|
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:
TX: At UT, Debut of Texas Gun Law Intersects with Tower Shooting Anniversary
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On Monday, when the University of Texas at Austin commemorates the 50th anniversary of sniper Charles Whitman’s murderous on-campus shooting spree, many of the routines of public mourning will be followed: Flags at half-staff, a solemn speech from the university president and the unveiling of a new memorial honoring the 16 adults and one unborn child Whitman killed that day.
But there will be one unusual specter looming over the day. On the same day the school mourns a seminal moment of gun violence in American history, a new state law known as campus carry will go into effect, allowing students, faculty and visitors to carry their guns into university buildings. |
Comment by:
Sosalty
(7/29/2016)
|
Another attempt to equate mass shootings with personal defense. Self defense is a God given right but doesn't include taking on a sniper shooting from a concealed position. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|