|
|
|
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:
Clinton Aide: Of Course She Doesn’t Want to Abolish the Second Amendment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
According to Chris Cox, executive director of The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, Clinton is wrong on all fronts.
“A majority of Americans support this freedom, and the Supreme Court was absolutely right to hold that the Second Amendment guarantees the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms,” he said last year. “Hillary Clinton’s extreme views are completely out of touch with the American people.”
Ed.: Of course she doesn't want to repeal it, she just wants to ignore it. |
| Comment by:
laker1
(5/13/2016)
|
| She just wants Australian type of gun registration thus confiscation of all semi-auto rifles. When that does not slow criminals it will be all semi-auto handguns. When that does not work it will be all sniper rifles, (hunting rifles). When that does no work all pump action shotguns and rifles, etc. Just like in Australia, England, France, Germany, Etc. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(5/13/2016)
|
Hillary wants the "Australian Solution," but she doesn't think that damages our second amendment rights.
Because we will still be allowed spitballs.
Meanwhile, just how is this e-mail investigation...."inquiry?" ....going?
Hillary: "Laws for thee, NOT for me." |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
