
|
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:
Connecticut's Senators Aim to Nullify 2nd Amendment
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Many people are honest about their opposition to the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. They support repealing the amendment or reconstruing it so the right is enjoyed only by members of the militia, the National Guard. Others urge outlawing semi-automatic guns, "semi-automatic" sounding scary but actually defining nearly every modern gun, guns that reload themselves. That would leave only shotguns and antique single-shot rifles and pistols available for general use. The objective of these people is forthright: to disarm everyone but the government.
|
Comment by:
Stripeseven
(6/18/2019)
|
The Commie Collective constantly dreams of implementing a Regime of Unchecked, Unlimited power over the citizens of this country. They intend to make the Freedoms that so many have fought and died for meaningless. Disgraceful, if not down right criminal. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/18/2019)
|
Hey. Screw you and your "crackpot in chief".
You should be thanking God for sending Trump to lead the fight against the communists in our midst. |
Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(6/18/2019)
|
I left Connecticut 25 years ago. I'm sad to see what my former home state has devolved into, but happy as a clam that I'm OUT and that I will NEVER go back!!!!!
|
|
|
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]. |
|
|