|
|
|
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: Betting on a Capitol gun ban?
Submitted by:
Corey Salo
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Political reporters just love stories about lawmakers “wasting” tax dollars.
Every two years, when a new batch of legislators would arrive in town, there was a tradition that they got to decorate their offices with whatever they wanted. Lavish sofas, mirrored walls, wood-paneled break-fronts and you name it as each new arrival competed with the other for top decorating honors while running up the tab on the taxpayer’s dime.
And, soon after they settled into their new digs, the news media pounded out stories on how much was being doled out until those poor souls cried uncle.
It was then that the State Capitol Commission was hatched.
|
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/20/2020)
|
"waving around loaded firearms"
This one phrase ruined an otherwise even-handed piece.
Had the author written "wearing loaded firearms" he would have been on point, but the incendiary phrase he chose revealed is personal bias.
Proof: Waving firearms around would have gotten the "waver" arrested. NO ONE WAS ARRESTED. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
