|
|
|
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:
NJ: nj.com: Turn the Hose on Gun Rights Protestors! (video available)
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"'A group of gun rights fanatics protested last week at the home of Senate President Steve Sweeney,' an nj.com editorial reports (substituting the word 'fanatics' for 'protestors'), 'throwing reckless accusations at him, annoying his wife, and scaring the wits out his disabled daughter. Sweeney, after holding his crying daughter in his arms for two hours, turned on his sprinklers to soak the motley crew of malcontents. To which we say: Right on.' Does the idea of dousing civil rights advocates remind you of anything? [Click here for a trip down memory lane.] The protesters took their 'punishment' in stride. But that wasn’t good enough for nj.com . . ." ... |
| Comment by:
kangpc
(6/24/2015)
|
The Red Star Ledger teeters on the precipice of bankruptcy and gives away free copies in the hope of increasing its circulation, then publicly insults a significant portion of potential subscribers by calling them "fanatics."
I predict that in 10 years this rag will be but a distant memory. And I, among many others in the Democratic People's Republic of New Jersey will breathe a sigh of relief and say "good riddance." |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
