|
|
|
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:
NV: Accelerating the boogaloo
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment isn’t a license to subvert democratic deliberation with intimidation. One goal of these armed rallies is to intimidate elected officials into following demands, but another goal is to frighten the rest of us into staying silent. Or, as historian David Perry puts it, "maximalist Second Amendment positions are minimalist First Amendment positions. You cannot have free speech when the other side has a rifle in your face, even if it's just 'for protest.'" We cannot stay silent in the face of this intimidation. It would be a death knell for democracy. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/9/2020)
|
| BOOGA-BOOGA-BOOGA!!!! ("Oh, dear, oh, my Lippy!") |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
