Missouri Rep Responds to proposed AWB...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trent

Trent

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
25,151
Location
Illinois
.... by taking the bill to the shooting range and filling it full of holes.

Several citizens are interviewed as well.




To my neighbors to the Southwest; bravo!
 
HAHA!!!!!!! Now that was funny I do not care what anyone says.......
 
It's a shame that we have people in the state that would even think about introducing a bill like this. I like Rep. Burlison's reaction to the bill. I'm thinking that they should allow St. Louis City (along with Chicago) become their own territories, we don't need them in Missouri.
 
Yeah which Missouri rep was it that posed for a press release this week with an M249 SAW?? That was impressive too. :)
 
I share 12Bravo20's idea that we should isolate large cities and let them be their own nation. Almost like the Judge Dredd story. Rural areas can just send in food to appease them. Lol.
 
fanchisimo said:
I share 12Bravo20's idea that we should isolate large cities and let them be their own nation. Almost like the Judge Dredd story. Rural areas can just send in food to appease them. Lol.
Click to expand...

So, how is that any different from what's happening now? Chicago rules IL politics. :fire:
 
The difference is that St Louis has NOT become powerful enough to run the whole state, and hopefully it stays that way. Outside of St Louis, Columbia, Kansas City, Springfield, and Jefferson City, the state is very rural.
 
Yeah I've been there a time or three. :)

Rural doesn't do it justice.

Only in Missouri do you go down a State Route, which goes from paved, to gravel, to paved, to gravel, to Bob's Back Yard Pasture, where you have to open the gate to drive across the field, to get back on the road. :)
 
That is beautiful.

Now that I just moved to STL I can put one more vote to get these dumb demes outta office :evil:
 
Trent it's different that this coalition of large cities governs only themselves. Whatever laws they wanna make only effects themselves. For instance if the coalition doesn't like guns, they can ban them within their city limits, but doesn't effect everywhere else. This isn't clear but I can't figure out how to express my idea any better. Lol. Maybe like Escape from LA with Kurt Russell, they govern themselves and no one else.
 
fanchisimo said:
Trent it's different that this coalition of large cities governs only themselves. Whatever laws they wanna make only effects themselves. For instance if the coalition doesn't like guns, they can ban them within their city limits, but doesn't effect everywhere else. This isn't clear but I can't figure out how to express my idea any better. Lol. Maybe like Escape from LA with Kurt Russell, they govern themselves and no one else.
Click to expand...
Or you can do what my state does - we have a strong RKBA clause in our state constitution and preemption of all local firearm laws/regulations. Several cities have gotten a legal smackdown for trying to enact their own gun laws or refusing to repeal illegal ones. One idiot mayor tried to call a parks ban an "administrative rule" which he thought would circumvent preemption. Loosing that one in court cost the city a couple million dollars.
 
fanchisimo said:
Trent it's different that this coalition of large cities governs only themselves. Whatever laws they wanna make only effects themselves. For instance if the coalition doesn't like guns, they can ban them within their city limits, but doesn't effect everywhere else. This isn't clear but I can't figure out how to express my idea any better. Lol. Maybe like Escape from LA with Kurt Russell, they govern themselves and no one else.
Click to expand...

We already have that in Illinois, it's called "Home Rule", where cities and counties can enact ordinances that have rule of law.

In theory, it sounds great, in practice, it allows them to infringe on the rights of citizens. Which is what lead to Heller, McDonald, etc, to throw off such infringements.

Also; saying that US Citizens who work in cities but live in the country, or vice versa, shouldn't be afforded the same rights as everyone else, kind of goes against everything we as a country stand for. :)
 
Flopsweat said:
Or you can do what my state does - we have a strong RKBA clause in our state constitution and preemption of all local firearm laws/regulations.
Click to expand...

So does Colorado. The US Constitution is pretty darn clear as well. Anti-gun politicians don’t care at all what the Constitution says. I could argue there are Supreme Court Justices who don’t care what the Constitution says.

Several cities have gotten a legal smackdown for trying to enact their own gun laws or refusing to repeal illegal ones. One idiot mayor tried to call a parks ban an "administrative rule" which he thought would circumvent preemption. Loosing that one in court cost the TAXPAYERS a couple million dollars.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you.

It cost the city nothing. It cost the mayor nothing. Which is why they keep doing it over and over. If one law gets overturned they either ignore it like Chicago is currently doing or simply pass another that does the same thing.

Maybe they get voted out but in a place like Chicago that’s not even much of a risk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top