|
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:
NYC Shooting Surge Highlights de Blasio’s Ineptness and Futility of Anti-Gun Edicts
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
“NYC's surge in gun violence sees spike in kid, teen and young adult victims,” WNBC-TV 4 reported Monday. “New York City has been grappling with an outstanding increase in gun violence over the past few months.” Shooting stats are up overall and across all age range categories. The increases are “jaw-dropping,” we are told, and all socialist Mayor Bill de Blasio can seem to think to do is “decry the recent violence [and express] deep condolences.” While former New York Police Commissioner Bill Bratton’s contention that the department is no longer allowed to do “things that work” is revealing (he no doubt means on-demand suspension of the Bill of Rights) what clearly does not work is New York City’s draconian citizen disarmament mindset. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/20/2020)
|
Bill de Blasio: The undisputed champion of nincompoopery. |
|
|
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) |
|
|