|
|
|
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:
One in Five Americans Wants the Second Amendment to be Repealed, National Survey Finds
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
One consequence of the success of the National Rifle Association's expansive gun-rights agenda — and its lobbying power in Congress — is that groups favoring more gun control have pared down their ambitions in recent years. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, for instance, no longer talks about banning handguns. Advocates have moved away from the term “gun control” in favor of more specific language like “gun violence” and “gun safety.” Democratic leaders in Congress have grown timid about proposing significant new restrictions on gun ownership. |
| Comment by:
jac
(3/28/2018)
|
| 20 percent is actually a pretty low percentage considering all the flaming liberals in the country. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(3/28/2018)
|
| They did not poll in AZ!!! |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(3/28/2018)
|
Despite former Justice John Paul Jackwagon's recent editorial, the second amendment is not going to be repealed. Even Dingbat Diane Feinstein of Commiefornya has said that it's far too hard to do.
And she is correct, for once.
The liberals would love it if it were to happen.
If it did happen, then watch out for Civil War 2.0 |
|
|
| 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]. |
|
|
