|
|
|
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:
MI: Trump's latest 'very good people' are 2nd Amendment thugs
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In last week’s disturbing pictures of protesters brandishing assault weapons in and around Michigan’s Capitol, we saw the naked face of the gun-rights argument, and it was repulsive. This is not a movement about liberty but anarchy. Only in the U.S., and no other civilized democracy, does a supposed right to take up arms against a duly elected government garner a measure of respect from politicians, the courts and the court of public opinion. No tenable reading of the Constitution supports it. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/7/2020)
|
| Hyperbole, much? Memo: ESAD. |
| Comment by:
shootergdv
(5/7/2020)
|
| Carrying is not "brandishing" . Brandishing a firearm is a chargeable offense anywhere - they used that word precisely to convey a false impression. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
