|
|
|
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:
MI: Home Depot parking lot shooter did what she's been told
Submitted by:
Corey Salo
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
How can you blame her?
When Tatiana Duva-Rodriguez shot at a fleeing shoplifter's tires in a Home Depot parking lot last week, she was only doing what she'd been told, time and again, from people like National Rifle Association chief Wayne LaPierre to presidential candidate Ben Carson: The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
The instructions CPL holders should receive in those classes contradict the vigilante ethos pushed by LaPierre, Carson and others, who have, in the wake of repeated school shootings, argue that if only more people were armed, the shooters could have been stopped.
Submitter's note: She was the only shooter |
| Comment by:
mickey
(10/14/2015)
|
Detroit's Free Press printed this pack of lies.
Valid link:
http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/nancy-kaffer/2015/10/13/home-depot-shooter-just-doing-what-shes-been-told/73866482/ |
| Comment by:
jac
(10/14/2015)
|
The writer of this article has no concept of what is taught in a concealed carry class.
It's too bad that journalists aren't required to practice some ethics before getting their articles published. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
