|
|
|
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:
Ralph Northam’s Insane Gun-Grab Proposal
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
As Stephen Gutowski notes at the Free Beacon, there’s a truly radical proposal lurking in the Virginia governor’s push for gun control. From a press release:
Delegate Kathy Tran and Senator Adam Ebbin will patron legislation to ban the sale, purchase, possession, and transport of assault firearms in the Commonwealth. The bill also modifies the definition of assault firearm to any firearm that is equipped with a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds of ammunition. |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(1/15/2019)
|
| Those who want to deprive you of your right to keep and bear arms are intending to deprive you of your freedom, period. The "Oath of Office" has teeth along with complete expectation that it be taken seriously. You do remember this right? "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will "Support" and "Defend" the Constitution of the United States". If you take an oath in a courtroom and lie...you know what happens. "Lying" or knowingly "Breaking" that oath should be considered more severe than being in a courtroom and lying. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(1/15/2019)
|
| Is there any more proof required that the elites want us disarmed? It doesn't matter if it's a flintlock or a AR-15 they DO NOT WANT US TO OWN IT!!!!!! ! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
