|
|
|
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:
MD: Maryland Democratic Leader Calls For Doxxing Of Gun Rights Activist “Terrorists”
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It seems like just the other day when I was writing about how the moderate Republican Governor of Maryland was at least partially succeeding in curbing some of the more rabidly liberal impulses of the Democrats in his state. (Oh, that’s right. It actually was just the other day.) As it turns out, not all of the Democrats have been embracing the cross-party goodness, however. The NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) documents some of the comments put forward by the Maryland Democratic Party Secretary this month, and he’s not exactly taking that whole bipartisan spirit to heart, at least when it comes to the Second Amendment rights of his state’s citizens. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/11/2019)
|
| Of COURSE he does. It's one of the Rules for Radicals. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
