|
|
|
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:
MI: Both Koster and Greitens Court NRA Endorsement
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Democratic nominee for governor Attorney General Chris Koster has made the National Rifle Association (NRA) endorsement an open question in Missouri. While Koster has made a play for the endorsement, Republican nominee Eric Greitens has not ceded his party’s traditional ground. “The 2nd Amendment is clear,” he says on his website. “I believe we must always defend the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. I am a life member of the NRA and a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment.”
|
| Comment by:
mickey
(8/24/2016)
|
OK, Eric, how long have you been a NRA member and when did you upgrade to life?
If you joined with a life membership while running for political office and wear it as your 2A credential, I'll have to stick you in the same pigeonhole as George HatesGuns Walker Bush. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
