|
|
|
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:
NY: Ethics panel sees no problem with Howard wearing uniform to pro-Trump rally
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Sheriff Timothy B. Howard did not violate the Erie County Code of Ethics when he wore his uniform to a pro-President Trump rally, the county's Ethics Board says.
...
The decision, reached this week, was sent to the five people who filed complaints after Howard on April 1 donned official garb for a rally with political overtones in Niagara Square. The event, one of a series of pro-Trump "Spirit of America" rallies staged across the country, was sponsored locally by the Tea Party and the Shooters Committee on Political Education, which resists gun-control measures. |
| Comment by:
mickey
(5/6/2017)
|
| If a sheriff or chief wearing his uniform to a political event is illegal, there are thousands of anti-gun police leaders who are guilty of it. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
