|
|
|
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:
Election 2016: The Supreme Court Is Everything
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
I might sound like a single-issue voter, but I’m really not. Allow me to explain. I’ll almost always support the candidate with a bold and unapologetic history of protecting individual gun rights. You’ll notice I said “protecting.” That’s a critical distinction. No government grants or gives rights. Rights are something we all already own. Period, paragraph, and end of story. So the concept of protecting gun rights is a big deal. The government’s job is to preserve the rights, any type of rights, that we already have. |
| Comment by:
mickey
(11/7/2016)
|
I don't see how the Tyler case can cost us anything we already have. Either he loses, and the 'adjudicated mentally ill' remain prohibited persons for life, or he wins, and 2A rights are expanded from their current level of recognition.
That said, Breyer has said that there is no individual right and he wants to overturn Heller. (and after he was part of the unanimous vote for the individual right in Heller, he was just in the minority who claimed a total ban on handguns didn't violate that right)
And Hillary has vowed to give us more justices who agree with Breyer.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
