|
|
|
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 |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
