|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
| Comment by:
dasing
(5/10/2017)
|
| Note: former judge, he belives anyone in front of a judge is guilty, hands down!!! |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/10/2017)
|
More Chicken Little nonsense.
The very idea that "clear and convincing evidence" should not be necessary to bind a person over for trial is inherently elitist and tyrannical.
I doper commits felony armed robbery and shoots someone. The facts on the ground are that he WAS involved, in flagrante delicto. He claims SYG immunity, saying he was 'defending' himself.
Do you mean to tell me that any judge, under the 'revised' SYG law, would GRANT such a dirtball immunity from prosecution?
Pu-LEEZE. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
