|
|
|
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:
NY: Baby Steps Are Not Enough
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
October 1, 2017, isn’t that long ago when you think about it. That date is memorable because it was a day when 59 innocent people were gunned down by a deranged shooter at a music festival. The shooting captured the attention of people around the world because it was the largest mass murder in American history.
The average citizen can’t do much to avoid another such tragedy because we lack the power to stop such an event from happening. However, there is one group that could be effective in stopping a future mass killing if only they cared enough to do something. I refer to the members of the U.S. Congress. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(1/20/2018)
|
| There is NOT any gov. entity that can stop a mass shooting, only the people at the active shoot can stop it if the gov allows them to have the means of self defense !!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
