|
|
|
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:
WI: Village Board tables Second Amendment sanctuary request again
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Round three of the debate concerning Baldwin becoming a Second Amendment sanctuary headlined the Village Board’s monthly meeting Aug. 11.
“I’ve gotten more phone calls, texts or emails on this issue than any other,” said trustee Austin Van Someren. “A lot for and a lot against.”
Village residents who spoke questioned the why?
“Your primary focus should be on municipal issues, not political manifestation movements,” said Ellen Olson, addressing the Board.
Said former President Willy Zevenbergen: “I’m not here for or against it, but this is a political quagmire. It’s not a position a Board should take action on.” |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/19/2021)
|
"Let the voters decide."
My, how democratic!
Memo: Constitutional rights cannot be subjected to a vote, EVER. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
