|
|
|
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:
Donald Trump: Lifetime Member Of NRA, Concealed Permit Holder
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"GOP presidential hopeful Donald Trump is a lifetime member of the NRA and a concealed carry permit holder who believes the advantages an armed citizenry provides to America are so evident as to be beyond 'debate.'" ...
"He went on to talk about this 'permit to carry' in New York and said, 'I know firsthand the challenges law-abiding citizens have in exercising their Second Amendment rights.'"
"Trump cited figures showing how concealed carry impacts crime and focused on how states with less restrictions on carry—'right to carry states'—enjoy a lower 'violent crime' and a 'lower murder rate' than other parts of the country. He contrasted this with the fact that gun control 'has consistently failed to stop violence' ..." ... |
| Comment by:
mickey
(7/8/2015)
|
Every political candidate with a few hundred dollars to spend on his campaign is a Life member.
Including lifetime anti-gunner George Herbert Wanker Bush, the only president to enact a gun ban by royal decree, I mean "Executive Order" before he'd been in office 60 days. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
