|
|
|
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:
FL: We don’t need a national registry for guns (first letter)
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"If a person is deemed so mentally unfit that legal gun ownership is forbidden, why isn’t that person institutionalized and given care instead of violating Second Amendment protections for all others?"
"The Pandora’s Box of diagnosing mental illness regrading the Second Amendment is dangerously double-edged. Does the APA determine mental fitness? Your prescriptions? A bureaucrat? The Brady Campaign? Family? Friends?"
"What’s to keep someone from maliciously reporting another as 'deficient'? What mental issues, spelled out in law, makes someone unable to legally own a weapon? Are they the same for holding public office?" ... |
| Comment by:
laker1
(7/15/2015)
|
| Why are they out and about if they can't be trusted with a gun, gasoline, ball bat, bow and arrow, knife, etc? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
