|
|
|
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:
Sen. Rand Paul’s year-old Second Amendment tweet resurfaces after shooting
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Meanwhile, in the House of Representatives, a debate on the availability of gun silencers scheduled Wednesday afternoon was delayed after the shooting.
As the heated debated centered on Second Amendment rights intensifies once again, one of Sen. Paul’s own tweets resurfaced—one that some suggest smacks of hypocrisy, given his press statements.
In June last year, the Republican appeared to quote Fox News contributor Judge Napolitano on Twitter, which said: “[We] have a Second Amendment … to shoot at the government when it becomes tyrannical!” |
| Comment by:
dasing
(6/15/2017)
|
| This recent incedent was NOT a revolution!!! It was a criminal showing his political bent, liberal!!!! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
