|
|
|
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:
Human silhouette target ban bill shows absurd dangers of anti-gun ‘solutions’
Submitted by:
David Codrea
Website: http://www.DavidCodrea.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Still, why stop at silhouettes? What about targets that actually show figures of people? What about popular 'zombie' targets? They’re not human any more, are they? Fortunately, for Kirkland’s esteemed 'peace officers,' they’ll still be able to blow away 'No More Hesitation' models of 'white-privileged' pregnant women and kids, at least while their already-purchased supplies last. And I guess as long as we’re exploring the absurd, another ridiculous question or two is in order: Could I have a silhouette target of someone who looks human, but isn't? For some reason Star Trek’s android Data comes to mind..." |
| Comment by:
xqqme
(1/15/2015)
|
Consider... One picture is worth a thousand words.
A silhouette is a picture.
It must therefore equate to words, you know, speech.
The First Amendment protects my freedom to speak.
Ergo, this proposal is a violation of the First Amendment and an attack on the Second. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
