|
|
|
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:
After Pulse: Assault Weapons Ban? Candidates Answer
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In Saturday's column, I asked candidates for local congressional seats to respond to this video created by some of the families of people who died at Pulse night club.
The families are calling for Congress to ban military-style assault weapons. I asked candidates in the following races whether they supported such a ban and why or why not. Here are their full, unedited responses. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(9/24/2016)
|
Note the answers and the party affiliation of the responders.
Which party wants to remove your liberty, and which party wants to protect it?
(rhetorical) |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. — Noah Webster in "An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution," 1787, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at p. 56 (New York, 1888). |
|
|
