|
|
|
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: Michigan City, Valparaiso Police Buying New Weapons
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constiutitionnework.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Michigan City Police Department is trading in 181 guns in a major weapons purchase approved recently by the City Council. Police Chief Mark Swistek told the council the trade-ins include 47 shotguns no longer in use by the department. The Valparaiso Police Department, too, is taking advantage of a sale Glock Inc. is offering area police departments through Oct. 1. |
| Comment by:
mickey
(9/4/2018)
|
Swistek said the special trade-in incentive Glock offered is rare. This is only the second time the company has offered it, he said.
“It may never happen again in our lifetime,” Swistek said.
(because it's impossible to find a FFL willing to pay $200 for a police issue G22?) |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
