|
|
|
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:
American Bar Association supports gun violence restraining orders
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The American Bar Association approved a resolution Tuesday to support gun violence restraining orders, despite opposition from some over issues of due process.
The measure, Resolution 118B, passed in the ABA House of Delegates on Tuesday and encourages state and local governments to enact laws allowing courts to issue restraining orders that would require law enforcement to seize guns from the subjects of those orders, the ABA Journal reported.
Ed.: Lawyers supporting laws that make lawyers more money. Anyone here shocked? |
| Comment by:
netsyscon
(8/17/2017)
|
| Of course, the American Bar Association doesn't like due process unless it benefits them. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/17/2017)
|
| Uh, who CARES what THEY think? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
