|
|
|
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:
WI: Milwaukee’s Bouchard’s Clothing Store Owner Repels Bad Guys With Gun Fire
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Rami Murrar, owner of Bouchard’s clothing store in Milwaukee, Wisc., was tending to his establishment when at around 4 a.m. a van smashed into the security doors and concrete posts protecting his store. A daring organized heist; after the van broke through the doors, three armed men attempted to gain access to the store.
Murrar responded to the threat by retrieving a semi-automatic rifle and firing at the armed intruders, striking one and causing all to flee. A short time later police caught up with one of the suspected robbers at a local hospital. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/31/2015)
|
Dimwit liberal: "You don't NEED those powerful military assault weapons to hunt."
You're right! We need them to defend against THIS.
And besides, our right to keep and bear them isn't determined by what we NEED. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
