|
|
|
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:
IN: What's Next For Indiana's Gun Laws?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Many consider Indiana a “gun friendly” state. And in recent years there has been an effort to loosen some restrictions the state does impose, but as gun violence escalates there is also push back.
At the end of a 2017 special study committee, Indiana legislative staff attorney Akash Burney reviewed the state’s gun laws.
“Indiana does not require handgun owners to be licensed or register individual handguns,” Burney read, “Indiana only requires a license if that individual desire to carry a handgun in public.” |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/30/2017)
|
"[M]ost people are on the same page as us,” she says.
Which is why the Framers included bearing arms as a RIGHT.
Rights are not subject to what "most people" want. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
