|
|
|
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:
Gun rights hanging in the balance?
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Last week, Dudley Brown of the National Association for Gun Rights and Rocky Mountain Gun Owners sent out a lurid email warning readers against an Article V Convention of the States:""'The truth is, if those pushing an Article V Constitutional Convention ever succeed, ALL of our freedoms protected by the United States Constitution — including the Second Amendment — would be put on the chopping block!' – Dudley Brown" "Brown is concerned about the dangers of a 'runaway convention' and calls for email recipients to write or call legislators and lobby them to remove their names in support of an Article V convention. ..." ... |
| Comment by:
mickey
(2/2/2015)
|
When you convene a convention to draft a replacement Constitution, the whole document is up for grabs.
Are any mentally functional adults really incapable of figuring that out? |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
