|
|
|
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:
Connecticut Senator: Anyone Wanting a High-Capacity Magazine is “Arming Against the Government”
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"The same senator who admitted lying to Sandy Hook families to get them to come to Washington in order to have them lobby for votes on unconstitutional gun confiscation legislation, is now claiming that if you want a high-capacity magazine for your gun, then you must be 'arming against the government.'"
"Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), a virtually unknown senator until the Sandy Hook incident, has conspired with gun grabbing senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) to co-sponsor Rep. Elizabeth Esty's (D-CT) unconstitutional bill that would limit magazine capacity to only 10 rounds across the nation. ...'" ... |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(2/10/2015)
|
"Anyone Wanting a High-Capacity Magazine is Arming Against the Government."
Yo. Murphy. Let's rephrase that so folks will really get what you are saying:
"Anyone Wanting a High-Capacity Magazine is Arming Against the Crown."
Just so we're clear on that.
You confuse us with people who don't have a long memory. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(2/10/2015)
|
| About all that's missing from the senator's statement is the word, ME ! I doubt it was his humility that precluded its inclusion. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
