|
|
|
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:
HI: Trump Judge Tries to Strike Down State Gun Safety Law: Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Hawaii has a long history of concern about and laws to promote gun safety, going back many years before it became a state. Individuals can possess guns in their homes and places of business, but cannot carry them openly in public unless they obtain a license, for which they must demonstrate “the urgency or the need” for such open carry to help protect “life and property.” George Young applied twice for such a license but did not attempt to show such an urgency or need; instead, he relied on his “general desire to carry a firearm for self-defense.” Young’s applications were denied and he sued in federal court to have the Hawaii law invalidated as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/26/2021)
|
The "urgent need" requirement is a counterfeit fabrication created from whole cloth.
The lawful exercise of fundamental rights cannot, BY DEFINITION, depend on a particularized "urgent need."
The right to keep and bear arms is as fundamental a right as free speech, free exercise of religion, freedom of assembly, freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to due process of law, etc. etc. etc.
The "balanceing test" argument by opponents, while appropriate for tempering other governmental restrictions, cannot be applied to constitutionally enumerated fundamental (unalienable) rights.
Period. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(3/26/2021)
|
"Gun safety law" my Dixie derrierre!!!!!!
Good grief, the euphemisms truly disgust me. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? [...] The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!" —Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago (Chapter 1 "Arrest") |
|
|
