|
|
|
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:
MD: Maryland Democratic Leader Calls For Doxxing Of Gun Rights Activist “Terrorists”
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It seems like just the other day when I was writing about how the moderate Republican Governor of Maryland was at least partially succeeding in curbing some of the more rabidly liberal impulses of the Democrats in his state. (Oh, that’s right. It actually was just the other day.) As it turns out, not all of the Democrats have been embracing the cross-party goodness, however. The NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) documents some of the comments put forward by the Maryland Democratic Party Secretary this month, and he’s not exactly taking that whole bipartisan spirit to heart, at least when it comes to the Second Amendment rights of his state’s citizens. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/11/2019)
|
| Of COURSE he does. It's one of the Rules for Radicals. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
