|
|
|
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:
The Times Recommends: Vote Yes on Gun Initiative 1639
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A proposed initiative on the November ballot would make some sensible improvements to Washington state gun laws and save lives. Voters should say yes to Initiative 1639. The proposal would raise the minimum purchase age from 18 to 21 for semi-automatic rifles, establish new safe-storage rules and require safety training before buying any kind of gun or rifle.
|
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(10/3/2018)
|
State preemption aside, if the initiative passes and state law changes to include this ordinance, it will still violate the law according to the Supreme Court of the United States, which ruled specifically in D.C. v. Heller (later incorporated to bind the states and their subdivisions by McDonald v. Chicago) that mandating that firearms in the home be locked up and unloaded (or otherwise disabled) facially violates the Second Amendment's core right of self-defense.
D.C. v. Heller (2008)
"Held:
3)...the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a
trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of
self-defense and is hence unconstitutional."
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Period. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(10/3/2018)
|
| P.S. - Democrats are STINK!!! |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(10/4/2018)
|
For those that continually seek to undermine our Constitutional form of government.
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| As an individual, I believe, very strongly, that handguns should be banned and that there should be stringent, effective control of other firearms. However, as a judge, I know full well that the question of whether handguns can be sold is a political one, not an issue of products liability law, and that this is a matter for the legislatures, not the courts. The unconventional theories advanced in this case (and others) are totally without merit, a misuse of products liability laws. — Judge Buchmeyer, Patterson v. Gesellschaft, 1206 F.Supp. 1206, 1216 (N.D. Tex. 1985) |
|
|
