|
|
|
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:
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/17/2020)
|
Gardner is a hand-picked minion of Soros, whose calculated undermining of our Constitution and society is well-documented.
As usual, this 'progressive' stands on her head and pronounces the world upside-down.
There is clear evidence that the mob of so-called 'protesters' tore down an iron gate to gain entry to the property, video evidence of their menacing manner, both of which justify taking up arms in self-defense.
The standard for review is the "reasonable person" test; would another reasonable person in the same circumstances perceive an immediate threat to life and limb?
The answer is an unequivocal "Yes."
Gardner is acting as a persecutor, not as a prosecutor. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
