|
|
|
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:
Should Ammunition Buyers Face Background Checks? California's Voters Will Decide
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
With gun control efforts stalled in Congress and in many statehouses, advocates are forging another path forward: They're going straight to the ballot box. Voters in four states will weigh gun control initiatives Nov. 8 ballot: Maine, Nevada, Washington and California. In Nevada and Maine, voters are being asked whether to strengthen background check requirements for gun sales. Washington State voters already did that; now they're considering whether to allow a court to take guns away from potentially dangerous people.
|
| Comment by:
Sosalty
(10/26/2016)
|
| Every day I'm thankful to have exited that state 18 months ago. |
| Comment by:
GR8dowbay
(10/27/2016)
|
** THERE ARE... beleive it r not... TONS of CA. GUN OWNERS who actually SUPPORT this Bill!! ...think its a "really good idea"...
For years I've said: KALIFORNIANS arent just STUPID - But a Special KIND of Stupid. SO Let 'em Burn - SOCIALIST Style. They're actually TOO IGNORANT To worry about!
** HELL is a place with NO HOPE. I just defined CA. !! |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(10/27/2016)
|
No. California voters shouldn't be allowed to decide what to have for breakfast.
Next question? |
|
|
| 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| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times.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 For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in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) |
|
|
