|
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:
TX: Failing to outlaw the war machines used in Sutherland Springs is a sin
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Within its double doors lies the scene of the greatest mass murder in Texas history, which took 26 lives and wounded 20 more. The weapon was nearly the same as every mass shooting in recent U.S. history: a Ruger AR-556 gas-powered, military-grade semiautomatic, more killing machine than mere rifle.
Wielded by Devin Kelley, it was one of the 5 million AR-15-type weapons in this country, a kissing cousin to America's standard-issue combat weapon. Along with supposedly civilian versions of Russian, Chinese and German combat weapons, this is the weapon of choice for mass killers from Aurora to Newtown, from San Bernardino to Orlando, Las Vegas and now, Wilson County, Texas. Only the 9 mm pistol, also semi-automatic, is as prevalent. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/10/2017)
|
What an irrational, ignorant op-ed, bereft of facts (.556? Please.) and long on hyperbole.
The good news is that none of this jackwagon's wet dream will ever manifest.
U.S. v. Miller ruled that these so-called "war machines" are the type protected within the ambit of the 2A. D.C. v. Heller ruled that we have a constitutionally protected right to bear them for "lawful purposes".
It's called SETTLED LAW. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|