|
|
|
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:
ND: How much is right to bear arms worth?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
If there's a magic number, what would yours be?
If you are a gun-rights advocate and you believe the Constitution's Second Amendment gave individual citizens the right to carry any type of gun or "Arms," then I really want to know: How many deaths will it take for you to support tighter regulations or a ban on certain types of assault weapons? And what's your point of measure?
If it's a total number of deaths by gun violence each year that would convince you, how many deaths would that need to be? |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(3/25/2021)
|
"Abusum non tollit usum" is an old Latin phrase meaning "bad use does not take away from good use." You don't ban fire because you were dumb and burned your house down by leaving a lit cigarette on a table ledge and it fell and ignited a carpet.
Evil people will always exist. Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter, used two handguns and killed about THREE DOZEN people.
Gun bans DO NOT WORK. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/25/2021)
|
This person uses the wrong metric to evaluate the right to arms.
The correct metric is, what level of liberty are you willing to defend?
When the balloon goes up, he who has the guns says what goes.
That is the sole determining factor in the value of the right to arms. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
