Replies

Well, how about jumping to conclusions. This reporter is not quoting Keyes precisely, he's paraphrasing and inserting his own anti-Republican, anti-Keyes, anti-second amendment spin. And the Keyes bashers here are adding their own anti-Keyes spin and embellishing on the reporters bias.

Here, I'll add my own pro-Keyes conclusions: I think Keyes is talking about arming and training a well trained, ie, a well regulated militia, as a response to the terrorist threat. Looks like an entirely new program and it has no bearing at all on the personal right to keep and bear arms that he supports 100% in the above quote:

"I always remind -- even people who support the Second Amendment -- that it has two parts: the right to keep and bear" arms, Keyes said. " 'Bear' means to carry, to carry around. . . . I think it has been proven empirically that . . . allowing law-abiding citizens this access to conceal-carry actually reduces crime."

I think Keyes is talking about arming and training a well trained, ie, a well regulated militia, as a response to the terrorist threat.

It could be a simple extension of the "Neighborhood Watch" programs already implemented in communities nationwide.
Neighbors watching out for each other!

I hope your assesment is the case. But from the posted article's quotations and structure, it doesn't read that way to me.
I am pretty sure we can rest assured that NRA members will get a clarification on it from Alan, and will determine if your assesment is in fact the case.

I have heard the "regulated militia" argument used by liberals to regulate guns before. I don't care to "take this issue" away from lbierals anymore than the one we ran into last week from Alan's campaign.

such statements if they are not refuted directly and immediately by the candidate, both WILL and DO impact available funds and votes in a region. I think it would be wise to treat this as a concern of the alan campaign, and the article if untrue should be corrected asap...

Bush is supposedly down by double digits amongst the illini, I don't want to see this kind of stuff worsen the current deficit of votes for the President, or for other republicans in the state. And I know most of the blame lies with Ryan, as does the national party.

Still I am not willing to lose even one vote for the Presidency, to gain a vote for a now rather tenuous seat that Ryan flushed for us, in the Senate.

Water, bridge, or bridge on fire... I don't know, but think this one needs a rebuttal from Alan or his campaign spokesman.

IMO