|
|
|
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:
Ben Carson Doesn’t Want ‘Stand Your Ground’ Gun Laws To ‘Create Vigilantism’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
But when asked by ThinkProgress during a book signing at a Costco in Naples for his thoughts on the controversial “Stand Your Ground” policy that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush signed into law, Carson seemed torn.
“I see positives and negatives,” he said. “We should be talking about how we preserve our Second Amendment rights but at the same time prevent unnecessary violence. That’s the right framework.”
When ThinkProgress pressed him to clarify, Carson said, after pausing to think, “Obviously I want people to stand their ground, but I don’t want to create vigilantism either. I probably come down somewhere in the middle on how to do it.” |
| Comment by:
laker1
(11/5/2015)
|
| Carson knowledge of guns = zero. He is going to think himself right out of the Republican POTUS runners group. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
