|
|
|
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:
Baltimore Sun Editor: Licensed Gun Owners Scare Me More Than Gun-toting Criminals
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On January 7, Baltimore Sun deputy editorial page editor Tricia Bishop penned a column in which she explained that licensed gun owners scare her more than gun-toting criminals.
Her central justification for this position is that she lives in a part of Baltimore where she can’t be reached by the poor blacks who are shooting one another in other parts of town, but she occasionally hears stories about law-abiding citizens who wear guns on their hips for self-defense while they are in their own yards. The justification is not congruent, but it’s the one Bishop provided. |
| Comment by:
laker1
(1/9/2016)
|
| She just demonstrated she will be added to the NICS list banning firearm ownership due to mental incompetence. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
