|
|
|
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:
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2021)
|
The sheriff has a narrow, in-the-moment view. As long as he's sheriff, he isn't worried. But he's not going to be sheriff forever.
If he is comfortable with the 2A, then there is no logical objection to supporting such a measure. It should be no skin off his nose.
Which could bring one to the conclusion that he isn't all that supportive of the 2A after all.
Or, that he's more supportive of government supremacy than he'd like people to think. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2021)
|
P.S. -
Sheriff, have you been paying attention? As in, who will control the levers of the federal government on Jan 20th?
And you can still say "It's not needed."?
i don' thin so, Loosie. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege. [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)] |
|
|
