|
|
|
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:
OK: Legislators, party chairs discuss new gun laws
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The right to keep and bear arms is granted under the Second Amendment of the Constitution, but over the years, it's become a hot-button issue. While some states have increased restrictions on gun owners, Oklahoma legislators loosened regulations this year.
The first bill signed into law by Gov. Kevin Stitt after taking office was H.B. 2597, better known as the constitutional carry bill. Oklahomans will be allowed to carry firearms without a permit or training starting Nov. 1. The legislation passed Senate with a 40-6 vote, and State Sen. Dewayne Pemberton, R-Muskogee, was among its supporters. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/24/2019)
|
"The right to keep and bear arms is granted under the Second Amendment of the Constitution."
That statement, first one out of the gate, destroys your credibility sir.
The rest of your treatise is, therefore, not worth reading. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
