|
|
|
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:
Schumer touts new gun control scheme, ignores a gaping 'loophole'
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
... "Now, it isn’t clear whether Soofi used that specific handgun in Garland (this column has reached out to ATF for an answer), but this story also raises an issue nobody in the gun prohibition movement dares to answer. Just because he bought a handgun five years before committing a crime, are firearms retailers supposed to be soothsayers now? Must they be clairvoyant? Who could say five years ago what somebody might do today with a gun he bought, or for that matter a car, kitchen knife or candlestick holder? Even the government can't foretell the future." ... |
| Comment by:
laker1
(8/4/2015)
|
| Schumer is a **** bottom feeder and rabid anti-gun grabber. . Its usually a toss up as to which Senator can race to a TV camera, Schumer or McCain. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
