|
|
|
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:
IN: Pack ideas, not guns to council meetings
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A town in southern Indiana, only four miles north of Louisville, Ky., now welcomes citizens and their guns to its council meetings. Clarksville officials enacted a provision last month allowing citizens to carry their weapons to public meetings at the town hall.
It's a bad idea that lacks common sense. Worse, it could lead to unnecessary worry and tragedy.
By nature, most folks don't attend city or town council meetings to pat their elected officials on the back. Many times, they arrive primed for an argument as they bellow openly at elected officials. Their discontent could be over a rezoning plan near their home, or a new building project they oppose. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(3/11/2017)
|
| Are they saying that law abiding people can't argue a political point with local officials without shooting them?!? |
| Comment by:
dasing
(3/11/2017)
|
| Maybe not a bad idea? |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
