Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

ST. Louis County (MO) HB 279!!!

Discussion in 'Activism' started by wow6599, Nov 27, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wow6599

    wow6599 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,417
    Location:
    Wildwood, MO
  2. gunlaw

    gunlaw Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2009
    Messages:
    339
    hb 279

    not aware of this Since I am a St.Louis Co atty I may want to know. the link did not work. Thanks
     
  3. wow6599

    wow6599 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,417
    Location:
    Wildwood, MO
    I received the email this afternoon from the NRA-ILA regarding the bill.....and they removed the content from the link? Here is a copy of the bill, which did pass this evening. Look at page 9, sections 11-14.

    http://www.nraila.org/media/10808904/mo_county_bill_279.pdf
     
  4. fanchisimo

    fanchisimo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    682
    Location:
    Central Missouri
    So they are declaring that if you do any of those it becomes an automatic hate crime?
     
  5. wow6599

    wow6599 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,417
    Location:
    Wildwood, MO
    Good question.

    Here is what the email had in it from the NRA-ILA -


     
  6. wow6599

    wow6599 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,417
    Location:
    Wildwood, MO
    It has now been voted on, so time to use the names, numbers and email to "fix" this.
     
  7. phototrail

    phototrail Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1
    Not that I am in favor of this ordinance, but a careful reading would not specifically prevent self defense with a firearm. The ordinance -- specifically section 722.050 -- while poorly constructed, only makes firearm use "more illegaler" is you purposefully attack because of one of the protected people groups (based on race, creed, religion, color, sexual orientation, etc). This we should already not be doing.

    Granted, yes -- this *could* open the door for a justified defensive gun use to be misconstrued as a hate crime if the attacker was someone covered by this (based on race, creed, religion, color, sexual orientation, etc). That is a shame and that's why I oppose this, and may alone be grounds for opposing it, above and beyond potential violation of the 2nd amendment. We know how a defensive gun use against someone can be misconstrued in the media the courtroom if a "protected" group is involved. Shame.

    There are deeper implications and inevitable misapplications of this ordinance, but I will continue to do what I do, and will not allow a potential problem of this being misconstrued to prevent my self-defense. I'll take my chances with the judge rather than the mortician.
     
  8. fanchisimo

    fanchisimo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    682
    Location:
    Central Missouri
    I don't think it's if you shoot a person of this group, it's if you shoot the person because they are part of that group. IE shooting a gay man versus shooting a gay man because he's gay.
     
  9. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    47,963
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    The window of opportunity has closed on this and another course of action needs to be posted.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page