
|
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:
AUSTRALIA: Indigenous Mother Threatens to Shoot 'Privileged' White Kids
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A MAJOR Coast school was put on high alert after an indigenous mother threatened to shoot all the "white, racist f---s" and "privileged, little white children" on the grounds. Iesha Lillian Nixon, 38, wasn't happy with the Department of Education and Training's response when she told them her son had been "racially vilified" at Nambour State College. Wanting to enrol him into Burnside State School, Nixon was on the phone to a department representative on February 8, 2017 for 45 minutes before the conversation turned violent. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2018)
|
She should be committed for observation. |
Comment by:
netsyscon
(1/16/2018)
|
The way the politicians talk all the guns have been banned. I guess not. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|