|
|
|
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:
NRA Challenges Illinois Gun Ban
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The National Rifle Association (NRA) and other pro-Second Amendment organizations filed a lawsuit today challenging the Illinois law signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker that bans commonly owned firearms and magazines. "The Supreme Court already ruled that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep arms that are commonly used by the people,” said John Weber, NRA Illinois state director. "Gov. Pritzker's decision to ignore the court and sign this bill demonstrates a blatant disregard for the rule of law and a willful ignorance of the nightmare he and his anti-gun allies in the statehouse have created with their soft-on-crime policies." |
| Comment by:
netsyscon
(1/25/2023)
|
| impeach him |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
