|
|
|
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:
Tweet Reveals The True Goal Of The Gun Control Agenda
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The first rule of social networking protocol seems reasonable, “don’t post if you are angry or intoxicated, because the internet has a flawless memory.”
Apparently, this wisdom does not apply to an extremist reactionist, as her thoughtless tweet inadvertently revealed the insidious leftist playbook to destroy the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Twitchy.com shares the amorally concise, unintelligent, and hate-filled string of words directly attacking gun owners and escalating the battle between sensibility and ridiculousness to a whole new level of ugliness. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/21/2018)
|
| Lad bink. |
| Comment by:
tazdevil
(5/22/2018)
|
| it appears the link has been pulled down |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
