Missouri takes first step
- Thread starter mardad
- Start date
I read the article this morning, pretty impressive. Hope more states, including mine, follow suit and do the same. I'm not exactly sure which side of the fence NM is on though...
What-do-ya-know, we got something right, lol. Hopefully other states will follow. Puzzling to me why some have so much difficulty interpreting "shall not be infringed upon."
Way to go MO! My state on the other hand has gone full retard. Sokay...we'll kick the bums out shortly and maybe pass something good like this. I hope so anyway or maybe I'll be headed to WY in a few years.
So its more of a gesture? In some states we have firearms freedoms acts. Does it set guidelines like those do?
Were lucky here in WA State. Our state constitution had the right to keep and bear arms for Self Defense written in from the beginning. We also have "State Preemption' as well. Keeps cities like Seattle from passing their own "bans" (which they actually tried a couple years ago). Things are looking a lot better these days with states taking individual action like MO not to mention the continued rulings by SCOTUS that are "slaps in the face" to places like WA DC, Chicago, etc.
It would appear that the pendulum is swinging back in the right direction. Hope the momentum continues.
It would appear that the pendulum is swinging back in the right direction. Hope the momentum continues.
The pendulum swings because legislators are willing to barter Constitutionally protected rights as bargaining chips against pieces of non-2A legislaton they personally favor. Our rights are not subject to the preferences of legislators. But those same legislators traditionally block any legislation that might curtail their caprice, the media solemnly portray those caprices as 'safety' and universally laud the legislators, and SCOTUS tap dances around getting off their collective butt and making any broad declarations contravening 2A infringements beyond the very narrowest interpretations related to litigation directly at hand. They could, but they collude with the others in refraining from doing so.
Face it, the media, judicial, legislative, and executive policy in this country is surreptitiously committed to emasculate the 2A and render the entire populace defenseless against government excess/oppression, whether real or imagined. Neither of those perceptions are grounds for cancelling out the right of the public to arm and bear for itself according to its own best judgment. In these matters, they are no better than Hitler or Stalin was.
Every time a 2A infringing law is cut into the books, another decision is taken out of the hands of we citizens. That is how the government usurps one's individual Constitutional authority and disenfranchises each and every citizen of this Nation.
Want that? Willing to stand up behind something else? Hope so. If not, maybe it's time to review our man cards; and women are not exempt, either.
Greg
Face it, the media, judicial, legislative, and executive policy in this country is surreptitiously committed to emasculate the 2A and render the entire populace defenseless against government excess/oppression, whether real or imagined. Neither of those perceptions are grounds for cancelling out the right of the public to arm and bear for itself according to its own best judgment. In these matters, they are no better than Hitler or Stalin was.
Every time a 2A infringing law is cut into the books, another decision is taken out of the hands of we citizens. That is how the government usurps one's individual Constitutional authority and disenfranchises each and every citizen of this Nation.
Want that? Willing to stand up behind something else? Hope so. If not, maybe it's time to review our man cards; and women are not exempt, either.
Greg
Last edited:
Smcarrol I don't know how to quote on here, but in the link it says the state has an obligation to uphold the right to keel and bear. Hopefully this keeps the games they like to play to a minimum
