|
|
|
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:
Gun Control and The Potential of Slaughter
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Last Tuesday, a 66-year-old man from Illinois armed with a semi-automatic assault rifle showed up at a baseball field in Virginia to kill GOP lawmakers and others who were practicing for their annual baseball game. The only police personnel that were at the location were there to provide security for the Republican Whip Rep. Steven Scalise of Louisiana. If they had not been there, there would have been a lot more people shot or killed, according to those who were involved.
|
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/26/2017)
|
What this person (and all of the non-2A-advocates) failes to understand is, that no matter what heinous criminal act occurs, it doesn't change the constitutional command, "shall not be infringed", one whit.
The question, "Does gun ownership make us safer?" is one of policy, and as Justice Scalia wrote in Heller, "The ensrhinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table."
Times change, but principles don't. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| There are other things so clearly out of the power of Congress, that the bare recital of them is sufficient, I mean the "...rights of bearing arms for defence, or for killing game..." These things seem to have been inserted among their objections, merely to induce the ignorant to believe that Congress would have a power over such objects and to infer from their being refused a place in the Constitution, their intention to exercise that power to the oppression of the people. —ALEXANDER WHITE (1787) |
|
|
