|
|
|
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:
NJ: Governor Christie’s Newest Anti-Gun Slight Of Hand
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Sure, the “report” looks official in all of its typed 34 pages. But what does it really say? Well, first, if Chris Christie was really on our side, he would have created this so called “commission” within 30 days of being sworn into office in 2010.
Why now? Because he is running for president and voters in New Hampshire, and other early voting states don’t share the anti-gun sentiments of New Jersey.
Christie needs to at least pretend to do something even when he does nothing. And lets not forget, following other anti-gun scofflaws who have come before him, the report was delivered several months after it was really due.
|
| Comment by:
kangpc
(12/25/2015)
|
| It's "sleight of hand." Errors like this in our media make us all look like morons. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
