|
|
|
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: Dallas rampage renews gun control debate
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Beneath a photograph of Hughes at the rally with the gun slung over his shoulder, the Dallas Police Department, desperately searching for the sniper whose rampage left five police officers dead and seven others wounded, tweeted to the world, "This is one of our suspects. Please help us find him!"
Alerted to the post, which was retweeted more than 40,000 times before the police department took it down Friday afternoon, Hughes quickly surrendered his rifle to police Thursday night, he told reporters on Friday. He was interrogated and had his clothes and the gun confiscated.
Since then, attorney Corwyn Davis said, Hughes and his brother had received "thousands of death threats. There was a lot of negligence with that picture." |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/9/2016)
|
It didn't renew any 'debate'. The 'debate' was settled in 1789.
It renewed leftist caterwauling and whining and meddling interference. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
