|
|
|
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:
Trump riles with suggestion Clinton's security disarm: 'Let's see what happens to her!'
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Donald Trump raised eyebrows Friday night by suggesting Hillary Clinton's security detail should disarm itself so the whole world can see what would happen to the Democratic nominee.
"I think her bodyguards should drop all weapons. They should disarm immediately," the GOP nominee said at a campaign stop in Miami, Florida.
"Take their guns away, let's see what happens to her!" he said.
His comments, which were made as he argued a Clinton presidency would lead to the dismantling of the Second Amendment, did not find a warm reception with certain media figures. |
| Comment by:
GR8dowbay
(9/17/2016)
|
"Just the GOP nominee hinting at the assassination of his opponent!"
HAHAHA... GOOOOOOO TRUMP!
*** HIPOCRITES EXPOSED!!! ***
SO! THE FATHERLESS LOW-LIFE's PLAINLY ADMIT -after 60 years(!) of Deception- THAT DISARMING THE POPULACE ... IS JUST MURDER!
|
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
