
|
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:
Insurrection in WA State: Lawmen ‘Just Say No’
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
What Second Amendment advocates considered an “extremist” gun control measure when they opposed it, I-1639 — passed by slightly less than 60 percent of voters, in only 12 of the state’s 39 counties — is being challenged in federal district court by the National Rifle Association and Second Amendment Foundation.
But top law enforcers — sheriffs in many of the state’s counties — are “just saying ‘no’” to enforcing provisions of the measure, at least until the court challenge plays out, the newspaper said. |
Comment by:
Stripeseven
(1/31/2019)
|
Sheriffs are just honoring the Oath they took, and apparently won't support unconstitutional activities. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|