|
|
|
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:
Sen. Bill Cassidy Answers Gun Control Questions During Opelousas Meeting
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
U.S. Sen Bill Cassidy fielded questions about gun control and preventing shootings during a meeting with St. Landry Parish officials Monday. Cassidy, a Republican, also criticized the anti-fascist activist organization Antifa, saying the group produces propaganda that engages listeners with "people who glorify violence." The group has drawn criticism and accusations of violence from Republican lawmakers, and President Donald Trump tweeted Saturday that it should be labeled as a terror organization.
|
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/20/2019)
|
"Will it take a congressman's child or family to be shot up by machine guns to change?" Fontenot said.
To date, THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE MASS SHOOTING COMMITTED WITH A MACHINE GUN.
In point of fact, there have been no crimes whatsoever committed with machine guns.
A person this ignorant should not be in a position to make/influence laws and regulations. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
