|
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:
Debating fire
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The gun-control debate has mostly revolved around interpretation of the Second Amendment. It would be more productive, instead, to focus on societal ramifications of the prevalence of guns.
The Violence Policy Center analyzed the data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics for a five-year period (2007-2011). It revealed that average annual “defensive” gun use occurred 67,740 times. In 2009, this resulted in 13,636 homicides by private citizens supposedly in “self-defense.” However, law enforcement officials determined that merely 215 were justifiable; thus 98.4 percent of homicides were illegal murders. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(2/4/2016)
|
And another 'expert' who knows nothing about guns presumes to expound on the subject. |
|
|
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)] |
|
|