|
|
|
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:
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(7/5/2019)
|
This fries me! ! ! She shot a antifa @$$h○|e to protect her husband AND SHE GETS CHARGED?!!!!!!???!??!!!!?!?!?!?
IF I was on her jury I'd take 2 seconds to say NOT GUILTY then if I had a chance outside the court I would ream the D. A. up one side and down the other. I'd tell him I'd shoot an antifa thug in defense of self or family too, and if the state came after me I'd likely go ballistic on the state 'cause when BOTH the bastards and the state want you canned then there's nothing more you can lose!!!!
Mayors are letting these PROfacist ass hats run a rampage and ordering the police to stand off??!????!
Antifa delende est. |
| Comment by:
jac
(7/5/2019)
|
I second Mr. Townsend's comments.
These are thugs that believe the law doesn't apply to them. If the thug had a knife in his hand it was clearly self defense. Too bad that the thug survived. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
