|
|
|
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:
Actually, Joe Biden, Flamethrowers Are Legal In All 50 States
Submitted by:
jack burton
Website: https://myhightechsecurity.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Almost all the candidates running in the Democratic Party primary are currently not running to become president of the United States, but of the internet. This is causing them to scramble leftward across each other in an attempt to win the Twitter primary.
Front-runner Joe Biden, despite leading with the majority that doesn’t live online, is as susceptible as the rest. Given the renewed discussion about gun control, he had this to say on Thursday: “It violates no one’s Second Amendment rights to say you can’t own certain weapons. You’re not allowed to own a bazooka; you can’t own a flamethrower.” |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(8/15/2019)
|
"It violates no one's second amendment rights to say you can't own certain weapons."
WRONG.
What do you think "shall not be infringed" means?
"Infringe:" 1.) To intrude into, or onto. 2.) To diminish
source: OXFORD AMERICAN DICTIONARY
"SHALL" Is an imperative. It does not say "may," it says SHALL. Consult a lawyer and ask what is the difference between using those words in a contract or legal document.
But then, Biden has always been a clueless gaff machine. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| There are other things so clearly out of the power of Congress, that the bare recital of them is sufficient, I mean the "...rights of bearing arms for defence, or for killing game..." These things seem to have been inserted among their objections, merely to induce the ignorant to believe that Congress would have a power over such objects and to infer from their being refused a place in the Constitution, their intention to exercise that power to the oppression of the people. —ALEXANDER WHITE (1787) |
|
|
