|
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:
Gun laws wouldn't have stopped Kyle Huff
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Seattle has been buzzing with talk about the gruesome murders on Capitol Hill perpetrated by Kyle Huff. Commentary from law-enforcement officials and opinion writers attacks Washington state's liberal firearms laws."
"'Not adequately restricting people from acquiring guns,' the argument goes, 'causes incidents like this one.' To the casual observer, this appears true and is adequate reason to ban firearms."
"But beyond casual observation, things are not so simple. In order to consider this issue, we have to accept a couple of facts:"
"First, guns are not going anywhere. ..."
"Second, no law will prevent people from breaking the law. ..."
"Third, crimes occur regardless of means. ..." ... |
No
Comments found for this Newslink
|
|
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)] |
|
|