|
|
|
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
(9/5/2019)
|
I applaud this action (automatic knives should also be included), but this statement reveals the mindset of misguided priorities:
“If someone has a novelty item or a legitimate self-defense tool, we really shouldn’t be prosecuting them for that,” Moody said. “That’s not a good use of resources.”
The use of resources is subordinate to the central issue. Liberty and the right of self-defense is primary. Moody's characterization using the words "shouldn't be prosecuting them for that" assumes that the question should be entirely within the states' prerogatives. Upside-down thinking, for sure. |
|
|
| 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]. |
|
|
