Comment: I see what you are saying,

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Hmmm... (see in situ)

I see what you are saying,

I see what you are saying, and I didn't mean to suggest that deportation of citizens is a likely course of action for the government to take. What I am concerned about is this series of thinking:

Step 1: Pierce Morgan advocating gun control is dangerous and is tantamount to an attempt to alter or abolish the American form of government.

Step 2: This isn't unique to Pierce Morgan. In general, advocacy of gun control is dangerous and is tantamount to an attempt to alter or abolish the American form of government.

Step 3: If an American citizen advocates gun control, the government has the right to defend itself against an aggressor and can punish the speaker

Step 4+: similar restrictions based on the same logic.

More simply, I find it pretty difficult how to avoid the logic that "if it is super duper dangerous to the longevity of the US government for a foreigner to say XYZ, then it is super duper dangerous for a citizen to say XYZ as well"

I agree with you on the issue of Americans have a right to alter or abolish the government, and foreigners not having that right (although not absolutely -- after all plenty of foreigners were complicit int the alteration of the government in the Revolution, such as Lafayette). The question is whether we want to have the precedent that mere advocacy of gun control is tantamount to an attempt to destroy the American government, for all the reasons I discuss above and elsewhere.

The point about people who are here illegally, I completely agree. To be honest from a policy perspective I find just en masse deportation to be highly inefficient, but my point was simply that I accept the fact that the government COULD deport you simply for being here illegally if it so chose.

PS: going to bed, but I very much enjoyed our conversation! Feel free to reply and I will read it tomorrow morning. Happy trails :)