|
|
|
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:
Biden: Cops Should 'de-escalate' by 'shooting ‘em in the leg'
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In an ABC News town hall last week, Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden proffered use of force advice to law enforcement that is being widely panned. "You can ban chokeholds, but beyond that you have to teach people how to de-escalate circumstances, de-escalate," said Biden. "So instead of anybody coming at you and the first thing you do is shoot to kill, you shoot 'em in the leg."
|
| Comment by:
jac
(10/21/2020)
|
If you have the option to shoot someone in the leg, they don't need to be shot.
Biden is an A$$. |
| Comment by:
jac
(10/21/2020)
|
If you shoot someone in the leg, don't admit that you aimed there. It would be difficult to support that "you feared for your life" if you shoot someone in the leg on purpose.
A leg shot is not shooting to stop the threat. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
