![Keep and Bear Arms](/images/clear.gif)
|
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:
Study Suggests These 5 Gun Reforms Could Prevent Most Mass Shootings
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Data obtained from The Violence Project and organized by the Los Angeles Times reveals that five reforms specifically could result in significantly reducing the number of mass shootings in the U.S. Those reforms are:
--banning straw purchases (and strengthening enforcement) --requiring safe storage of weapons when not in use --an assault weapons ban --background checks on every gun purchase --and “red flag” laws
The analysis admits there’s “no guarantee that these laws would be effective in stopping motivated killers from ultimately achieving their goal.”
Ed.: It's not going to work, but they want to do it anyway. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(2/28/2020)
|
"[T]he enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table." - D.C. v. Heller (2008) |
|
|
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)] |
|
|