|
|
|
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:
4th of July 'Sit In' Against Gun Violence
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Peninsula Congresswoman Jackie Speier took part Monday in a "sit-in" against gun violence while dressed in red, white and blue. At the annual Fourth of July festival in Redwood City, it was a day of celebration -- with a message. Holding signs reading, "Disarm Hate," Speier and anti-violence advocates chanted "No more gun violence!" outside the Fox Theatre on Broadway while calling for responsible gun legislation and mandatory background checks for all gun sales. |
| Comment by:
PP9
(7/5/2016)
|
I'm against gun violence too.
Well, actually, I am against all violence. There's no reason to separate it into "gun" violence and all other forms of violence.
It is that opposition to violence that leads me to own guns. I'm especially against violence done to me or to those close to me-- so much so that I prepare myself to counter it, should it unfortunately be necessary one day. I own and carry guns because I am a peaceable citizen who thinks that violent victimization of others cannot be tolerated.
As one with a basic familiarity with reality, I recognize that there are people out there who don't share this ideal. Thus, it is incumbent upon me to have the means to resist those who would breach the peace with their violent impulses. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
