|
|
|
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:
WI: Gun Enthusiasts Fight Gun Ban on Public Transit
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Slinging legal arguments that never mentioned the right to bear arms, gun rights advocates argued before the Wisconsin Supreme Court Friday for the right to carry handguns on city buses.
The dispute began when Wisconsin Carry Inc. sued the City of Madison in January 2014, challenging Madison's Transit and Parking Commission for passing a rule forbidding "weapon[s] of any kind" on Madison Metro buses, according to a case summary provided by the Supreme Court's public information office.
So far, Wisconsin Carry has been unsuccessful both in the state court and in a lower appeals court. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(9/11/2016)
|
Private property is not public property.
Transit buses are public property. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
