|
|
|
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:
The Clintons' Disdain for the Second Amendment: 'You Can't Have a Bunch of People Walking Around With Guns'
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Arkansas has pretty permissive gun laws. It does not require handgun owners to obtain licenses, does not ban so-called assault weapons, issues concealed-carry permits to anyone who meets a short list of objective criteria, accepts carry permits issued by other states and, since 2013, arguably allows people to openly carry handguns without a permit."
"Although Bill Clinton was the governor of Arkansas from 1983 to 1992, he and his wife, the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee, prefer a decidedly more restrictive approach. On Sunday, the former president highlighted the couple's disdain for the right to armed self-defense by declaring that 'you can't have a bunch of people walking around with guns.' ..." ... |
| Comment by:
Taos_Trapper
(6/17/2015)
|
'You Can't Have a Bunch of People Walking Around With Guns'
Why not??? We have "Open Carry" here in New Mexico and I have not observed blood running in the gutters of our streets! I have, however, observed many instances of CITIZENS going about their daily routines while wearing their handguns! No problems observed. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(6/17/2015)
|
Does anyone ever bother to ask these 'restrictors', 'what are you afraid of ?'. Since even the gun banners acknowledge criminals don't obey gun laws, what purpose does imposing more restrictive gun law that will only be observed by law-abiding citizens serve ?
IMNSHO only two: 1) to criminalize ever more of the nation's community leaders as a control measure and 2) eliminate or restrict, ISFAP, the means of effective "grass roots" resistance to any force seeking to impose dictatorial powers upon our populace or constitutional systems. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
