|
|
|
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:
Gun store raffles AR-15 for Orlando victims
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
An Illinois gun shop is holding a raffle for an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle to raise money for the victims of the Orlando shooting.
The raffle has struck a chord with many Americans for whom the AR-15 has become emblematic of the highly fraught debate around the role of assault weapons in American culture. To gun-rights advocates, the AR-15 is "America's gun," a lightweight weapon that is ideal for target practice, self defense, and hunting. Proponents of gun-control, however, point to the AR-15 and other semi-automatic weapons like that have been used in mass shootings as evidence that the expired ban on assault weapons should be reinstated. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/1/2016)
|
Note to those "offended": Money is green. It all spends the same.
You SCHMUCKS. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
