What You May Have Missed
Most Popular
Across Site
In World & Nation
- Defending the Faith: A case for the...
- Abercrombie & Fitch CEO posts statement on...
- Boy Scouts open membership to all boys,...
- Brave woman tried to reason with London...
- One third of millenials regret going to college
- Stories behind viral Oklahoma tragedy photos...
- Tornado relief spurs LDS Church, Layton's...
- Facts about the Boy Scouts of America
Most Commented
Across Site
In World & Nation
- Defending the Faith: A case for the...
44 - Journalists criticize Obama...
38 - Associated Press CEO calls records...
23 - IRS official Lerner invokes Fifth...
22 - Former IRS chief to Congress: Can't say...
21 - More Obama aides knew IRS targeted...
19 - Supreme Court to weigh in on...
17 - IRS role in Obamacare adds deeper layer...
16



Of course threatening a law maker is never right, but why would any law maker want to enact a law limiting the right to defend oneself? This article should have given details about the proposed law.
Aren't the threats a good reason why a law like this is needed?
Yet the NRA has been pushing for exactly the opposite. Shoot if you "feel" threatened. They even want to make it legal to shoot a police officer if a person "feels" that the officer is "overstepping his Constitutional bounds."
Pure insanity. But that's what we've come to expect from the NRA.
Maybe what's really needed is a law banning the NRA.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments