|
|
|
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:
AZ: What guns do I really need?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Finally, we get to the toughest question. Do police need AR-15s? In the past, a few selected long guns for sniper kinds of activities and shotguns for closer range incidents were adequate. It seems to me that is still the case. Also, while I can certainly see the need for large capacity magazines for military soldiers, I cannot see that same need for police.
Therefore, I must conclude that people who purchase weapons for self-defense “need” weapons like handguns, shotguns, and rifles, but not AR-15s or large capacity magazines (or fighter jets or nuclear bombs or tanks or howitzers or grenade launchers). |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
