To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . .

Filed under: Gun Control,Opinion |

Repost from Chet Russell

‎”To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege.” [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)]“

Statue of Liberty. New York, USA.

Did you enjoy this article?
Share
the
Love
Get Free Updates
2014 is right around the corner
We're going to need you.

Related Offers

3 Responses to To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . .

  1. I don’t see why a “normal” citizen would want a bazooka or an M-2 .50 machine gun, but there is a “right’ to have them …
    likely a strong argument against using them …

    Bill
    March 17, 2013 at 3:57 pm

    • Here’s where the problem lies, Bill. Once you begin limiting the parameters of a right, then it becomes easier to justify more limitations until you’ve effectively eliminated the right, without actually eliminating it. Let’s use an analogy. There’s really no reason to want a Ferrari, or Lamborghini that can do 200 miles an hour, so we’ll legislate that you’re only allowed to have the throttle operate at a maximum of 60%, it’s for “the children’s safety”, or some other “sound good” nonsense. Then, you limit the fuel capacity. Then you limit something else, you require much more expensive insurance, etc., until, eventually, no one can afford to drive it, or even own it. Then, you buy it back for pennies on the dollar and destroy it. Same thing with guns. Boil them to death so slowly that they don’t realize what’s happening until it’s too late.

      Bob
      March 17, 2013 at 4:19 pm

    • Why the liberals have such a fixation on people owning bazookas is unknown. First they are a class of weapons not sold to the public just like we can’t but ex military aircraft capable of firing rockets or missiles. Full automatic weapons are available if you pay the tax and pass the background check. How many or these legally owned weapons have been used in crimes ZERO. Criminals have modified some weapons illegally and made them capable of automatic fire not a big surprise considering they were criminal to start with. Senator not so Feinstein missed the point this past week. Here bill which “allows” some 2170 weapons is still an infringement on the 2nd admendment which states my rights shall not be infringed. It does not say infringed a little or infringed on because or criminal actions it states “shall not be infringed.

      David
      March 17, 2013 at 7:14 pm

Leave a Reply