|
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:
Obama administration should heed Mexico's call to crack down on guns
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"MEXICAN PRESIDENT Felipe Calderón has shown courage in leading his government to take on the violent drug gangs that have claimed thousands of Mexican lives. On Thursday, he displayed a different kind of fortitude: standing before a joint meeting of Congress and asking for a revival of the U.S. assault weapons ban. The Obama administration, which has been largely absent in the fight against the illegal gun trade, should have such backbone."
"Mr. Calderón, who has been in Washington for a state visit, made a powerful case. Over the past three years, Mexican authorities have seized some 75,000 weapons used in crimes; more than 80 percent of those they were able to trace came from the United States ..." [emphasis added] ... -------
Submitter's Note: But since they've only traced 20% of siezed weapons, that means that less than 17% came from the US. |
No
Comments found for this Newslink
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|