|
|
|
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:
NV: Gun control laws are coming
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Proliferation inevitably prompted gun control laws. Our 182-year history of taxing, licensing, restriction, purchaser records, background checks, and gun owner protections is lengthy, and can be found on internet websites such as thoughtco.com. State and federal governments have struggled to balance the rights of all citizens alike, pursuant to the Second Amendment’s protection for weapons carried for self-defense. |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(8/30/2019)
|
| What do you say that we don't make any more "Feel Good" laws, and just enforce the laws that are already on the books....including the one where public servants knowingly and willfully break their Oath to deprive law abiding citizens of their Constitutional rights. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/30/2019)
|
As the SCOTUS recognized in 1875, the people's right to go armed for lawful purposes wasn't granted by the Constitution, it was assumed arguendo to preexist the nation's founding, and the Second Amendment was enshrined to foreclose the government from infringing its exercise. In other words, the Second Amendment exists to remind the government that the right is fundamental, and cannot be materially abridged.
Were the Second Amendment to be repealed or amended further, the status of the right would not change - it would still be fundamental, and it would still be endowed in the people, not in the government.
If you wish to have a serious debate about methods to attenuate violence, you must first accept that reality.
Then we'll talk. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? — Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836 |
|
|
