|
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:
MT: Montana has a history of gun regulation, for good reason
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
According to the territory’s first newspaper editor Thomas Dimsdale, “shooting, dueling, and outrage were daily occurrences” in Virginia City and Bannack. Granville Stuart, as close to a founding father as the territory produced, remarked that in 1860s Virginia City it “became the custom to go armed all the time.” Yet the territory’s first legislature passed a law banning “the carrying of concealed deadly weapons” anywhere within the limits of any town in the territory. Such laws were not unique to Montana. Most states banned concealed weapons in the nineteenth century, considering them the weapons of assassins and thieves, not appropriate for an honest man. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/18/2021)
|
Noitdoesn't. Quitlyin'.
Heh-heh.
I would point out that until the ratification of the 14th Amendment, the Bill of Rights was only binding on the United States government.
That was over 100 years ago. Times have changed. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
"Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|