|
|
|
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:
Illinois Gov. Rauner Signs ‘Waiting Period’ Bill
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The debate over waiting periods and whether they are effective might take on a new dimension in Illinois, after Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner on Monday signed a bill establishing a 72-hour wait for the purchase of all firearms, according to the State Journal-Register.
Waiting periods for buying guns are popular on the political Left. The claim is that they save lives. Studies say so. But is that accurate?
|
| Comment by:
mickey
(7/17/2018)
|
How many weeks' waiting period do we already have to obtain a FOID?
And if we've had an FOID for years because we already own guns, what possible point is there to making us wait before getting one more gun?
And if we don't already have guns because it's a new FOID, refer back to my first question. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
