|
|
|
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:
WA: Washougal urged to be gun-rights sanctuary
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Patriot Prayer members and a Washougal gun shop owner turned out to a Washougal City Council meeting Monday to ask city leaders there to declare Washougal a “Second Amendment sanctuary city” and instruct local police to not enforce a set of voter-approved state gun control laws.
More than 50 people attended the council meeting, including Joey Gibson, founder of the Vancouver-based Patriot Prayer group; Eric Hargrave, owner of Limitless America, a Washougal firearms retailer; and a film crew shooting footage for a “VICE News Tonight” program that will air on HBO in the spring. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/1/2019)
|
“It’s not up to me to decide whether 1639 is constitutional or not,” Greenlee said. “That’s somebody else — the Supreme Court of the State of Washington or the Supreme Court of the United States — any federal or state courts.”
Sorry, Greenlee. That cop-out won't fly. If you'd done your homework, you'd know this:
“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.” - D.C. v. Heller (2008) |
|
|
| 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]. |
|
|
