|
|
|
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:
NV: Fiore, officers at odds over firearm comments
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A statement that Assemblywoman and Congressional candidate Michele Fiore made in an interview with Politics NOW’s Steve Sebelius is at the center of a growing controversy.
"I would never, ever point my firearm at anyone, including an officer of the law, unless they pointed their firearm at me. Now, once you point your firearm at me, I'm sorry, then it becomes self-defense,” she said on Politics NOW last month. “Whether you're a stranger, a bad guy, or an officer, and you point your gun at me, and you're going to shoot me, and I have to decide whether it's my life or your life, well, I choose my life." |
| Comment by:
mickey
(5/27/2016)
|
She's right, of course.
I've been the victim of badge toting criminals more than once, in one case a felonious assault, but I've never shot any of them, for the simple reason that none of them ever threatened to shoot me. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
