|
|
|
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:
NC: Common sense should prevail
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 9 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Before I begin: This letter concerns gun control, but please don’t “turn off.” No one is trying to take away your guns. The writers of the Bill of Rights weren’t referring to military grade weapons when they wrote about the right to bear arms. They weren’t talking about cannons—they were talking about single repeat weapons to be used for self defense or hunting.
Ed.: They were, in fact, talking about cannons and warships as well. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/10/2017)
|
| Military grade firearms are EXACTLY what 2A is about!!!!! |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/10/2017)
|
| Military grade firearms are EXACTLY what 2A is about!!!!! |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/10/2017)
|
| Military grade firearms are EXACTLY what 2A is about!!!!! |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/10/2017)
|
| Military grade firearms are EXACTLY what 2A is about!!!!! |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/10/2017)
|
| Military grade firearms are EXACTLY what 2A is about!!!!! |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/10/2017)
|
| Military grade firearms are EXACTLY what 2A is about!!!!! |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/10/2017)
|
| Military grade firearms are EXACTLY what 2A is about!!!!! |
| Comment by:
MidwestDeb
(11/10/2017)
|
| Actually in the vernacular of the late 1700s, "arms" were man-portable, common infantry weapons. "Ordnance" were cannon, etc. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(11/10/2017)
|
There was no such thing as "military grade weapons" back then. There was no "mil spec" for weapons. The flintlock muskets the red coats had were the same muskets the Colonials had, for hunting deer.....or redcoats.
In fact, colonials had rifled muskets too. We just call them rifles. The British hated that since they were much more accurate than smooth bore muskets.
And the founders expected the populace to be as well armed as an army. It wasn't about shooting Bambi. |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
