|
|
|
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:
Legacy of Slavery Is Why U.S. Remains Bound by Insane Gun Policy
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Here’s a thought exercise. Please indulge this idea: if slavery had never taken root in the U.S., would there have been a need for a 2nd Amendment to this nation’s constitution?
Take into consideration Roger Williams University’s Distinguished Research Professor of Law, Carl T. Bogus, whose thought-throttling paper was published in the University of California Davis Law Review. Titled, “The Hidden History of the 2nd Amendment” (2019), the article documents and explores ongoing conversations among a number of contributors to the Constitution (1789), which later led to the framing of the Bill of Rights back in 1791. |
| Comment by:
lucky5eddie
(12/9/2025)
|
| That "Professor" has the right name for his belief's. "Bogus". LOL |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
