|
|
|
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:
It�s Time to Judge Cops by Their Actions
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
What everyone should agree on, though, is that we need a better way to hold police officers accountable when they use excessive force, such as putting their knees on the necks of civilians who are not resisting arrest. We also need to hold police officers accountable when they attack civilians who are simply exercising their First Amendment right to peacefully protest.
Police officers like Chauvin should not only be fired, they should be prosecuted and held responsible for their actions. If any one of us were to attack another person without provocation, we would be arrested and charged. If any one of us were to kill another person without justification, we would be arrested and charged. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/12/2020)
|
| 'Not a big fan of Politico, but this editorial posits some legitimate points. |
|
|
| 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)] |
|
|
