|
|
|
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:
A Gun Fanatic Like Kavanaugh Doesn't Deserve to Be on SCOTUS
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
For anyone who cares about reducing gun violence, it was Sen. Dianne Feinstein who asked the key question of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. The California senator demanded that Kavanaugh reconcile his opposition to assault weapon bans with the growing frequency and increasing deadliness of mass shootings.
And that is where Kavanaugh parroted the gun lobby’s talking points -- falsely arguing that we can only prevent the mass shootings that occur in our nation’s schools by “hardening” schools. National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre has said the same thing for years. “We must immediately harden our schools,” LaPierre said after both Newtown and Parkland. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(9/15/2018)
|
| Yeah? Well, he's GONNA be, and our liberty will then benefit from his 'fanatacism'. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
