|
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 Gun-Crazed NRA Is Trying To Tell Us Our Gun Laws Are A Mistake
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Better limber up those brain muscles, folks. Because we're about to do some logic gymnastics."
"America's exceedingly powerful gun lobby group - the National Rifle Association - has taken direct aim at Australia's strong gun laws, following President Barack Obama's appearance on comedian Marc Maron's podcast WTF with Marc Maron."
"During the podcast, President Obama again praised the stringent gun laws implemented by the then Howard Government in the wake of the 1996 massacre at Port Arthur in Tasmania." ...
"'Course in America you can't make even the tiniest peep about the sacrosanct second amendment without wild, shouty rebuttal." ... |
Comment by:
laker1
(7/14/2015)
|
Aussies agree we and they should not be trusted with weapons. Why should we trust them? |
Comment by:
teebonicus
(7/14/2015)
|
Somebody hand this Aussie a towel so he can wipe the froth off his mouth. |
|
|
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) |
|
|