|
|
|
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:
MD: Pro-Gun and Pro-Hunting Bills Become Law in Maryland
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Your NRA-ILA is glad to report that Governor Larry Hogan (R) has signed into law Senate Bill 736 and Senate Bill 88.
As previously reported, NRA-backed SB 736, sponsored by state Senator Edward Reilly (R-33), will eliminate the unnecessary database and failed ballistic fingerprint system from state law. This pro-gun bill will remove an unnecessary burden from firearm manufacturers who are required to continue sending shell cases to a program that has been unfunded for years. SB 736 was unanimously passed by the Maryland Senate on April 11, and passed by the House of Delegates on a 135 to 2 vote on April 13. |
| Comment by:
-none-
(5/15/2015)
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a7WRPyMxOU
Car Terror Attack
Arutz Sheva TV |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
