Confiscate Firearms - Missouri Democrats Introduce Legislation : Gives Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in

page: 4
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by LuckyLucian
 


You're misrepresenting your state. Take a look at the vote totals there on Politico's election page. Of 10,835,058 total votes cast on Missouri ballots 5,293,099 (48.9%) went to Democrats, 5,160,364 (47.6%) went to Republicans, 381,595 (3.5%) went to other candidates. Add in all votes for Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer and Attorney General (21,479,350 total votes) the numbers move further towards Democrats and "other", and further from Republican. 10,634,593 votes for Democrats (49.5%), 10,023,522 votes for Republicans (46.7%), and 821,235 votes for others (3.8%). Source


I'm more or less on my way out for a couple weeks of much needed break...but I do figure I ought to finish with the threads I'm already involved with.

I'm not misrepresenting my state at all. Jay Nixon won, not because he's a Democrat, but because he's been a good Governor. I voted for Nixon, for that matter. I'm anything but a Democrat. I vote for the man, first, and Party or Ideology second. Usually, they run the same and in the same direction, but not in this case and not to be taken for granted in Missouri.

This is the show me state, after all....and believe it or not, people who live here take that as more than a tongue in cheek thing more than some may think.

Claire McCaskill ONLY won because that imbecile Todd Akin wouldn't get out of the way once he'd politically committed suicide for the state (and nation) to laugh their heads off at...between fits of crying over the pure ignorance the man showed. I'm sure there are places he wouldn't be served coffee in this part of the state and we're as red as a Washington Apple in the Southwest region of Missouri. Always have been.

As far as our Lt. Governor you casually lump in with the rest of the names? Well....


PETER D. KINDER was elected Missouri's 46th lieutenant governor on November 2, 2004. On November 4, 2008, he was re-elected to a second term, and on November 6, 2012, he became only the second Missourian in state history to win the office three times, carrying 108 of Missouri's 114 counties.
Source


We have a split executive in this state with a Democrat Governor and Republican Lt. Governor.

As your own numbers show, our State House is 2:1 in favor of Republicans, although I notice you were careful not to put it quite that way. It is accurate though......it's almost exactly 2 Republicans to each single Democrat for our State Legislature, going by your numbers.

How would you figure Missouri is remotely 'even' on it's division? We're divided, indeed....and St Louis along with Kansas City and Columbia account for a good number of people in raw, 'popular vote' totals. However, those vote totals don't decide bills in the Missouri legislature and State House. The general balance as shown by the first map I put on page 1 does. Missouri is solidly conservative and I don't see that changing any time soon, although divisions may well become deepen. 1861 all over again and Missouri was split several ways then, too.



edit on 14-2-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: typo




posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by lynxpilot
 


The point I was trying to make in my response to Wrabbit about misrepresentation applies to your post as well. If we're going to pick and choose what image we want to try to make a point, couldn't a left-leaning person point to a map like this:



Or this:



...to make their point as well? I mean, look at all that blue! Clearly Missouri is just so liberal!

It makes discussing issues a lot easier when we speak from an honest position rather than a partisan slant. Not everyone on ATS is from Missouri and to just simply post a map showing essentially 95% red is misleading, especially considering more Missourians voted for a Democrat than a Republican. I think it's rather essential on a forum like ATS (deny ignorance) to honestly represent the pertinent information.

What would be helpful is something like a poll of Missouri residents showing their disapproval or support of gun control measures.
edit on 2/14/2013 by LuckyLucian because: redundant



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I tried to explain, too briefly, that the majority of Missouri voted Democrat and raw vote totals do not describe the reason for the votes. There may be voters that self identify as conservative due to social issues (abortion, death penalty, etc.), but vote Democrat due to economic issues or what have you.

Delving into Missouri voting shows a voter turnout of about 2/3. It appears that on the whole, the districts with the highest turnout were red districts, lowest were blue. So the point is, with changing demographics where do the majority of people (that voted Democrat) stand on gun issues? My question is will the heavily Republican State Assembly vote according to the feelings of their actual constituents, or along party lines? Are bill proposals like this one (which I am extraordinarily against) going to continue to work through the Missouri legislature until a much more watered down version strikes the right chord? What are the feelings of the majority of Missourians towards gun control in general? That's the kind of thing that a proper discussion can be built around. Not this absolutely ridiculous bill or the reactions to it. I want all the information.

At no point in any polling that I ever saw, or can currently find, did Akin ever have a lead over McCaskill that was larger than the poll's error margin. McCaskill appears to have had the lead nearly the entirety of the race, so to claim she "only" won because Akin stuck his foot in his mouth is disingenuous.

I wasn't careful not to put anything in any way. I gave the actual numbers. If there's an ATSer out there that can't figure out that 133 vs 62 is essentially 2 to 1, I'll be glad to give them a few rudimentary math lessons. And I still want to know what's with the vacant seats.

The map you posted shows counties. These are not districts, which are gerrymandered. There are 163 members of the Missouri House. There are 34 Senators. There are 114 counties. These aren't the same.
edit on 2/14/2013 by LuckyLucian because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   
According to Moses...I think maybe his real name was Charleton Heston...if they want MY gun...they belong to come take it. I can just about guarantee that the magazine will be empty. I can unload it in the driveway when they pull up. Our legal system is a volunatary system. People show up voluntarily for court, because they have a relative idea what the outcome will be. I am a lawyer. We know this. Congress is so power drunk and career minded that they are too stupid to see it. What is the answer? Hell, make everybody a criminal. That is always Congress' answer. It is also what they are doing. All the government has to do to get the US population to flex their collecive mass population muscle is quit responding voluntarily. Every attorney knows it. Not only will we not "produce" our guns...we can just flat quit going to court all together. All it takes to render the US and state govts useless is quit...going...to...court. It would turn the police into chickens with no heads. They are already undermanned because the unwashed masses are caught in the fear of arrest. All the average person has to do is quit acknowledging the power structure. Simple stuff. And the govts have no backup. Every police force in this country is running on an unenforcebale legal power system based largely on security manpower affordability. All of them. The Rothschild Dynasty is way too drunk on their own self-appointed power. Alex Jones is right. Just try it.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
I cant help but remember meathead and archie arguing over this 40 years ago.it's a platform for politics maybe.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by professorjoe
 



According to Moses...I think maybe his real name was Charleton Heston...if they want MY gun...they belong to come take it. I can just about guarantee that the magazine will be empty. I can unload it in the driveway when they pull up. Our legal system is a volunatary system. People show up voluntarily for court, because they have a relative idea what the outcome will be. I am a lawyer. We know this. Congress is so power drunk and career minded that they are too stupid to see it. What is the answer? Hell, make everybody a criminal. That is always Congress' answer. It is also what they are doing. All the government has to do to get the US population to flex their collecive mass population muscle is quit responding voluntarily. Every attorney knows it. Not only will we not "produce" our guns...we can just flat quit going to court all together. All it takes to render the US and state govts useless is quit...going...to...court. It would turn the police into chickens with no heads. They are already undermanned because the unwashed masses are caught in the fear of arrest. All the average person has to do is quit acknowledging the power structure. Simple stuff. And the govts have no backup. Every police force in this country is running on an unenforcebale legal power system based largely on security manpower affordability. All of them. The Rothschild Dynasty is way too drunk on their own self-appointed power.

Sir or Madame. Best direction I have seen thus far. Thank you.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by GuyverUnit I

4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:

(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;

(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or

(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.

5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony..


Source

Read The Bill

So it begins.
Will it pass?


This idea blatantly violates the Ex Post Facto clause in the Constitution. These idiot people do not realize that they are completely violating the Constitution.

King George did this to us. He would arbitrarily demand something that took a man who was in compliance with the law on one day and make him a criminal the next. They can legally pass laws (maybe) that out law certain weapons but because you own one before the effective date of the law you are supposed to be left alone about it.

These damn fools.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 12:33 AM
link   
I see this as a new form of data mining.
Fed.gov wants to know who the "will shoots" are before their endgame shifts into high gear, martial law has been declared, and, confiscation begins.

What better way to get some of'em to fess up than proposing this ridiculous legislative tripe?
We know our e-mails, forums, and, other social media are monitored for possible "terrorist" activities.
You know some of the super patriot's, hot heads, those of lesser intelligence, and, the 'net ignorant are gonna wave that "Don't Tread On Me" flag when legislation like this comes up. Add that name to the list.

The Dems KNOW this hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of passing.

So, why go to the trouble?

I believe gathering a list of the probable, "will shoots", would be downright handy to have once confiscation time comes.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by akalepos
 


I'm going to play devil's advocate here, but ex post facto laws can be passed and have been upheld by the Supreme Court (United Staes v. Carlton, 1994). From what I remember from 2009 when the House was voting on some bill to try and retroactively tax all those enormous CEO bonuses, the ex post facto clause only covers criminal action. Money and property would be civil, thus unprotected by the clause.

So, depending on what RSMo 571 stipulates (this Bill is an amendment to it) then it may be completely legal.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Juggernog
Wasnt Mis-ser-y one of the states that said it would not abide by any Federal Gun Legislation that was introduced?


That was proposed legislation as well.
We shall see which one gets passed.... if any.

I agree that this is just posturing.
It is making the commies appear as though they are "trying" to do something, and it is most definately in response to the affore mentioned proposed legislation.

I live in Misery, and.....this state is packed full of "good ol boys" who will FKING GO TO WAR ON YOUR AZZ if you try and take their guns.

Aint gonna happen in my state.
This aint Californie or New York!!!

This is God Damned Missouri, the "show me state".
Guess what gun grabbers???

I got sumthin' to show ye!!!

Come take a look.
edit on 15-2-2013 by Screwed because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Make your own gun. It'snot that hard and ddoes not require registration.

The lower receiver, the only part of the gun which has the serial number on it, can be bought 80% fabricated and is not classified, at this level of completion, by the atfe, to be a firearm.

All you have to do is machine the other 20% of the lower receiver and from there, you can purchase individual gun parts (serial number free) and assemble them to the lower receiver.

What you'll have is a fully legal, unregistered firearm. They can't take it if they don't know about it.
edit on 15-2-2013 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


What you are missing.....and everyone who says statements like that, is cops would never enforce this. So tired of being lumped in with this agenda. The Sheriff's in Illinois stated they wouldn't enforce it. Of my entire police department only one officer is for the gun ban. The rest of us have stated we will never enforce such an unconstitutional law. It will be that exact moment when you should look to local law enforcement for help.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   
This is really kinda funny. It's Missouri for Christ's sake. That will be a career ending move. I can hear the chuckles through the halls of the capitol building now.

Missouri does have it's liberal pockets of population which is fine by me, as I like a little balance in all things, but what separates Missouri from a lot of other states is the lack of stupidity within those pockets. When Missouri starts going for the toll roads is the day I start worrying about my home state.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


Gun-grabbing FASCISTS! Communism will follow.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 08:41 AM
link   
You know, I kinda get the feeling that certain elements of the Anti-2nd Amendment crowd are really trying to start a Civil War. They talk of "reasonable" new laws on the TV while proposing laws like this in Missouri and Nationally, and enacting laws passed in the dark of night without public review like in New York.

So which should I believe gun-grabbers, the rhetoric your side spews in the media or the actions that have been taken by your allied legislators? You talk about how you only want "common sense" solutions but the actions you take lead me to believe that it is only a means to totally ban ownership of firearms by The People. I don't see any room for debate or compromise with the forces that were responsible for the NY gun law, this Missouri proposed legislation, or Fienstein's bill in the Senate, not an inch. I feel that if those who cherish the 2nd Amendment allow any compromise through it will only encourage the Anti-2nd Amendment forces more.

Also, hunters and sportsmen beware, if you don't stand with those who believe The People should have the right to own "scary black rifles" you will be next. If they succeed with an "assault weapon" ban, the first time someone kills a cop with a .308 deer rifle, or drags a couple of hunting rifles up a tower (like the ex-marine in the 60's), they'll be talking about how "sniper rifles" should not be able to be owned by the public.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 09:02 AM
link   
"Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri"

knock knock knock...... hello. yes we are here to confiscate your asualt rifle. oh sorry officer , its no longer in the state,

oh where is it?

i threw it over the state line on the side of a highway. have fun looking for it lol.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   
5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony

i thought people were allowed to manufacture weapons and not register it if they make them on own?



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~widowmaker~
5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony

i thought people were allowed to manufacture weapons and not register it if they make them on own?


Maybe not, but if it's not registered then they can't know about it.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   
This law is contrary to the Constitution and therefore null and void. People there need to disregard the law and make them take you to court where you will be found not guilty. Make sure you sue everybody you can and this will stop immediately. It is just a scare tactic to get people who don't know their rights to give up their weapons. DON'T DO IT.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I went straight to comment, didn't read more than the title.

They don't get it...... (all of government) ......we will not turn in our weapons, and if push comes to shove it will be mass non-compliance and the likely start of much more bloodshed than ever imagined could happen here. Where I'm from, the Law Enforcement is on the pro gun peoples side. So we stand united. Come down here with the Army, and it will be a war, and one that will cost dearly.
edit on 15-2-2013 by Plotus because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join