|
|
|
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:
AL: Defeat Senator Doug Jones to Defend the Second Amendment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Second Amendment supporters have the right to feel frustrated about the situation in Alabama. By all rights, it is a state where a strong Second Amendment supporter should be cruising to an easy re-election. But instead, Doug Jones is trying to get a full six-year term.
So, instead of an easy re-election allowing us Second Amendment supporters to focus our efforts on enabling Second Amendment supporters to win tough races in Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, Arizona, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Michigan, and two races in Georgia (one regularly-scheduled, one special), now we also have to use resources to dump Doug. The reasons why Doug must go are obvious. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(10/31/2020)
|
We wouldn't have Doug Jones if the idiot repukes hadn't shoved Roy Moore into the candidacy.
The repukes are their own worst enemy at times. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
