|
|
|
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:
CA: Bill Disarming Teachers, Domestic Violence Victims Heads to Jerry Brown’s Desk
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The bill to disarm teachers and staff—including school employees who are victims of domestic violence—has passed the last of its legislative hurdles and is now sitting on California Gov. Jerry Brown’s (D) desk.
Breitbart News first reported this effort on May 12, 2017, as Assemblyman Kevin McCarty (D) pushed AB 424 with the aim of disarming teachers in the five districts which allow them to carry for self-defense. Those districts are Kern High School District, Kingsburg Joint Union High School District, Folsom Cordova Unified School District, Anderson Union High School District, and Palo Cedro’s North Cow Creek School District. |
| Comment by:
netsyscon
(9/14/2017)
|
Fantastic new law....
Hey, shoot them, they are unarmed.
I would move SOOO FAST out of that stupid state.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
