|
|
|
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:
CT: Connecticut had fifth-lowest rate of gun deaths in U.S. in 2016
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
“In Connecticut, we pride ourselves on being a national model for sensible gun policy because we know that commonsense measures like background checks and banning the sale of military-style assault weapons save lives,” Gov. Dannel P. Malloy said. “Today’s report is proof-positive that our policies are working, but now is not the time to rest on our laurels.”
He is seeking a ban on bump stocks and other accessories that can make semiautomatic rifles fire nearly as quickly as machine guns. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(1/18/2018)
|
I used to live in the Nutmeg State. There's nothing sensible about its draconian fascist gun laws.
I'm glad I left....GOOD RIDDANCE! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
