|
|
|
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:
WA: ‘Unenforceable?’ ‘Unconstitutional?’ Fight Heats over WA I-1639
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Not only have a majority of Washington State’s county sheriffs publicly announced they will not enforce provisions of the voter-approved gun control Initiative 1639, a second county commission passed a resolution opposing the measure while one major state daily newspaper has chastised the lawmen for their stances.
The Stevens County Commission unanimously resolved this week to oppose I-1639. According to KXLY News, Commissioner Steve Parker said the initiative “is dangerous and damaging to citizens, law-abiding citizens.” |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(2/8/2019)
|
| This just seems criminal somehow. Attempting to deprive law abiding citizens of their rights again, and again, and again, over, and over, and over. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
