|
|
|
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:
Want True Homeland Security? Ban All Assault Weapons
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Is there any other civilized country on earth where a teenager can walk into a gun store and legally buy military-style assault weapons and large magazines designed to maximize the death toll? We all know the answer to that. Just like we all know that the latest tragedy in Sutherland, Texas will be followed by more gruesome mass shootings of Americans while they pray, watch a movie, listen to a concert, sit quietly as a teacher reads, attend a peaceful rally — or just go to work, the post office, a lecture, a restaurant, a family reunion.
|
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(11/13/2017)
|
" ... a teenager can walk into a gun store and legally buy military-style assault weapons and large magazines .... "
Really? All this time I thought "military style assault weapons" were NFA weapons and no one could buy any of them if they were made after 1987.
|
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
