|
|
|
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:
AR: Slain Realtor's son talks about safety
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Some area Realtors already are changing their business practices.
After the meeting, Mary Mauger of Century 21-Bradley Realty in Fort Wayne, said she turned down a potential client when, she said, “nothing added up.”
She now carries Mace with her on a lanyard around her neck along with the card allowing her to open lock boxes.
Brenda Williams, also with Century 21-Bradley, said she wants prospective clients to know that if a Realtor asks for ID, they’re not being singled out.
“So please don’t be offended,” she said. |
| Comment by:
jac
(4/28/2017)
|
| Get a gun. Mace only provides a false sense of protection. Other recommendations are sensible. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(4/29/2017)
|
Not once - NOT ONCE - does the article even consider realtors carrying concealed sidearms.
Why not? It's a no-brainer; handguns are THE best tool for personal protection. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
