|
|
|
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:
Dianne Feinstein Comments on No Guns for Terrorists Vote
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Senator Dianne Feinstein yesterday spoke at a press conference following the vote on her amendment to give the attorney general the authority to block the sale of guns to known or suspected terrorists.
Her remarks follow:
“Well, here we go again. Another mass shooting—this time the largest in history. Forty-nine dead, 53 injured. Another chance for Congress to take meaningful action. Another missed opportunity.
|
| Comment by:
mickey
(6/22/2016)
|
There you have it, folks.
An open admission that she views high profile killings as opportunities to enact gun control. |
| Comment by:
lbauer
(6/22/2016)
|
Feinstein cannot be so clueless that she does not know that none of the proposed gun control laws would have done anything meaningful to prevent terrorists from obtaining weapons.
She has a long standing record opposing private ownership of firearms. For everyone except herself, her friends, and their bodyguards of course.
It really is sickening how these rabid gun control fanatics try to take advantage of yet another tragedy to sell the public on their failed agenda. |
| Comment by:
stevelync
(6/22/2016)
|
| Too bad that bloodline didn't end in an eastern European oven. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
