|
|
|
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:
Millwright66
(6/27/2015)
|
| How does one set about documenting all the instances of criminals being deterred by their appreciation of threat of their victim(s) being armed ? How do we document how a reactive reach for a firearm deters a criminal ? How do we document how many criminals have a change of heart when their intended victim displays a firearm ? We can't, except in the aggregate decline in violent crimes where the threat of CCW prevails. And its precisely on this hinge VPC and its ilk swing their innuendos. |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(6/28/2015)
|
These "studies", valid or not, are irrelevant.
The sanctity of our fundamental rights is neither increased nor diminished by any "study".
Fundamental rights stand apart from the democratic process, and are immutable.
As Scalia wrote in Heller, fundamental, natural rights are not subject to any free-standing "interest balancing" test. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
