|
|
|
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:
NV: Accelerating the boogaloo
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment isn’t a license to subvert democratic deliberation with intimidation. One goal of these armed rallies is to intimidate elected officials into following demands, but another goal is to frighten the rest of us into staying silent. Or, as historian David Perry puts it, "maximalist Second Amendment positions are minimalist First Amendment positions. You cannot have free speech when the other side has a rifle in your face, even if it's just 'for protest.'" We cannot stay silent in the face of this intimidation. It would be a death knell for democracy. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/9/2020)
|
| BOOGA-BOOGA-BOOGA!!!! ("Oh, dear, oh, my Lippy!") |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| As an individual, I believe, very strongly, that handguns should be banned and that there should be stringent, effective control of other firearms. However, as a judge, I know full well that the question of whether handguns can be sold is a political one, not an issue of products liability law, and that this is a matter for the legislatures, not the courts. The unconventional theories advanced in this case (and others) are totally without merit, a misuse of products liability laws. — Judge Buchmeyer, Patterson v. Gesellschaft, 1206 F.Supp. 1206, 1216 (N.D. Tex. 1985) |
|
|
