|
|
|
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:
Background Checks Do Not Infringe on Our Rights
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In his Sept. 18 column, Dave Skinner once again missed the mark. With his all too common complaint about how the federal government can’t do anything right, Mr. Skinner now targets firearm background checks. Rather than celebrate that background checks kept 181,000 firearms from being sold to criminals last year he lambasts the federal government for not prosecuting the offenders. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(9/28/2019)
|
No comment provision on that site.
The writer thinks that if a constitutional violation that doesn't bother him is so small as to be no big deal, he needs a good smack.
There is no, like ZERO, authority delegated to the federal government in the Constitution to regulate private sales of firearms or anything else.
If he wants his state to enact them and it doesn't violate its own constitution, well, have at it.\
But at least know WTF is happening, and why or why not. |
| Comment by:
AFRet
(9/28/2019)
|
| Hey dude, how about a backround check on fools like you before you are allowed to write an article like this...sounds good to me. |
| Comment by:
lbauer
(9/28/2019)
|
OK, then how about a common sense background check before anyone can cast a vote in a federal election.
Right to vote and right to bear arms both protected by the constitution, so shouldn't be a problem now should it? |
|
|
| 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| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times.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 For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in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) |
|
|
