|
|
|
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:
Mark Kelly at DNC: Lack of Gun Control One of America’s ‘Greatest Moral Failures’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
During his July 27 speech at the Democrat National Convention, gun control proponent Mark Kelly described the absence of new gun laws as one of America’s “greatest moral failures.”
Mark Kelly has been campaigning to require a background check for every would-be gun purchaser ever since his wife, Gabby Giffords, was attacked by a man who passed a background check to acquire his firearm. Giffords’s attacker — Jared Loughner — passed a background check for the Glock he used to attack innocents in Tucson on January 8, 2011. |
| Comment by:
laker1
(7/28/2016)
|
| Both have been pictured in years past shooting an AR-15. Now with ant-gun dollars rolling in they have become the face of gun control. However, not one of these morons can point to a place where gun control has worked in lowering violent crime. Not one! |
| Comment by:
Sosalty
(7/28/2016)
|
| Really, the Dems tax us and make us pay to kill an estimated 70,000 black babies a year, and then claim the moral high road? |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
