|
|
|
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:
FL: In gun safety quest, let's protect Constitution, right to self-defense
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Wednesday Your Turn column on the editorial page enumerated several “common sense” recommendations to lower gun violence in Florida. While I agree with many of them, I must disagree with two.
As is the usual case with those who wish to restrict gun rights, limiting freedoms is couched in phrases like “dangerous and ineffective Stand Your Ground Law.” This law is important to provide protection to those who are faced with the threat of imminent death or great bodily harm, in my opinion.
Also, they did not recommend arming teachers, citing “no evidence that arming teachers makes kids safer.” |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(2/28/2019)
|
| Yes protect the Constitution from the criminals that continually seek to deprive American citizens of their Rights.. Yes, you have rights. Know them. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
