|
|
|
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:
Connecticut Senator: Anyone Wanting a High-Capacity Magazine is “Arming Against the Government”
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"The same senator who admitted lying to Sandy Hook families to get them to come to Washington in order to have them lobby for votes on unconstitutional gun confiscation legislation, is now claiming that if you want a high-capacity magazine for your gun, then you must be 'arming against the government.'"
"Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), a virtually unknown senator until the Sandy Hook incident, has conspired with gun grabbing senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) to co-sponsor Rep. Elizabeth Esty's (D-CT) unconstitutional bill that would limit magazine capacity to only 10 rounds across the nation. ...'" ... |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(2/10/2015)
|
"Anyone Wanting a High-Capacity Magazine is Arming Against the Government."
Yo. Murphy. Let's rephrase that so folks will really get what you are saying:
"Anyone Wanting a High-Capacity Magazine is Arming Against the Crown."
Just so we're clear on that.
You confuse us with people who don't have a long memory. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(2/10/2015)
|
| About all that's missing from the senator's statement is the word, ME ! I doubt it was his humility that precluded its inclusion. |
|
|
| 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| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times.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 For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in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) |
|
|
