|
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:
NC: Gun violence prevention group opposes 2nd Amendment sanctuaries
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The resolutions are designed to prohibit any state or federal law from infringing on county residents legally getting firearms.
“These gun laws save lives,” North Carolinians Against Gun Violence executive director Becky Ceartas said.
The group is asking local governments to remove the resolutions or vote them down.
“We need to keep our state’s gun laws, enforce them strongly and pass new gun laws to protect North Carolinian from gun laws,” Ceartas said. |
Comment by:
Stripeseven
(2/13/2020)
|
Elected servants only have power that is delegated to them by the Constitution.These servants are there to protect the individual rights of the minority from the demands of the majority. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(2/13/2020)
|
“We need to keep our state’s gun laws, enforce them strongly and pass new gun laws to protect North Carolinian from gun laws,” Ceartas said.
??????
Now, *ahek*, how STOOPID is THAYAT? |
|
|
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) |
|
|