|
|
|
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:
TX: San Antonio Police Chief Is Critical Of City's Proposed Gun Buyback Plan
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A gun buyback program is in the works for the City of San Antonio. Two members of the San Antonio City Council are recommending the voluntary program but San Antonio’s police chief is against the idea. The proposal calls for using money from the police department’s asset forfeiture fund to pay people who bring in guns. The plan would buy guns from anyone, not just San Antonio residents. The plan also suggests to melt the guns that are brought in. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/28/2019)
|
"[T]here are numerous studies that have confirmed that this type of program is largely ineffective.”
You know better than that, Chief. This is virtue signaling masquerading as a remedy, nothing more.
It's good that you oppose it, and these anti-gun ninnies should be shamed out of existence. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
