|
|
|
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:
MarkHamTownsend
(10/14/2017)
|
Here's more of that twaddle about only the militia bearing arms.
Hellen did away with this nonsense. It's like a monster movie.....you think you've slain the creature it comes back and tries to eat you again. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(10/14/2017)
|
| Hellen..dang autocorrect....US V. HELLER.. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(10/14/2017)
|
Re: Title
No, they wouldn't.
The public understanding of the people's right to arms rested on the fact that there were no differences between military arms and civilian arms. Arms WERE military arms. They are the only kind of arms that existed, which means that the people fully expected to be armed in parity with a standing military. Sorry if that puts a hole in your canoe, but that's the fact, Jack. |
| Comment by:
lucky5eddie
(10/14/2017)
|
| Sounds like they are busy trying to rewrite history to meet their agenda and not the facts. Facts be dammed. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
