|
|
|
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:
Venezuela: Venezuela killings show why citizens should be armed
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Regarding “UN: 5,287 killings in Venezuela security operations in 2018” (July 5): This story is one of the best examples of why there is the Second Amendment. The story says that Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro’s government tallied nearly 5,300 killings during security operations that were classified as cases of “resistance to authority.”
The Founding Fathers had the foresight to give U.S. citizens the right to bear arms in case of tyrannical actions by their government. Here is the proof of why the Second Amendment must remain. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/25/2019)
|
| With all due respect to the author, whose point is inarguable, the Founding Fathers didn't "give" us the right to bear arms, rather, they enshrined the protection of that right in our Constitution. It is gramatically assumed to exist by the amendment and foreclosed from government infringement. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power." [Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)] |
|
|
