
|
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:
FL: Weapons ban
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Automatic and semi-automatic weapons should only be sold to law enforcement agencies, and not to civilians. They are not needed for self-defense or sport. Banning them would not violate the Second Amendment, as many other guns would be legal.
The NRA claims that "bad guys" wouldn't obey the law and would acquire them anyway. However, banning them would make it that much harder on any would-be mass murderer, and over time the number of such weapons would be reduced, and we would all be much safer. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/30/2016)
|
This letter writer is typical of the constitutionally ignorant masses.
Justice Scalia wrote plainly and unequivocally in D.C. v. Heller (2008) that "[T]he Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
The clear intent of the Second Amendment is to guarantee the people's access to small arms suitable for defense against insurrection, invasion and domestic tyranny. At the time of the writing, there was no distinction between "military" arms and "civilian" arms - they were in PARITY.
It is this principle that is embodied in the Second Amendment. |
Comment by:
Sosalty
(6/30/2016)
|
To do our civic duty as the founders of America outlined, we need the same weapons as law enforcement, at a minimum. Fewer criminals would have modern weapons if outlawed? Wasn't the Paris terrorist shooter armed by Eric Holder's 'Fast and Furious' program? No thanks, I need the defensive tool that's maximizes my security. |
|
|
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) |
|
|