|
|
|
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:
Are Democrats dangerously delusional about background checks?
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"A comment the other day by Oregon Rep. Dan Rayfield (D-Corvallis) reported by the Albany Democrat Herald Thursday seems to sum up what many in the Second Amendment community have decided is a dangerously delusional attitude about a proposed “universal background check” bill now headed to the full House in Salem."
"'We still need to close the loopholes,' Rayfield said, according to the newspaper. 'Criminals, as was noted, are still going to attempt to purchase guns. Right now if they can't go through the traditional means they go to private sales, online markets, to gain access to these guns.'"
"Does this guy, or any of his colleagues, have a clue about how criminals really obtain most of their firearms? ..." ... |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(4/27/2015)
|
| "Dangerously" or just merely "delusional", i.e. unable to comprehend or accept the prevailing situational realities. Their mantra of the "gunshot loophole" is one example. Anyone with access to a library or computer can - without referencing any "pro-gun sites- read chapter and verse of ATF regulations governing firearms commerce. There is no "loophole". All firearms transactions in a FFL's "bound book" inventory have to be accounted/approved in a federal form. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
