|
|
|
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:
MN: Victim fatally shoots robber, 16, in Saint Paul
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
beautiful night with a blue moon brought two adults to a St. Paul river bluff to enjoy the weather, but police said they were soon met with a random act of violence that ended with a 16-year-old dead.
Four juvenile males approached the adults Friday night and one, wearing a mask and gloves, pulled a handgun and tried to rob the adults, police said. One of the victims has a permit to carry a handgun, pulled his own weapon and shot the suspect, they told police. The teenage suspect from West St. Paul died at the scene near a World War I monument at Summit Avenue and Mississippi River Boulevard.
|
| Comment by:
jac
(8/7/2015)
|
From the article, it would appear that this miscreants life of crime was cut short saving the taxpayers and future victims enormous cost and despair.
|
| Comment by:
jac
(8/7/2015)
|
From the article, it would appear that this miscreants life of crime was cut short saving the taxpayers and future victims enormous cost and despair.
|
| Comment by:
jac
(8/7/2015)
|
From the article, it would appear that this miscreants life of crime was cut short saving the taxpayers and future victims enormous cost and despair.
|
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
