|
|
|
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:
MA: Gun shops essential? Exposing fallacies in Constitutional argument
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Consider the claim made by the Second Amendment Foundation that “no malady, however severe, can nullify or even temporarily suspend the exercise of a constitutionally delineated fundamental right.” This claim is categorically and demonstrably false. The Supreme Court has consistently held that even the most fundamental of rights and liberties can be curtailed if the government has a sufficiently compelling interest. The right to keep and bear arms is no exception. |
| Comment by:
hisself
(4/9/2020)
|
"The Supreme Court has consistently held that even the most fundamental of rights and liberties can be curtailed if the government has a sufficiently compelling interest."
The Supreme Court has been consistently WRONG!!!
There is no exception for a sufficiently compelling interest anywhere in the Constitution. The Constitution states an absolute: "Shall NOT be infringed"! Nowhere does it say unless a political hack decides otherwise.
|
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
