David Codrea:Piers Morgan shows as much contempt for First Amendment as he does for Second

Entering the “Duck Dynasty” fray after family “patriarch” Phil Robertson explained in a GQ interview his faith-based belief that homosexual acts are sinful, CNN host Piers Morgan posted an opinion to his Twitter account Thursday demonstrating the Second Amendment isn’t the only part of the Bill of Rights he advocates gutting.

“Just as the 2nd Amendment shouldn't protect assault rifle devotees, so the 1st Amendment shouldn't protect vile bigots. #PhilRobertson,” Morgan tweeted.
The employment controversy between Robertson and A&E is not a First Amendment issue. It’s a contractual one, invoking specific relevant clauses, and more broadly, one of voluntary association involving private parties with a conflict between the right of one to say what he believes, and the right of the other to not associate with someone they perceive does not represent the image they want to identify with. Fans of the family can, and have, let the network know of their displeasure, with some pledging a boycott, and some sponsors making their support for Robertson and his religious views known. On the other side are groups like GLAAD and their supporters condemning Robertson’s statements. There are even spin-off impacts, such as national restaurant chain Cracker Barrel removing selected “Duck Dynasty”-related merchandise from their gift shops (which in turn resulted in secondary boycott calls and a quick apology).

That all falls within people’s rights. You are free to pick and support your side or to ignore the whole sorry mess.

In Morgan’s fascist world, that choice would be taken from you. Let’s prove that together.

The prefatory clause to his tweet repeats a false claim he made a little over a year ago, and still hasn’t responded to once his utter lack of an educated opinion was demonstrated.

“The 2nd amendment was devised with muskets in mind, not high-powered handguns & assault rifles,” he proclaimed. “Fact.”

Except it’s not a fact. This column dissected a common claim by anti-gun activists that the Founders could not have imagined today’s firearms technology when they wrote the Second Amendment, and proved it without merit, listing technological developments -- some of which had already been around for hundreds of years -- that showed advances in firearms that were known at that time, such as pepperbox revolvers, volley guns, breech loading rifles and the Puckle gun. Of note, the Girandoni air rifle, capable of firing 22 .46 caliber balls, had been in use by the Austrian army 11 years before the Bill of Rights was ratified (be sure to watch the accompanying video for the effect the rifle’s “high capacity magazine” had on discouraging Indian attacks on the Lewis and Clark expedition, and note how the mere presentation of a gun with such capabilities deterred violence).

More Here at Gun Rights Examiner