|
|
|
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:
MI: Americans want protection from irresponsible gun owners
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Mr. Arthur and others believe that adoption of such a proposal would protect gun owners against an intrusive government and so-called red flag laws, universal background checks and prohibitions against semi-automatic long guns and high-capacity magazines.
Michigan has no red flag law, there are no universal background checks and no prohibition against so-called assault rifles. So if nothing changes, commissioners would be taking a bold stand against . . . nothing. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(4/23/2020)
|
The existence of fundamental rights is not dependent upon what the public WANTS. They exist independent of any majoritarian plebiscite, as inherent properties of being human.
It's clear from this writer's perspective that the current state of the public's understanding of American civics is woefully atrophied. |
| Comment by:
hisself
(4/23/2020)
|
"Americans want protection from irresponsible gun owners"
Actually, Americans want protection from irresponsible journalists and legislators!! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| As an individual, I believe, very strongly, that handguns should be banned and that there should be stringent, effective control of other firearms. However, as a judge, I know full well that the question of whether handguns can be sold is a political one, not an issue of products liability law, and that this is a matter for the legislatures, not the courts. The unconventional theories advanced in this case (and others) are totally without merit, a misuse of products liability laws. — Judge Buchmeyer, Patterson v. Gesellschaft, 1206 F.Supp. 1206, 1216 (N.D. Tex. 1985) |
|
|
