|
|
|
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:
WA: We can’t let our emotions restrict our rights
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On the Ron and Don Show this week, Don invited folks to enter the arena on the topic of banning AR-15s, a proposal he supports in the wake of too many shootings, local and national. I’ll happily join the arena for the debate because while his argument is emotionally powerful and rooted in good intentions, it’s flawed and dangerous.
Don sets up the argument like this: make a choice — you either say goodbye to the AR-15 (and similar types of guns) or you say goodbye to the innocent lives of children.
It’s a specious choice. It’s also constitutionally invalid.
|
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(8/5/2016)
|
| Of course we could always require those wishing to chill our second amendment rights with this "historical" canard to observe the same restrictions upon their first amendment rights. I.e. they may freely express their opinions in person to anyone willing to listen. Write their manifestos in long hand on parchment with quill pens, copy them out manually, and print their treatises on single plate manual presses, and distribute them by horseback, sailing ship and any animal powered conveyance . It would be historically accurate. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
