|
|
|
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:
Walmart CEO Supports ‘Common Sense’ Gun Control
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Dick’s Sporting Goods should serve as a giant warning sign of the perils of practicing corporate gun control advocacy. To the tune of $150 million. And Levi’s. And Delta Airlines ($40 million annually). Now Walmart’s CEO is making noises that sound like he wants to sail those same perilous seas, too, signaling his company’s support for “common sense” gun control. Walmart has received immense pressure from anti-freedom organizations to stop selling guns after the shooting in one of their stores in El Paso. Because guns are bad.
|
| Comment by:
jac
(8/20/2019)
|
There is no such thing.
Gun control only affects law abiding citizens. It does nothing to prevent criminals, wackos and malcontents from acquiring guns. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
