|
|
|
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:
A Counterbalance to the False Narratives About Gun Ownership
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The data is in: Americans are flocking to gun stores in unprecedented numbers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The spike has left many gun control advocates struggling to find a motive other than pure, irrational panic. After all, the common narrative goes, “the good guy with a gun” is a myth and it’s very rare that any law-abiding Americans have to defend themselves at gunpoint.
Enter The Heritage Foundation’s new Defensive Gun Use Database to help make sense of why so many Americans are now racing to exercise their Second Amendment rights, often for the first time. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/23/2020)
|
"The government cannot always be there to protect your individual rights and liberties from criminals."
This canard must be discarded. It is counter-productive. It posits a counterfeit 'requirement' that citizens must rely on government instead of themselves, yet it is repeated by 2A proponents ad infinitum as a polemical sop to ameliorate the uninitiated's perception of purported 'extremism.'
It is destructive to Americans' understanding of the principles of liberty. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the police have no responsibility to protect individual citizens.
Government is established to protect its sovereignty and our unalienable rights from usurpation. When it expands that power, it invariably diminishes our freedom. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
