|
|
|
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:
MT: David Chipman can unite us on Second Amendment issues
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Yes, Chipman supports sensible, proven restrictions regarding firearms to improve public safety, as do I, and many of my fellow Montanans and fellow gun owners. Does this violate our constitutional rights? No. There have and always will be restrictions on Second Amendment rights. I would have to meet stringent requirements to own an M60 machine gun. I am not allowed to have an M203 grenade launcher, an M1 Abrams tank, a LAAW (Light Anti-Tank Assault Weapon), Stinger anti-aircraft missile or a nuclear warhead. Those all seem like reasonable restrictions to me. We all draw the line somewhere. |
| Comment by:
hisself
(8/6/2021)
|
The basic premise of this article is BS! There are no Constitutional barriers to my owning an M60 machine gun, an M203 grenade launcher, an M1 Abrams tank, a LAAW (Light Anti-Tank Assault Weapon), Stinger anti-aircraft missile or a nuclear warhead.
Any law to the contrary is an Unconstitutional infringement upon my right to keep and bear arms. |
|
|
| 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| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times.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 For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in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 If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal.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) |
|
|
