|
|
|
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:
NJ: New Jersey's Gun Laws: Infringement on the Second Amendment or Strong Protections Against Gun Violence?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Congress struck a bipartisan spending deal that for the first time in over 20 years would include funding for research on gun violence. The bill includes $25 million for research on gun safety to be used by the Center for Disease Control and the National Institute of Health. This occurred on the seventh anniversary of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.
Gun laws in New Jersey regulate the sale, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition, and are among the most restrictive in the country. And, unlike the Federal Constitution, the New Jersey Constitution has no provision explicitly guaranteeing the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/27/2019)
|
John is yer typical progressive nudnik.
Jack is okay, but not strident enough. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
