|
|
|
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:
MO: Throwing up my hands doesn’t work for me anymore
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, and that right must be preserved. But citizens do not need weapons capable of killing many victims quickly. They do not need “bump stocks” that convert a semi-automatic weapon into a machine gun-like weapon.
Background checks should be applied for every purchase, not just those by licensed dealers, and people with mental health issues should be monitored better and prohibited more reliably from buying weapons.
Did you notice that Donald Trump labeled the Sutherland Springs massacre a mental health problem, not a gun issue, after he worked with Congress in February to loosen mental health restrictions on gun purchases? |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/23/2017)
|
No way to comment. Of course.
"But citizens do not need weapons capable of killing many victims quickly."
1) Yes, they do. According to SCOTUS precedent (U.S. v. Miller, 1939), the types of arms under 2A protection are those that have "some reasonable relationship to the . . . efficiency of a well-regulated militia".
2) Protected rights are not subject to the majority's assessment of what people "need". |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/24/2017)
|
| NOT a matter of NEED, it is a matter of want...and they are legal firearms, DUH!!! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
