|
|
|
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:
NH: Mass shootings show ‘militia is not ‘well-regulated’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Michael Dow writes frequently and eloquently in defense of the Second Amendment. I am writing to ask Mr. Dow to kindly explain exactly what, in his view, the Founding Fathers meant by the preambe “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State.” Those are the words of the Second Amendment that precede the words gun rights supporters are so fond of quoting. Mr. Dow asserts that the Constitution is a static document that must be taken word for word exactly as written. OK, then. Please explain those words, if the Founding Fathers witnessed a nutcase firing a sporting weapon into a crowd, they would consider that to be poorly regulated. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/15/2018)
|
| STOOPID. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(12/15/2018)
|
| Of course, we ALL know that in the Founders' time, there were no murderers or other criminals, because it was utopia back then. (/sarcasm) |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| There are other things so clearly out of the power of Congress, that the bare recital of them is sufficient, I mean the "...rights of bearing arms for defence, or for killing game..." These things seem to have been inserted among their objections, merely to induce the ignorant to believe that Congress would have a power over such objects and to infer from their being refused a place in the Constitution, their intention to exercise that power to the oppression of the people. —ALEXANDER WHITE (1787) |
|
|
