|
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:
IL: Illinois gun laws, and a troubling loophole
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Prosecutors say Michael Arquero was acting in self-defense when he fired back at a drive-by shooter last month outside a taco stand in Humboldt Park. He will not face charges related to the car driver's death. "I would consider him a good guy with a gun," one of his friends told the Tribune. "There's the bad guys with guns, and he's a good guy with a gun."
We don't know if Arquero is a good guy with a gun or a bad guy with a gun, but this much we know: He should not have had a gun in the first place. He is a convicted felon, and felons aren't allowed to buy or possess a gun in Illinois. So how did he get one? |
Comment by:
AFRet
(10/22/2016)
|
Really?
How about this, criminals or anyone who wants a firearm will get one...fingerprints or not.
It's not the gun morons, it's the CRIMINAL.
Just like cars do not drive around by themselves drunk and causing accidents, injuries and deaths.
People that buy this **** are too stupid to be allowed to procreate!! |
|
|
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)] |
|
|