|
|
|
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:
DE: Second Amendment shouldn't protect assault weapons
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
My family and I have legally owned guns for the protection of our households for as long as I can remember, and I believe that every adult citizen has the right to legally own a firearm for protection or hunting.
But when the Constitution of the United States was written in 1787, I'm sure the Founding Fathers could not envision that, in future generations, Americans would be using the Second Amendment to justify ordinary citizens owning military-style semiautomatic weapons or bump stocks that enable a person to turn a gun into such a destructive weapon. |
| Comment by:
shootergdv
(11/16/2017)
|
| They envisioned the citizens being armed with the same level of weaponry as any standing army. Shucks, privately owned cannons were common ! |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
