|
|
|
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:
CA: Santa Clarita demonstrates (once again) the folly of too-easy access to guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Here’s one reason: Because somehow in the United States of the 21st century it’s simply not that difficult for a teen to acquire a .45 caliber semiautomatic handgun. Should the staff at Saugus High School have pegged the suspect, a junior who was a member of the track team, as a candidate for murder-suicide? That seems highly unlikely (and might not have made a difference anyway). Would the usual NRA prescription, a so-called “good guy” with a gun have made a difference? Not in 16 seconds. Could the school have been fortified sufficiently to prevent the attack? Equally preposterous. The line to metal detectors could just as easily have been the killing field as the school’s quad. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/16/2019)
|
Baloney.
You keep your kids away from guns your way, and I'll do it my way.
NO. MORE. RIDICULOUS. DEMOCRAT. RESTRICTIONS.
AAMOF, get rid of 99% of those on the books now. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(11/16/2019)
|
California has some pretty strict gun control laws.
But the statists are never happy. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
