Piers Morgan vs. Nathan Dahm and the 2nd Amendment

| | TrackBacks (0)

Oklahoma State Sen. Nathan Dahm (R-Tulsa) acquitted himself admirably in an appearance Monday night on CNN's Piers Morgan show. Dahm's invite to appear was the result of his decision to name his bill, authorizing Oklahomans to carry a firearm without first needing to acquire a license, after Morgan, an outspoken critic of gun rights.

About 14 minutes into the video, I thought I heard Morgan use an antiquated term to distinguish police officers and soldiers, whom he would allow to keep and bear arms, from ordinary citizens, whom he would not. At first and second hearing, I could have sworn he referred to ordinary citizens as "villeins," a feudal term referring to peasants who were legally bound to the lord of the manor and who were not free to travel without their lord's permission. On the third listen, it was clear that he said "civilians," but I think the synonym for serf isn't far from Morgan's opinion of free American citizens and the limits to which they should be subjected.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Piers Morgan vs. Nathan Dahm and the 2nd Amendment.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.batesline.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/7090

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Michael Bates published on January 28, 2014 11:03 PM.

Roscoe Turner, RIP was the previous entry in this blog.

Small-business employees get Obamacare sticker shock is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.



Subscribe to feed Subscribe to this blog's feed:
[What is this?]