that guns are for “pussies,” well, Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country and we just had our 500th gun-related murder. I’m begging you to PLEASE move here and tell the gang-bangers that you refuse to carry a gun because you’re so brave.

    Seriously, I’ll pay for your visit.

  18. avatar
    The Mildly Tanned Knight 12/28/2012 14:14

    LoK, he’s more of an anal cyst than an anal troll.

  19. avatar
    Thissiteiswack 12/28/2012 14:51

    Underball and aldmere signed a petition to have tits banned from this site. Apparently it worked. There isn’t anything dumber than a troll acting tough, while calling other people Internet brave. I guess you can’t be a true liberal without being a hypocrite. So dumb.

  20. avatar
    underball 12/28/2012 15:51

    “Libtards” I love it when the intellectually challenged people start making insult mad-libs to express their frustrations.

    No one on here, not me or anyone else, said the petition was a violation of the 1st amendment. It’s not. What the petition calls to happen would be. The petition itself is completely legal. It makes everyone who signed it look like a complete moron who wishes to strip the 1st amendment rights away from anyone they happen to disagree with, but you’re right, the petition itself is completely legal and not a violation of anyone’s rights. The fact that this needs to be explained to you doesn’t exactly speak well about the Chicago area public education system, but there you have it.

    As for the gang-banger gun murder problems you’re bragging/crying about in Chicago, I would refer you back to my comment about guns being for cowards (unless you consider gangbangers brave heroes) and an indicator of poor life choices. Gun control laws didn’t get those people killed. Guns did. Guns bought out of state. Stricter federal laws would hinder their ability to do this. It wouldn’t completely prevent it, but it would hinder it.

    As for the 500 gun deaths in Chicago – this year there were 58 in the UK. Not just England, but the WHOLE UK. That’s 10x the population of Chicago. Where the gun laws are even STRICTER than Chicago. So if you’re going to throw around anecdotal statistics, there’s always going to be a bigger one that trumps it.

You must be to post a comment.