|
|
|
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:
NH: You have to read the whole Second Amendment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
I agreed with your theory about what our Founding Fathers probably took for granted in the late 18th century – namely that owning a gun for protection and for hunting was a necessity for many. A hunting rifle, a shotgun – the expectation was that most people, especially outside of the cities, would have such a weapon. I think you are correct when you say that our Founding Fathers never gave restricting that right a second thought and although I am not a hunter myself, I have no problem with someone who wishes to hunt to feed their family.
I disagree wholeheartedly, however, with your interpretation of the Second Amendment. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/21/2016)
|
| *sigh* Don't these dimwits EVER get tired of regurgitating the most obvious lie of all time? |
| Comment by:
Sosalty
(7/21/2016)
|
| If only you could get your hands on your old 5th grade American history text. The American Revolutionary War started with the British attempting to disarm us. Our Founding Fathers forsaw that someday, the American Govt would distrust Of the People, by the People, and For the People just as the British did. |
|
|
| 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]. |
|
|
