|
|
|
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:
IL: Gun paranoia in the age of Trump
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
But in an era in which facts don't matter, the president should have saved his breath. In 2008, LaPierre dismissed Obama's promises: "Never in NRA's history have we faced a presidential candidate ... with such a deep-rooted hatred of firearm freedoms." The NRA insisted Obama planned to ban all handguns, ban "use of firearms for home defense," increase federal taxes on guns and ammunition by 500 percent, and require a federal license to buy a gun. |
| Comment by:
Sosalty
(11/19/2016)
|
| Guess those folks over in California are paranoid also. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/20/2016)
|
| Why is the author flapping his inch of brain on that mailing... it says presidential CANIDATE, not President. Also there are many still in government that want absolute power. Why should we ignore those tyrants? |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/20/2016)
|
| Oops... candidate |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
