
|
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:
Guns Good, Marijuana Bad
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
That’s the response he gave to a Justice Department intern who pressed him on the Trump administration’s handling of the two issues.
“Statistically guns kill significantly more people than marijuana does,” the intern said during a Q & A session with the attorney general. “You support pretty harsh policies for marijuana and pretty lax gun control laws.”
“That’s a apples and oranges question,” Sessions responded. “The Second Amendment — you’re aware of that — guarantees the right of people to keep and bear arms. And I intend to defend that Second Amendment. It’s as valid as the First Amendment. That’s my basic philosophical view about it.” |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/8/2017)
|
Guns good. Marijuana? Meh.
My view is that LIBERTY is good.
If you wanna smoke pot, the gov't should stay the hell out of your way. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|