|
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:
MN: Minnesota House Panel OKs Legalizing Silencers
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"On Thursday, a Panel in the Minnesota House of Representatives voted in favor of which would de-criminalize the possession of silencers and prohibit a chief law enforcement officer from refusing to perform NFA sign-offs 'based on generalized objection to private presons or entities making, possessing, or receiving firearms or any certain type of firearm, the possession of which is not prohibited by law.' HF1434 also establishes an appeals process for cases where the CLEO refuses to sign off on an NFA application, awarding reasonable attorneys for plaintiffs who are so denied and later prevail in court . . ." ... |
Comment by:
Millwright66
(3/18/2015)
|
I'll "bet the ranch" if we could get the more accurate term "mufflers" into common usage the non-shooting public would rush to demand their use. |
|
|
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]. |
|
|