|
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:
Elizabeth Warren Is Trying to Have It Both Ways
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
I see this all the time when discussing constitutional rights. “The First Amendment isn’t unlimited,” someone will say. “The Court has determined that some regulations are permissible.” And then, having stated this banal fact, they argue that we need the government to prosecute speakers whose words they consider hateful. It’s the same with the Second Amendment. “Scalia himself said that the right to be arms wasn’t infinite,” I will be assured. And then comes the proposal to ban almost every firearm in the country and embark upon a mass confiscation drive. The logic seems to be, “If something is allowed, then everything is. And that makes everything the same as something.” |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/17/2018)
|
Pocahontas needs a poke in the hontas. |
Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(8/17/2018)
|
Fauxcahontas is a socialist nut; she wants all businesses earning over 1 billion dollars controlled and regulated by government -- a government that couldn't run a profit from a lemonade stand. She should keep prattling this, and opponent politicians should run it all over their political tv ads and radio blurbs now and again in 2020! |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
"Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|