|
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:
NJ: Murphy's Hike on Gun Fees is About Gun Control Range Owner Says
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It's been just under a week since Gov. Phil Murphy outlined his $38.6 billion state budget, including a proposed $9 million hike on gun fees and taxes. And that's sent shockwaves through New Jersey's community of licensed gun owners and second amendment supporters. Fred "Rick" Friedman, CEO and co-owner of gun range RTSP, said he's worried that if passed, the increases would make a constitutional right too expensive for a large part of the state's population. |
Comment by:
Stripeseven
(3/12/2019)
|
The Unchecked, Unchallenged growth of government is what they want. A Regime of unlimited power is what they are after. They want it to where those hard fought rights become meaningless. |
|
|
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]. |
|
|