|
|
|
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:
WI: Balancing public safety and gun rights
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
I am a member of the NRA, and strongly defend our Second Amendment right to bear arms.
I also agree that private ownership of military fully automatic weapons and machine guns is a real stretch to the intention of the Second Amendment rights. Also, it would be appropriate to have gun registration at gun shows. And, if a legitimate person is on a No Fly List, he/she should not have a right to guns, However, the federal government needs to purge this list before enforcement because there are people on it erroneously. |
| Comment by:
laker1
(12/19/2015)
|
| What good is the 2nd Amendment without semi-auto and for that matter full auto weapons. We the people are the 1st responders to violent crime. The cops come later to put up yellow tape and full auto weapons in many cases. Why should we be at a disadvantage? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
