|
|
|
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:
ME: "Red Flag" Gun Bill Falters in Senate, but Alternative May have Better Chance
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Maine Senate voted Tuesday to reject a so-called “red flag” bill that would allow police to temporarily confiscate the guns of potentially dangerous individuals. The bipartisan, 20-15 vote is a major blow against a top priority for gun control and gun safety advocates in Maine this year. But an alternative measure negotiated between the Mills administration and the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine could face better odds at picking up support from Republicans and Democrats in rural districts.
|
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/19/2019)
|
Bait-and-switch.
There still is no due process, only with this 'alternative', the cops seize not only the guns, but seize the person as well, again without first requiring an adversarial hearing, and still based upon mere allegations with no opportunity for rebuttal.
Is it that these blokes don't get it, or are they just devious snake-oil salesmen? |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
