Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: SgtHooper

>In the legal world, there is no ambiguity about the understanding of this word. It is the most definitive form, similar to the effect of “must”.

This, my good sir, is precisely why I think to myself “What the f—” when I read the statute and the [State] Constitution. Things could not be clearer that the statute does indeed deny the right to bear arms, and therefore must be illegitimate. How can the definitive form be so ignored?


6 posted on 04/21/2012 9:49:05 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: OneWingedShark

The state law does not deny the right to bear arms, generally, but only in certain venues. Heh. For those with offices in “state buildings”, I can understand why they want to be “secure” in their offices. However, it IS a state office, and we should be able to carry there as well. There may be a few employees capped from time to time, but that may actually improve government “service”.


10 posted on 04/21/2012 11:39:18 AM PDT by SgtHooper (The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson