|
|
|
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:
WA: The Hits Keep on Coming as Magazine Ban Pulled to the Senate Floor
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On Friday, the Washington Senate pulled magazine ban legislation, Senate Bill 5078 to the Senate Floor where it is eligible for a vote for passage. NRA Members and Second Amendment supporters probably recall this measure from last year, previously reported here. Please contact your State Senator IMMEDIATELY and ask them to OPPOSE Senate Bill 5078.
Senate Bill 5078, bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc., of magazines that “are capable of holding,” or hold more than, 12 rounds of ammunition. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2022)
|
Poison pill an amendment to it stipulating that those restrictions apply equally to any government agency or personnel, on AND off-duty, whose positions require the carrying of arms as conditions of employment, and that there are NO exemptions.
Watch it go *poof!* immediately thereafter. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power." [Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)] |
|
|
