|
|
|
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:
VA: Staunton City Council rejects councilwoman's bid for Second Amendment sanctuary meeting
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The city of Staunton will not be a Second Amendment sanctuary, nor will its city council conduct a public hearing on the issue despite one councilwoman's multiple attempts.
For the first time on Thursday, the topic was on council's work session agenda, and Councilwoman Andrea Oakes tried to convince council to hold a public hearing. But the other six council members agreed: Enough was enough.
"We've had two very full matters from the public sessions and innumerable letters and phone calls," Councilman Jim Harrington said. "So I don't see the point of it." |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(1/25/2020)
|
| Well then. You know what side of the fence they're on. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
