|
|
|
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 Control Group Wants Reporter Fired For Speaking At A Pro-Gun Rally
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The gun control group the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) wants Fox News affiliate WTTF to fire its investigative reporter, Emily Miller, claiming that she violated journalistic ethics by criticizing Washington D.C.’s strict gun laws at a recent event.
In its attempt to get Miller fired, CSGV pointed to a Jan. 19 speech she gave at an event held by the Virginia Citizens Defense League — which CSGV claims is “a radical pro-gun group that embraces the use of political violence.”
During the rally, Miller said that Washington D.C. “is not part of America, because they don’t recognize the Second Amendment.” |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(1/29/2015)
|
| CSGV is major stinkage of poopy. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
