|
|
|
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:
Retired Army sniper: 'There'd be a lot more people dead in that church' if Joe Biden 'had his way'
Submitted by:
jac
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A retired U.S. Army sniper told Fox News Monday that more people would have been murdered in a Texas church over the weekend if 2020 Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden had his way and more restrictive gun laws were in effect.
Ryan Cleckner told Mark Steyn on Monday's "Tucker Carlson Tonight" that Biden was completely wrong about the supposed danger of a Texas law allowing firearms to be carried in houses of worship.
"If [Biden] he has his way, there would be a lot more people dead in that church," Cleckner said.
The veteran added Biden is one of many gun-control advocates who appear n including long-established laws against murder.ot to understand that criminals by definition don't obey laws, |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/1/2020)
|
"The government doesn't give us the right to carry in church..."
The government isn't the proprietor of the right, the individual citizen is, therefore the government can't 'give' us something to which it has no claim. What it can (and must) do is to respect our liberty and honor the Constitution that protects it.
The notion that the right didn't exist before the government 'granted' it is nonsense.
The default in this country is individual liberty. Liberty is not a benefit dispensed by government. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
