|
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:
FL: In gun safety quest, let's protect Constitution, right to self-defense
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Wednesday Your Turn column on the editorial page enumerated several “common sense” recommendations to lower gun violence in Florida. While I agree with many of them, I must disagree with two.
As is the usual case with those who wish to restrict gun rights, limiting freedoms is couched in phrases like “dangerous and ineffective Stand Your Ground Law.” This law is important to provide protection to those who are faced with the threat of imminent death or great bodily harm, in my opinion.
Also, they did not recommend arming teachers, citing “no evidence that arming teachers makes kids safer.” |
Comment by:
Stripeseven
(2/28/2019)
|
Yes protect the Constitution from the criminals that continually seek to deprive American citizens of their Rights.. Yes, you have rights. Know them. |
|
|
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]. |
|
|