Alexander Hamilton
Go figure.
The "lunacy" would be why does someone who lives in SD even want to go to NYC? Perhaps the perps in NYC would be more respectful of out-of-towners?
When he’s in New York working for the NY Times, I’ll bet Frank Bruni stays out of parts of Harlem, Brooklyn, and the South Bronx. Let somebody else be mugged and shot with an illegal weapon, the only kind most New Yorkers are allowed to carry.
A 9mm? Pretty light...Noo Yawk would be .45 territory, imho.
They want power concentrated in reporters, lawyers and politicians, not individuals.
Heaven forbid we should allow the little people to protect themselves while traveling from one state to another.
He was up in arms the first time this was posted, too.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2797622/posts
I don’t know which is more astonishing: A Lib having a 10 Amendment epiphany, or the idea that someone from South Dakota would ever want to visit NYC.
We live in strange times.
Of course, the New Yorkers probably did prefer those nicely appointed, cultured British troops occupying their fair city throughout much of the Revolutionary War anyway, rather than Washington’s surrounding riffraff. Sad day for them, I suppose, when the Brits sailed away.
but they want universal exception for fagot marriage...Of course Bruni would expect the Constitution’s ‘full faith and credit’ provision to apply to gay marriage.
I wonder why.
Situation Ethics. Carte Blanche for liberals to do anything at anytime. And always be right.
Situation ethics means there is no requirement to be consistent in your beliefs. Right for me is wrong for you. Wrong today is right tomorrow.
I suggest that concealed carry rights are granted in the federal constitution, by the Privileges and Immunities clause. States have no rights to deny Privileges and Immunities granted by other states.
Concealed carry is a privilege granted by your state, right?
I would look forward to seeing a SCOTUS case seeking redress: federal denial of the ability of another state to deny your CCW privilege.
In one state, you’re a law abiding citizen, but cross the wrong state line and you become an automatic criminal.
Given the necessity to go about unarmed, I would rather be unarmed in North Dakota than New York.
Let’s just take some joy in the fact that a deceasing percentage of folks read the NYT, and even fewer actually take to heart what they read.
The MSM is losing, and they don’t like it.
And for me, I don’t give a smelly Obama what a journalist thinks about guns. As if this clown knew which end the bullet came out of.
What a @$$clown !
Liberals favor uniform federal laws only if it restricts liberty. For example, speed limits (gone for now), seatbelt laws, helmet laws (gone for now), prohibition like more draconian DUI and drinking age laws. Anything that favors individual liberty is out !
The three people who still read the new york times are really agitated.
Which state, per capita, has a lower crime rate?
Dems were NOT 'reluctant' to cross the NRA - that's a lie. A typical New York Times lie. The reason dems didn't take on gun control WAS BECAUSE THE ISSUE DOESN'T WORK FOR THEM. The polls changed some years back - - dems discovered they LOST voters over the issue - and dropped it like a hot potato...