Mike Bost erupts over change in concealed carry bill

Watch THIS!!!!

Illinois state Rep. Mike Bost (R-Murphysboro) launched into a fiery tirade on the Illinois House floor after Democratic lawmakers attempted to sneak in what he considered to be a significant floor amendment to a proposed concealed carry bill. Bost’s outburst actually occurred on April 17, but was only lightly covered.

www.theblaze.com... playing-games/

Home of Senator Obama turned POTUS Obama

Typical elitism the 'not one constitutional scholar' followed up by 'shouldn't be allowed to'.

Man oh man i would have laughed if it wasn't so damn infuriating.

What say you?

I don't say this very often but, Jesus Christ!

Bost's first comments in the beginning of the video were right on the money. Trying to pass multi page bills off as simple amendments and back dooring the entire process by slipping in things that should be handled individually. The 'process' is past @#$'ed up, obviously.

When that guy made the comment about preventing Bost from getting a gun... I almost fell of my chair.

No Constitutional Scholars? That pisses me off so much, because it's not that @#%$'ing hard to read a few books, read the Constitution, research supreme court cases and there ya go... getting closer. Don't have time to do all that? Then you don't have time to represent people in our government, in which it's based on. Maybe they should have, free Constitutional Scholar Training for every rep, senator, mayor, sheriff... and so forth.
...

Constitutional Scholars? If you can't comprehend the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, then what the F@#$ are you doing in office?

reply to post by neo96


Two really good responses to this thread!!!

If these idiots are too stupid to understand the Constitution then just what the hell are they doing representing us???

Am I and you guys the only ones finding that comment to be not only criminal, as well as the perfect example as to why are country is about to hit third world status??????

Remember when Cruz upset Feinstein????

She made damn near the same comment!! I believe her words were, "It is not our job to understand the Constitution. Our job is to create laws! It is the responsibility of the Supreme Court to decide whether the laws we create are Constitutional or not...............................SIGH!!!!

reply to post by seeker1963



We are doomed!

That saying all politics are local never rang more true.

reply to post by neo96


Hellz to the yea~ I wish I was there to see this go down.... What I do know.... Not sure if it passed on the 17th but the first time it was voted on we were only 12-15 votes shy of CCW.... A few tweeks and you get a senator with his panties in a bunch..... KEEP PUSHING ILLINOIS! I love it!~

reply to post by seeker1963


Yup, It's all pretty ridiculous.

A politician should immediately be expelled from office for voting on a bill or passing some legislation without reading it or for trying to sneak something into a bill that is unrelated. It's just scum bag stuff.

Also, I hope Feinstein gets mouth herpes or something.

More information on this:

Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, had said the plan was a permissive concealed carry program. But the language indicates that Illinois State Police could deny permits to anyone unable to show they faced a violent threat or did not have a “proper reason” for carrying one — hallmarks of gun-permit laws in states with more restrictive rules.

chicago.cbslocal.com...

Have to prove a reason?

What they have to wait til they get beaten up,mugged, or raped?

Yeah Jesus Christ!

I do love some backbone. I know for sure I could never be a representative, I'd be going Wayne Brady left and right up in that house lol. Although there is some merit to needing a background in the subject matter and not having a consensus to go on, that's no excuse for lack of due diligence leading to faulty debate and poor discourse. As others have already noted, this incident highlights the lack of depth in understanding that may be found within some representatives. I certainly don't know everything, nor do I expect another to, but these poor kiddies can't even grasp their training wheels.

reply to post by neo96

Typical elitism the 'not one constitutional scholar' followed up by 'shouldn't be allowed to'.

Exactly!

Since when did you have to be a Constitutional Scholar to interpret a document that unlike current legislation is clear as a bell? The only thing you need to understand the Constitution is common sense and the ability to read left to right.

The Constitution is only hard to understand when you hate freedom. I'm guessing thats their problem.

This guy needs to be a guest on the Alex Jones show.

reply to post by danneu89

Why are they swearing an oath to the Constitution if they have no understanding of the document?

That alone may be criminal.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.][62]

But I dont know what it says or means, nor do I care...

Originally posted by neo96
More information on this:

Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, had said the plan was a permissive concealed carry program. But the language indicates that Illinois State Police could deny permits to anyone unable to show they faced a violent threat or did not have a “proper reason” for carrying one — hallmarks of gun-permit laws in states with more restrictive rules.

chicago.cbslocal.com...

Have to prove a reason?

What they have to wait til they get beaten up,mugged, or raped?

Yeah Jesus Christ!

That's funny! You see all this time I thought it was the Bill of RIGHTS, but apparently in Illinois it's just the Bill of NEEDS.

BTW, to all interested parties, the Democrat's amendment was voted down later that same day.

reply to post by neo96


Sounds like the party of Psychopaths and Sociopaths: Democrats. There seems to be a great deal of commonality between the Bolsheviks and the current Democrats. I wonder how far the similarities go?