|
|
|
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:
MI: Riley: Michigan Senate Loses It's Mind, Votes to Allow Guns in Schools and churches
Submitted by:
Corey Salo
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Michigan Senate has lost its collective mind.
The 38-member body approved legislation Wednesday that would allow folks to carry concealed handguns into schools, churches, day care centers, bars and stadiums - all places that now ban them.
Rather than be deterred by recent mass shootings that have left dozens dead and hundreds injured, these senators want to take the law into their own hands - or place it in the hands of whoever happens to be there if - and when - Michigan suffers fates similar to those that occurred in Texas and Nevada.
They want to make sure people can participate in gun battles as if at the OK Corral, notwithstanding the children or parishioners that might be in the way. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/13/2017)
|
| "You don't stop mass shootings by arming everybody." - How do you know? Have you TRIED it? No? Well then... SIDDOWN AND SHADDUP. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/13/2017)
|
| "You don't stop mass shootings by arming everybody." - How do you know? Have you TRIED it? No? Well then... SIDDOWN AND SHADDUP. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
