|
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:
OR: Gun Ban Introduced in the State Legislature
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On Thursday, anti-gun Rep. Carla Piluso introduced a draconian gun ban bill, House Bill 3223, that would impose California-style gun control in Oregon by banning many commonly owned semi-automatic firearms used by countless gun owners for target shooting, hunting, and self-defense. HB 3223 has not yet been referred to a committee for consideration at this time. Please contact your state legislators and urge them to OPPOSE HB 3223 and other anti-gun legislation. |
Comment by:
Stripeseven
(3/2/2019)
|
An imaginary Regime with no more limits on power, a Totalitarian State. But actually, knowingly depriving citizens of their rights guaranteed in the Constitution is a criminal act, a federal crime. Serve.. Not Rule.. |
|
|
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) |
|
|