Chelsea Schilling is a commentary editor and staff writer for WND and a proud U.S. Army veteran. She has also worked as a news producer at USA Radio Network and as a news reporter for the Sacramento Union.More ↓Less ↑
Is British CNN host Piers Morgan finally admitting gun advocates have a point when they say the Second Amendment is to protect citizens from tyrannical government?
Since the Sandy Hook massacre last year – in which Adam Lanza shot and killed 20 students and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. – Morgan has made advocating for gun-control legislation a frequent topic of his program, clashing with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich or rocker and National Rifle Association board member Ted Nugent, for example, and calling Gun Owners of America’s Larry Pratt “an unbelievably stupid man” for disagreeing with him.
As WND reported, despite his avid criticism of guns, Morgan protects his own personal property with signs warning that it is guarded by “Armed Response Security Systems,” according to a recent investigation by self-described “guerrilla journalist” James O’Keefe.
And on March 11, Morgan insisted that, “people need the nanny state occasionally.”
Now – after learning of the Obama administration’s involvement in the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups and its secret seizure of Associated Press phone records – the CNN host admitted to guest Penn Jillette that perhaps gun advocates were right about creeping tyranny after all:
“I’ve had some of the pro-gun lobbyists on here, saying to me, ‘Well, the reason we need to be armed is because of tyranny from our own government,’ and I’ve always laughed at them,” Morgan said. “I said, ‘Don’t be ridiculous! Your government won’t turn itself on you. …
“But, actually, this is vaguely tyrannical behavior by the American government.”
He continued, “I think what the IRS did is bordering on tyrannical behavior. I think what the Department of Justice has done to the AP is bordering on tyrannical behavior.”
Jillette agreed with Morgan, stating, “There’s no doubt about that. Once you use the word ‘bordering,’ that’s true.
“I also think that it shows you that how much we can trust the government and just sit back– which is not very much at all. We have to be ever vigilant.”