Missouri Set to Nullify All Federal Gun Laws [Archive]

Feuer Frei!

08-30-13, 02:32 AM

It looks like Missouri is about to order the federal government to butt out in terms of gun laws. The state legislature appears to have the votes to override the governor's veto of a bill that nullifies all federal gun legislation, reports the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/us/missouri-gun-measure-pushes-nullification-boundary.html?hp)

Time and courts will tell...

SOURCE (http://directorblue.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/thunder-missouri-set-to-nullify-all.html)

Ducimus

08-30-13, 06:14 AM

Red October1984

08-30-13, 07:19 AM

WOOHOO!

Missouri ftw! :)

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 07:36 AM

In other news, BO blocked Re-imports of military surplus firearms.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/29/obama-announces-new-gun-control-measures-targets-military-surplus-imports/

Hope you didn't want an M1 Garand, Cause you know, their used every day in the commission of a crime. It's also amazing the Liar-in-Chief can make time for this when he's got much bigger fish in the frying pan.

One begins to wonder. Then again, a Jr. Senator that never voted for much when he was present certainly is qualified to the run the country. :doh:

August

08-30-13, 07:46 AM

In other news, BO blocked Re-imports of military surplus firearms.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/29/obama-announces-new-gun-control-measures-targets-military-surplus-imports/

Hope you didn't want an M1 Garand, Cause you know, their used every day in the commission of a crime. It's also amazing the Liar-in-Chief can make time for this when he's got much bigger fish in the frying pan.

Proof that Obama isn't motivated by gun violence. Banning antique firearms that aren't being used in crimes or mass shootings only shows that the Democrats are out for nothing less than to completely take away the peoples right to keep and bear arms.

Tribesman

08-30-13, 08:14 AM

So this import legislation doesn't ban people from buying a M1 Garand, it doesn't ban people from owning one either.
The other piece of legislation only bans people from owning guns who are already banned from owning guns.
Its a conspiracy I tell ya.

Ducimus

08-30-13, 08:28 AM

One begins to wonder. Then again, a Jr. Senator that never voted for much when he was present certainly is qualified to the run the country. :doh:

Proof that Obama isn't motivated by gun violence. Banning antique firearms that aren't being used in crimes or mass shootings only shows that the Democrats are out for nothing less than to completely take away the peoples right to keep and bear arms.

Do you guys remember this?
Obama- I Will NOT Take Your guns (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGlx7-M5Zho)

What a liar he turned out to be too.

As an aside,
Harvard Study: No Correlation Between Gun Control and Less Violent Crime (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/27/Harvard-Study-Shows-No-Correlation-Between-Strict-Gun-Control-And-Less-Crime-Violence)
A Harvard Study titled "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?" looks at figures for "intentional deaths" throughout continental Europe and juxtaposes them with the U.S. to show that more gun control does not necessarily lead to lower death rates or violent crime.

Link to actual study:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

August might enjoy this:
God Made a Democrat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx9jZ3ARVtk)

Back on topic,
I can't imagine any state being successful in nullifying federal laws, however, I don't think this is the first, or only attempt. Regardless of chances of success, more states need to push back like this. The federal government has become entirely too over reaching and they always seem to want more.

EDIT:
Obama’s new executive order will kill the 110-year-old Civilian Marksmanship Program (http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/29/obamas-new-executive-order-will-kill-the-110-year-old-civilian-marksmanship-program/)

My extreme dislike, is quickly turning into hatred.

Tribesman

08-30-13, 08:50 AM

As an aside,

Lets see, does the study use Kleck as a source?
Surprise surprise repeatedly, using a primary source which makes up "facts" makes the study questionable.
I see they also throw in the soaring "violent crime" figures in one location from after "shouting at someone" was reclassified as violent crime in the statistics from that location.

Edit;EDIT:
Obama’s new executive order will kill the 110-year-old Civilian Marksmanship Program (http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/29/obamas-new-executive-order-will-kill-the-110-year-old-civilian-marksmanship-program/)
Pure baloney, restrictions on imports will not kill the program, banning all the guns would kill the program, but that ain't never going to happen is it.

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 09:07 AM

There is only one study that is consistent. It is the study of local newspapers that daily report gun violence and or guns used in the commission of a crime. What does this study mean that we read about daily? The criminals have guns, will continue to get guns and use them. The laws already in place weed out those that apply for gun purchase but are denied for one reason or another. The laws do not affect those in back rooms or on the streets buying guns illegally. Taking guns from the citizen who likes these weapons for sport, hunting or home protection is not the answer. It also leaves guns in the hands of the military. The military under the direction of the government. Not a comforting situation for some.

There simply is no fix all law. Washington needs to come to grips with that fact. Let the good citizens cling to their religion and guns. Fix the legal system pertaining to use of a gun in a commission of a crime.

Platapus

08-30-13, 10:09 AM

I anticipate some interesting court challenges forthcoming. :yep:

Wolferz

08-30-13, 10:18 AM

Jihad on the weapons. Because those weapons are loading themselves and jumping up and killing people.:88)

The touchy feely Democrats will never learn But, they do have the back door covered and plugged. :huh: Adding a whole new meaning to Kum By Yah

They can't prosecute murderers for killing people with guns because the prisons are already overflowing with murderers who used other tools.

Tribesman

08-30-13, 10:36 AM

The laws already in place weed out those that apply for gun purchase but are denied for one reason or another.
Can you explain that loophole which avoided backround checks then, you know the one they claim to be closing in this new legislation?
While you are at it can you explain a few of the other loopholes where people can purchase weapons from a legal source while avoiding backround checks?

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 10:41 AM

Can you explain that loophole which avoided backround checks then, you know the one they claim to be closing in this new legislation?
While you are at it can you explain a few of the other loopholes where people can purchase weapons from a legal source while avoiding backround checks?

Internet sales is a gray area. One could purchase over the internet with no recourse of a check. I'm not sure how this will be enforced if at all. This is the only loophole I'm aware of.

There are no other sources that I'm aware of that allow legal purchase of a weapon w/o a background check.

Wolferz

08-30-13, 10:48 AM

Can you explain that loophole which avoided backround checks then, you know the one they claim to be closing in this new legislation?
While you are at it can you explain a few of the other loopholes where people can purchase weapons from a legal source while avoiding backround checks?

What legislation? If I'm not mistaken, this didn't come out of congress. It's another Executive Order from his exalted highness, doing as he pleases.:-?

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 10:51 AM

What legislation? If I'm not mistaken, this didn't come out of congress. It's another Executive Order from his exalted highness, doing as he pleases.:-?

As I understand per the news and I understand it. This is BO brain child enacted on a whim.

Ducimus

08-30-13, 10:53 AM

Internet sales is a gray area. One could purchase over the internet with no recourse of a check. I'm not sure how this will be enforced if at all. This is the only loophole I'm aware of.

There are no other sources that I'm aware of that allow legal purchase of a weapon w/o a background check.

My understanding is that is not accurate at all. Yes you can order a firearm online, however it still has to be shipped to a licensed FFL dealer who does the background check before you take possession of the firearm.

Tribesman

08-30-13, 11:00 AM

There are no other sources that I'm aware of that allow legal purchase of a weapon w/o a background check.
Can you not think of one which 33 states allow?

What legislation? If I'm not mistaken, this didn't come out of congress. It's another Executive Order from his exalted highness, doing as he pleases.:-?
That would be delegated legislation then.

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 11:02 AM

My understanding is that is not accurate at all. Yes you can order a firearm online, however it still has to be shipped to a licensed FFL dealer who does the background check before you take possession of the firearm.

Private sales via internet. Ebay of old? Air pistols can be purchased at Ebay. Not sure about large caliber weapons being sold years ago on Ebay. But, yes, shipping to a licensed dealer that conducts the check before final sale. That makes sense.

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 11:07 AM

Can you not think of one which 33 states allow?

The White House announced Thursday that it will close two gun sales loopholes by requiring background checks for gun purchases by corporations and trusts and banning almost all re-imports of military surplus firearms to private entities.

Gun shows and the lack of uniform gun-control laws provide easy access to guns that can be used for criminal purposes,

http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/welcome/features/20090923_gun_study/index.html

In 33 states, private gun owners are not restricted from selling guns at gun shows. Buyers who purchase guns from individuals are not required to submit to the federal background checks in place for licensed dealers. Critics say that firearms can be obtained illegally as a result, calling it the “gun show loophole.” Proponents of unregulated gun show sales say that there is no loophole; gun owners are simply selling or trading guns at the shows as they would do at their residence.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Shows.htm

Tribesman

08-30-13, 11:19 AM

Ducimus

08-30-13, 11:20 AM

I'm not entirely sure about the loophole at gunshows. I was at one a couple weeks ago and i heard some background checks being done.

AVGWarhawk, as poetic as your sig sounds, it also sounds like you've given up. I think the fight to keep our civil liberties and freedom is just starting. I for one will never give up until I'm dead and buried. There mere thought of my descendents not living with the same that I was born with infuriates me.

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 11:33 AM

See, easy to find isn't it AVG.:up:
Now lets take it further.
When Al-Qaida makes a propaganda video urging Americans to go all murdering jihadi like Nidal Malik Hasan did, where does it suggest as a handy convenient source for cheap guns without background checks?

To be honest Tribes, I never did bother to see what was being enacted as I don't own a weapon nor in the market for one. I don't see a need for one in the future.

I don't watch Al-Qaida propaganda videos. I can't comment on what it would suggest to anyone. I would believe it would be easier to get a weapon in the alley way than calling your local Al-Qaida group looking for a fully auto. :haha:

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 11:37 AM

Ducimus

08-30-13, 11:54 AM

I don't own a weapon nor in the market for one. I don't see a need for one in the future.

If I may make a suggestion, and no pun on Biden intended, If you were to get just one gun, I would suggest 12 gauge pump action shotgun. They are inexpensive (200-300 dollars), versatile in ammunition (bird shot, buck shot, slugs), and have many practical applications (home defense, or hunting).

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 12:17 PM

If I may make a suggestion, and no pun on Biden intended, If you were to get just one gun, I would suggest 12 gauge pump action shotgun. They are inexpensive (200-300 dollars), versatile in ammunition (bird shot, buck shot, slugs), and have many practical applications (home defense, or hunting).

I have considered it. :yep:

Ducimus

08-30-13, 12:29 PM

It is better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it. :salute:

Wolferz

08-30-13, 12:50 PM

If the other 49 follow suit... well what would that say to the crooks in DC?:hmmm:

AVGWarhawk

08-30-13, 01:00 PM

If the other 49 follow suit... well what would that say to the crooks in DC?:hmmm:

It will give them an opportunity to raise taxes on gun and ammo sales. After all, the purchasing explosion after said nullification takes place will be crazy!

darkone999

08-30-13, 10:29 PM

I have to agree with "Ducimus" a shotgun is the best all around gun.I have a 20 gauge rem 870 express pump youth.I bought a pistol grip that I keep on it for home and put the reg stock back on for hunting.I have used that gun for years.Last year I killed 15 Squirrels one month and the next month took a deer at 100+ yards all with a smooth bore barrel.I use #3 buckshot for home defense.I have never had one issue with this gun in 8 years of heavy use.Rain,sleet or snow it has never failed to fire or pump the next round in the chamber.As far as an all around military gun for battle "it is not" but If you want a gun for all around "general needs" a shotgun is the best hands down.:up:

Tim

Onkel Neal

08-30-13, 10:49 PM

WOOHOO!

Missouri ftw! :)

Why not? Washington and Colorado just did that with the dope laws. Looks like a win for the states.

darkone999

08-30-13, 11:12 PM

Ok I will start by saying my first daughter I named "Liberty"...Here is the Definition of LIBERTY:know:

1: the quality or state of being free:
a : the power to do as one pleases
b : freedom from physical restraint
c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control
d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges
e : the power of choice

The word Liberty was used in our Constitution and by our founding fathers many times.Today the word Liberty seems to be just used as lip service for those who use that word having little wisdom or understanding of what it means or why our founders used that word so much.

Here is the preamble to the Bill of Rights(even wiki does not include this on there bill of rights wiki page "very sad")But you have to read the preambles to help U understand the means to the end............

"THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."

What is my point.My point is our bill of rights is in place to protect us from our Government and ourselves.Any government official or agency who breaks these rights our breaking the laws and have become criminals and in fact traitors to our Nation.The other point is make your self aware by reading and understanding your rights and why they where formed into our great documents such as the Constitution.Knowledge is power my friends.

I guess you now Know where I stand on gun control...........

Freedom is choice
Tim

Tim:up:

Stealhead

08-31-13, 12:22 AM

No one on this planet is truly able to enjoy part "A".

What if it pleases you to expose yourself in public?
What if you are most pleased by driving drunk?
Or by running over cats?
What if you are most pleased by raping someone or killing them?
What if you want to greet people by punching them in the face?

The founding fathers where thinking of part "C" and "D".

If we truly had the right to "do as one pleases" things would be very interesting you would have hard core liberals forcing you to live one way and hard core conservatives telling you how to live another way.I say that because many people love to tell others how they should live their lives.

Like it or not on some level if you have a government you are being controlled to some extent.Even in a place like Somalia where there is no central government the warlord who has the most fighters and guns has control and he is going to be taxing people in some way other wise he will not be able to pay his fighters I guees you could refuse and grab your AK but good luck facing 100 AKs 4 or 5 DhSK-38s and a few ZSU-23s.

Tribesman

08-31-13, 03:00 AM

I guess you now Know where I stand on gun control...........

Not really Darkone, as gun control isn't a yes/no issue unless you havn't thought about it.
Stealhead already pointed out the flaw in (a:)
So on gun control, what is your stand on convicted felons being allowed to buy any gun they please?

Sailor Steve

08-31-13, 11:01 AM

My point is our bill of rights is in place to protect us from our Government and ourselves.
My only disagreement here would be the use of the word "ourselves". We make laws to protect us from each other, not ourselves. Laws that protect us from ourselves, such as drug, helmet and seatbelt laws, are arbitrary and have nothing to do with liberty.

Freedom is choice
I've often said that the freedom to choose for yourself is the only true freedom.

No one on this planet is truly able to enjoy part "A".
I agree with your summation in general, but in any interaction with other human beings you have to draw the line somewhere. My opinion on that is "I have the right to do anything I want, as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's right to do the same."

Not really Darkone, as gun control isn't a yes/no issue unless you havn't thought about it.
Stealhead already pointed out the flaw in (a:)
So on gun control, what is your stand on convicted felons being allowed to buy any gun they please?
Simple. Someone who commits a felony relinquishes all his rights, Liberty included, possibly even Life, sometimes Property, certainly the Pursuit of Happiness. He loses those by virtue of having denied those same rights to someone else. A paroled felon is still a felon. He has been extended a chance to prove himself to the society that condemned him in the first place.

That's where I disagree with the law as it stands. A parolee is still only to be partly trusted, but the man who has served his full term is described as having "paid his debt to society". It's my belief that his full rights should be restored to him, including the right to vote and to own the means to protect himself and his family, just like any other citizen.

Tribesman

08-31-13, 12:04 PM

Simple.
Thank you Sailor.
So the yes/no position doesn't give an answer as terms and conditions apply.
That can be spread to every aspect of firearm regulation can't it, which means someones position on gun control can't be known unless they fill in all the details on what their specific stand is.

Sailor Steve

08-31-13, 03:15 PM

Tribesman

08-31-13, 04:22 PM

I think he gave more than enough detail for anyone to know what his stance on gun control is...for himself. He would probably add to that all free citizens. It looks to me like you're just trying to trip him up by quibbling over details.
Really? he gave no detail at all.
Since its all about detail in firearms regulation(like any regulation) it isn't your "quibbling" again is it.
All but the most extreme fringe of the yes/no camps don't actually mean yes/no and when pushed on specifics those few cannot really defend the yes/no position as the devil is in the detail.

Platapus

08-31-13, 04:43 PM

Here is the preamble to the Bill of Rights....

Kudos on researching the preamble. :up: I would opine that the majority of people in the US are not even aware that there IS a preamble to the Bill of Rights. The preamble to the Bill of Rights is an important part OF the Bill of Rights.

Sailor Steve

08-31-13, 04:47 PM

Really? he gave no detail at all.
Since its all about detail in firearms regulation(like any regulation) it isn't your "quibbling" again is it.
All but the most extreme fringe of the yes/no camps don't actually mean yes/no and when pushed on specifics those few cannot really defend the yes/no position as the devil is in the detail.
He left no doubt at all as to his stance on gun control. He's against it, at least for him.

Red October1984

08-31-13, 04:56 PM

Why not? Washington and Colorado just did that with the dope laws. Looks like a win for the states.

Well... :hmmm:

Drugs are an entirely different issue for me...but if my state wants to nullify Federal Gun Laws they have my full support.

Platapus

08-31-13, 05:55 PM

Well... :hmmm:

Drugs are an entirely different issue for me...but if my state wants to nullify Federal Gun Laws they have my full support.

What if your state decides to nullify the Federal Gun Laws and implement their own State Gun Laws that may be even more restrictive?

Red October1984

08-31-13, 06:10 PM

What if your state decides to nullify the Federal Gun Laws and implement their own State Gun Laws that may be even more restrictive?

Then there would be a hell of a lot of pissed off Rednecks. :timeout:

Stealhead

08-31-13, 09:01 PM

Not to mention the fact that even if a state chooses not to follow federal law the fire arms manufactures will still have to meet federal laws.So unless the firearm is made in Missouri despite the difference in laws the federal laws will trump the state laws and they will not produce a federally banned weapon because they will not be able to sell it to 99% of the market.

Most firearms producers already make California compliant rifles where the strictest laws exist if federal laws would change to be as strict as CA or more so they would simply produce firearms that are legal.As I have said before firearms manufactures are for profit business.They care about money not your rights.Bottom line is so long as they have some sort of market they care not they will gladly shell out what is federally legal all day long.

Tribesman

09-01-13, 01:58 AM

He left no doubt at all as to his stance on gun control. He's against it, at least for him.
Which is no stand at all.
Take another poster in this topic, he has seemingly made his "stance" well known repeatedly, yet it now appears that he doesn't really know where he is standing himself.

What if your state decides to nullify the Federal Gun Laws and implement their own State Gun Laws that may be even more restrictive?
That's the double edged sword.

Sailor Steve

09-01-13, 10:39 AM

Which is no stand at all.
Take another poster in this topic, he has seemingly made his "stance" well known repeatedly, yet it now appears that he doesn't really know where he is standing himself.
Well, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. On the other hand you seem to have a lot of opinions on other peoples stances without ever espousing one of your own.

Armistead

09-01-13, 11:20 AM

Not really Darkone, as gun control isn't a yes/no issue unless you havn't thought about it.
Stealhead already pointed out the flaw in (a:)
So on gun control, what is your stand on convicted felons being allowed to buy any gun they please?

It should depend on the felony, but any felon can get a gun, just ask any criminal. Much of the justice system is fubar, felony for a lil too much pot, etc., if the crime isn''t a violent one, I have no problem with gun ownership. For instance, if someone writes enough bad checks, they should take away their rights to ever have a checking account, not a gun.

Tribesman

09-01-13, 11:24 AM

Well, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. On the other hand you seem to have a lot of opinions on other peoples stances without ever espousing one of your own.
I have stated my opinion before, I am in favour of the right to bear arms and in favour of strict firearm regulation.
It all comes down to the details, which some people are very light on.

Sailor Steve

09-01-13, 11:24 AM

For instance, if someone writes enough bad checks, they should take away their rights to ever have a checking account, not a gun.
That's something I never thought of! Good one! :rock:

Tribesman

09-01-13, 11:31 AM

It should depend on the felony, but any felon can get a gun, just ask any criminal. Much of the justice system is fubar, felony for a lil too much pot, etc., if the crime isn''t a violent one, I have no problem with gun ownership. For instance, if someone writes enough bad checks, they should take away their rights to ever have a checking account, not a gun.

See, that's more details.
As for any criminal being able to obtain a gun, I did include a couple of words in #20 which bring up a couple of other issues with black market purchases.
To "cheap" and "convenient" could I add "reliable" as that is another factor when it comes to making purchases while skirting the existing laws.

Armistead

09-01-13, 02:44 PM

See, that's more details.
As for any criminal being able to obtain a gun, I did include a couple of words in #20 which bring up a couple of other issues with black market purchases.
To "cheap" and "convenient" could I add "reliable" as that is another factor when it comes to making purchases while skirting the existing laws.e a

Most felons can easily get someone to legally buy a gun. I have a friend that recently bought a gun for his felon father who was convicted many years ago. I've bought guns at gun shows for friends. I could go out and buy numerous guns off the street now. Heck, when I ran a contracting business, I bought more good guns for cheap from construction workers, all very reliable.

The fact is, the more laws you pass, the bigger the underground market will thrive. The result, criminals will still have guns, people into guns will still have guns, the average law abiding person will do without and suffer for not being able to protect himself.

Tribesman

09-01-13, 03:33 PM

Most felons can easily get someone to legally buy a gun.
Yep, lack of registration makes illegal straw purchases very easy, thanks for making my point for me.

I have a friend that recently bought a gun for his felon father who was convicted many years ago. I've bought guns at gun shows for friends.
Straw purchases are illegal aren't they:yep: I wonder how they can close that loophole?

The fact is, the more laws you pass, the bigger the underground market will thrive. The result, criminals will still have guns, people into guns will still have guns, the average law abiding person will do without and suffer for not being able to protect himself.
That makes no sense, as restricting illegal gun sales will not affect the ability of law abiding people to buy guns.

darkone999

03-18-16, 03:13 AM

just re read this topic and follow up posts..Just to be clear..I would never think u could just give anyone a nuke or a tank..That is common sense..I do have the right to own any small arms I want as that was the intention of the "right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Unless I belong to the National guard in Indiana (militia)"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" I have no right to have or use any Military type large weapons or WMD unless I was in the military or a State run national guard..Trust in your founders and be a student of freedom and educate your self on American History.ignorance is a sure path to tyranny:know:

Cybermat47

03-18-16, 03:47 AM