|
|
|
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:
CA: No, Judge Benitez, we do not need weapons of war for ‘home defense’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A FEDERAL judge’s decision overturning California’s longtime ban on assault weapons has been rightly mocked for its ludicrous likening of an AR-15 rifle to a Swiss Army knife. But the ruling is no laughing matter. While it will be appealed — and hopefully overturned by jurists who understand the Second Amendment is not without limits — the ruling is part of a sustained attack on gun safety laws that has been emboldened by the shift in balance of the U.S. Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez of the Southern District of California on Friday termed the state’s ban on assault weapons, implemented in 1989 and revised over the years, “a failed experiment” and ruled it unconstitutional. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(6/9/2021)
|
* SIGH *
More of this "weapons of war" cr@p.
The "Heller vs. D. C." SCOTUS decision stated that modern arms ARE protected by the second amendment. Let's hope the high courts that will hear the appeal know this.
Do the myrmidons who write this mush realize that just about every type of firearm ever made has either been a "weapon of war" or is still a "weapon of war." |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/9/2021)
|
WaPo pay wall.
Nope. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
