|
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:
TX Dems Exploit Austin Shooting to Fight Permitless Carry
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Democrats in Texas are using a fatal shooting in Austin to encourage Gov. Greg Abbott to veto legislation allowing permitless carry of firearms in the state, but a look at the suspects in that incident shows a significant disconnect between politics and reality.
According to the Austin American-Statesman, 13 people were wounded and one New York tourist was killed in the June 11 shooting.
|
Comment by:
jac
(6/16/2021)
|
Constitutional (permitless) carry has not taken effect yet. I can guarantee that neither of the shooters were licensed for concealed carry. There is no link between constitutional carry and the shooting in Austin.
Just more liberal opposition to law abiding citizens. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|