|
|
|
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:
MA: Massachusetts Measure Would Ban All Semi-Auto Firearms
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Massachusetts citizens who believe their state has ridiculously restrictive gun laws haven’t yet seen just how bad it can really get.
A new measure before the state legislature—H. 4038—would ban not only Massachusetts residents’ favorite old Browning semi-automatic .22-caliber small-game rifles, but also the semi-automatic shotguns they own for hunting, clay shooting, or self-defense.
Authored by state Rep. David Linsky (D), the legislation would rewrite Massachusetts’ already-strict ban on so-called “assault weapons.” In a nutshell, the bill strikes all references to “assault weapons” in the current law and inserts in that place “any rifle or shotgun containing a semi-automatic mechanism.” |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
