|
|
|
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:
repealfederalgunlaws
(2/26/2021)
|
| This is really dangerous because the 9th circus could do ANYTHING. Two previous pro gun rulings in this case (one by the district judge and one by the 3 judge appellate panel) have now been set aside. We start all over now and I'm concerned the deep state, which controls the federal judiciary, will uphold commiefornia's totally unconstitutional "law." But in that scenario, since an adverse ruling from the full appellate court would conflict with two previous rulings, we would have a chance of getting to scotus, but scotus has been ignoring good 2nd amendment cases by the dozen. So who knows. Our rights should NOT be in this precarious of a position. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
