|
|
|
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:
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(1/22/2015)
|
It’s a ridiculous argument, and it hasn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of passing.
The reason police would be exempt under the law is obvious and belies the inane postulation by the bill’s sponsors. Cops have to shoot at people, not circles, and that acclimation is critical to training for self-defense or the exemption wouldn’t exist. By exempting law enforcement, the sponsors have torpedoed their own argument.
|
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(1/22/2015)
|
Anyone - LEO or civilian - doesn't "shoot to kill". They shoot to live ! And any device/aid improving their odds of succeeding is beneficial. Any confrontation, (let alone a gun fight), is "high-stress" and repetitious training - made as realistic as possible - is one way to reduce "collateral damage" from missed shots.
These current clique of critics need to first submit to some serious handgun training - including time in the "shoot house" to see, first hand, what life is about. Paper is cheap, but for gun owners/users every shot is dear. They "own" it forever.
And how do you "ban" something anyone can create "on the spot" with minimal materials ? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| There are other things so clearly out of the power of Congress, that the bare recital of them is sufficient, I mean the "...rights of bearing arms for defence, or for killing game..." These things seem to have been inserted among their objections, merely to induce the ignorant to believe that Congress would have a power over such objects and to infer from their being refused a place in the Constitution, their intention to exercise that power to the oppression of the people. —ALEXANDER WHITE (1787) |
|
|
