|
|
|
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:
‘Gun Violence Prevention’ Bills Treat Rights as Privileges
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Newsweek is reporting that “Two potentially sweeping gun violence prevention bills were introduced to Congress” this week, but what the story didn’t say is that both measures appear to treat rights enumerated in the Constitution as privileges.
The first of these measures, according to the story, is the “Handgun Purchaser Licensing Act,” introduced in the Senate by anti-gun Maryland Democrat Sen Chris Van Hollen and in the House by Democrat Congressman Jamie Raskin, also of Maryland. Joining Van Hollen in the Senate are Democrats Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, while the House version is joined by Johana Hayes., all from Connecticut. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/17/2019)
|
"Where does it say that a license should be required before someone can exercise a right protected by the Constitution?"
Where does it say that a license CAN be required before someone can exercise a right protected by the Constitution? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
