|
|
|
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:
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2021)
|
The sheriff has a narrow, in-the-moment view. As long as he's sheriff, he isn't worried. But he's not going to be sheriff forever.
If he is comfortable with the 2A, then there is no logical objection to supporting such a measure. It should be no skin off his nose.
Which could bring one to the conclusion that he isn't all that supportive of the 2A after all.
Or, that he's more supportive of government supremacy than he'd like people to think. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/16/2021)
|
P.S. -
Sheriff, have you been paying attention? As in, who will control the levers of the federal government on Jan 20th?
And you can still say "It's not needed."?
i don' thin so, Loosie. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
