|
|
|
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:
IN: Bump stock ban needed
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights prevents the government from infringing on the right to bear arms, therefore, it is unlikely it will ever be eliminated. The main reason there are mass killings is the attachments such as the “bump” on a rifle and clips that hold 30 or more bullets.
The elimination of the “bump” and restricting handguns and rifles to a maximum six bullet magazine (or shotguns to three bullets for hunting fowl) will prevent the carnage that occurs in mass shootings. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(9/1/2018)
|
What garbage! Bump stocks were used at ONE shooting in Vegas! Handguns are used in most mass shootings. The Parkland Florida school shooter used TEN ROUND MAGAZINES because he believe the standard 30s would "print" in the carrybag.
Magazines and bumpstocks ARE IRRELEVANT!!!!!! |
| Comment by:
shootergdv
(9/1/2018)
|
| Shotgun "bullets" ? The whole diatribe is an advertisement of the writer's ignorance. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(9/1/2018)
|
Democrats = restrict, restrict, restrict, ban, ban, ban
Wrong country, you misanthropes. Move to Cuba. |
|
|
| 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| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times.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 For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in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) |
|
|
