|
|
|
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:
MO: Greene County sheriff changes mind on gun legislation after lawmakers make changes
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Greene County Sheriff Jim Arnott says he’s changed his mind after two Springfield-area lawmakers changed the wording of two bills intended to protect the Second Amendment and further ease restrictions for gun owners.
Sen. Eric Burlison (R-Christian County) and Rep. Jered Taylor (R-Republic) sponsored the legislation to establish the Second Amendment Preservation Act.
The lawmakers say the bills will prevent police and deputies in Missouri from enforcing any federal gun laws, even if the federal laws become stricter than what they are now. |
| Comment by:
jac
(2/4/2021)
|
Whoever wrote this article needs to go back to school.
It doesn't tell one anything about the language in the article, or the reasons for the objection. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
