The possibility of law-abiding citizens using guns to effectively-and-immediately stop criminal attacks may well be the reason that the
mis-leaders of the Democratic (sic)
Party have taken the lead in attempts to deprive our fellow citizens
of modern-and-effective firearms. That is, the
effective-and-immediate use of firearms, by law abiding citizens, to "put down" dangerous criminals is
more likely to reduce the Democrat's “power base” than otherwise.
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
Why Democrat Leaders Oppose An Armed Citizenry
Labels:
Crime,
Government,
Law,
law constitution,
PolCorrect,
Politics,
Self-Defense,
Terrorism,
Weapons
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree. The purpose of an Armed citizenry is the protection of a free state. And to keep it free. It is the job of the individual citizen, not the government, to protect a free state. Check out my post, the constitutionality of assault weapons. Sorry its long! I break down Heller v. DC and Scalia’s opinion on the case.
http://jaredlafferty.blogspot.com/search?q=are+assault+weapons+constitutional%3F
Post a Comment