|
|
|
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:
WI: Despite Likely Appeal, Badger Guns Ruling Could Have Immediate Impact
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"I think the ramifications for gun stores are going to be huge," says Nik Clark, who heads the pro-gun group Wisconsin Carry. He expects the owners of Badger Guns to appeal the ruling. Yet he says even if the owners ultimately prevail, this week’s ruling will take a toll on gun stores.
"Between now and the time that the appeal is heard and decided -- which may be years -- businesses, if they're worried about their legal exposure, are going to need to adjust their practices immediately," Clark says.
Clark says some stores might now turn away customers who can legally buy guns. |
| Comment by:
jac
(10/17/2015)
|
What other retail business needs to be able to read peoples minds?
This sets a dangerous precedent in that it requires gun dealers to discern a buyer's intent when they sell him a gun. That is clearly not possible.
The real problem here is that you have a democratic city inhabited with liberals and low information types that have an agenda to drive gun dealers out of their city as has happened in San Francisco.
I don't believe this law suit would have gained any traction here in Texas, but it was predictable that it would occur in one of the blue states. |
|
|
| 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]. |
|
|
