|
|
|
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:
MD: Limiting guns in Baltimore and beyond
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Kudos to Dan Rodricks for writing about this issue. I am just flabbergasted as to why there isn’t a wider media campaign, like there was with smoking and cigarettes, on reducing gun violence. It is just outrageous that there are places in this country, where one can walk around with a firearm with no controls, licensing or training. No other country in the world has this kind of callousness to loss of human beings and, most notably, of children. I will not set foot in a state like Texas or Florida, lest there are those who will advocate for “Second Amendment rights.” |
| Comment by:
PP9
(7/15/2023)
|
"I will not set foot in a state like Texas or Florida, lest there are those who will advocate for “Second Amendment rights.”
Fantastic. We don't want you here either.
What is this big hangup you have with gun violence, though? If murders doubled but "gun violence" fell by half, would you call that an improvement?
If a person was running through a crowd stabbing random people, would you want someone with a gun (police or otherwise) to shoot him? But that would increase gun violence, wouldn't it?
Maybe what you should be concerned about is murder, not "gun violence."
|
|
|
| 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]. |
|
|
