|
|
|
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:
Why is NSSF Trying to Expand List of "Prohibited Persons"
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"In the wake of high-profile mass shootings in South Carolina, Tennessee, and Louisiana, some of the calls for more 'gun control' are coming from a perhaps surprising direction. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the firearm industry's trade association, is calling for revisions to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) that would deny more people the most effective means of defending life and liberty. What's more, they are proudly boasting of having done so in the past, and lamenting the fact that 'gun control' groups won't give them any credit for their own 'gun control' efforts." ... |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(8/10/2015)
|
| They aren't the first person - or group - to shoot themselves in an overabundance of zeal or untempered reaction. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
