
|
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:
Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2021)
|
The sheriff has a narrow, in-the-moment view. As long as he's sheriff, he isn't worried. But he's not going to be sheriff forever.
If he is comfortable with the 2A, then there is no logical objection to supporting such a measure. It should be no skin off his nose.
Which could bring one to the conclusion that he isn't all that supportive of the 2A after all.
Or, that he's more supportive of government supremacy than he'd like people to think. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2021)
|
P.S. -
Sheriff, have you been paying attention? As in, who will control the levers of the federal government on Jan 20th?
And you can still say "It's not needed."?
i don' thin so, Loosie. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? — Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836 |
|
|