|
|
|
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:
PA: Gun advocates fueled by irrational emotion (letter)
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Thanks to Lawrence Braico of the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs ("Gun law's flaws," Dec. 5) for finally clarifying why pro-gunners are so vehement in opposition to limits on packing heat at will."
"Gun-lobby rhetoric is awash in false patriotism and incorrect reading of constitutional principle ... But in his rambling and parental letter taking Gov. Rendell to task for signing legislation enabling law enforcement to remove guns from domestic abusers, Braico defined what really motivates pro-gunners to fight against every limit on gun possession or use: emotion."
"He wrote that emotion was key ... So now we know. It's less about so-called rights, and more about the emotional attraction pro-gunners feel toward guns." ... |
No
Comments found for this Newslink
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
