|
|
|
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:
Push for gun-storage laws continues
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
For more than two decades, some Washington officials have pushed for laws intended to reduce gun deaths by making firearms more secure at home.
Those efforts � from an unsuccessful ballot initiative in 1997, to legislation sponsored year after year at the state Legislature � never came anywhere near to becoming law.
But 2018 has become a consequential year for so-called safe-storage laws. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(10/5/2018)
|
Why is this malicious nonsense so prevalent when D.C. v. Heller ruled (in the holding, not in dicta) that mandating that firearms in the home be rendered inoperative facially violates the 2A core right of self-defense, and is thus unconstitutional?
IT IS PRECEDENT, GUDDAMMIT!!!
It is THE LAW. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. � Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
