|
|
|
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:
IA: Iowa gun law concerns some sheriffs
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Some Iowa sheriffs say an increase in the number of non-professional permits to carry handguns, coupled with new or recent gun laws in the state, have increased safety risks in their counties.
They point to provisions in the new Iowa Omnibus Gun Law, adopted this year, that decreases the punishment for carrying a firearm while intoxicated and increased the ability to use a stand-your-ground defense when firing a gun at someone else. |
| Comment by:
jac
(9/1/2017)
|
They can't point to any actual problems.
The only real problem is that some liberal hack went looking to write a story showing the new gun law in a bad light. This story never should have been written.
The reason that they have shall issue is because, just as in every other state with may issue, the issuing authorities denied carry permits to people without any valid reason. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
