I used to think that the dumbest gun law ever produced came from Matt Gaetz who, when he was a State Senator in Florida, introduced a law (which went nowhere) that would have allowed patrons who were shot by someone in a gun-free zone to sue the owner of the property who had made his space gun free.
But the Governor of Missouri, Mike Parson, is about to sign into law a bill which is even dumber than the law put out there by child-molester Gaetz. This is a law called the ‘2nd-Amendment Preservation Act,’ which prohibits the police in Missouri from enforcing federal laws which would be “considered infringements on the people’s right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed by Amendment II of the Constitution of the United States.”
Exactly what laws are they talking about? The most egregious infringements on gun ‘rights’ in Missouri would be any federal law which would result in “any registration or tracking of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition.”
So, if a local police department shows up at a crime scene, let’s say a murder, and finds a gun next to the corpse which was evidently used to kill the guy, according to this new law the cops can’t ask the ATF to trace the gun in order to figure out who may have actually committed the crime.
And why do the good people of Missouri need such a law? Because according to the Governor’s office, this law will “empower people to protect themselves.” The Governor’s spokesperson, Kelli Jones, actually said this. She actually stated those exact words.
In 2019, the most recent year for which we have data, Missouri was one of 7 states with a murder rate in double digits, specifically the rate was 10.23 murders per 100,000 residents. There were only 4 states in 2019 which suffered from a higher rate of murders where the killer used a gun. So why not make it harder for the cops to figure out who pulled the trigger when they find a dead body on one side of the street with his head blown off and then find the gun on the other side of the street?
Obviously, the guy who got his head blown off wouldn’t have been a murder victim at all if he had taken the trouble to ‘empower’ and protect himself, right? And how could this guy have empowered himself to make sure he didn’t get his head blown off by someone else? That’s simple. All he needed to do was go out and get himself a gun.
I can certainly understand why the head of Missouri’s gun-control group, MOMS, would issue a statement calling this law something with no benefit at all. But that’s not completely true, because after all, as the fear of Covid-19 abates and less people feel they can protect themselves from the virus by buying a gun, the guys who own gun shops in Missouri will need to find some way to boost sales.
Know how many guns were purchased in Missouri last month? Try 40,192. Know how many guns were sold in Missouri in April? Try 51,356. In March it was 65,739. So, over the last three months, gun sales in Missouri have dropped by almost 40%! That’s no good. No good at all.
If it weren’t for the idiot state legislator, Jered Taylor, who sponsored this bill, and the idiot Governor, Mike Parson, who signed the bill, the gun business in Missouri might collapse, and then all those state residents who still need to empower themselves to keep themselves safe would be sh*t out of luck.
Maybe what those poor folks would have to do is sneak into someone’s house when they’re not around and swipe one of their guns. And if the neighbor reports the theft to the cops and the cops want to trace the gun, then the local cops will also be sh*t out of luck.
Missouri’s known as the ‘show me’ state. Want to show me a law that is dumber than this new gun law?
Jun 11, 2021 @ 13:26:38
Seeing how police have no duty to protect you, Kelli Jones is saying that people should be empowered to protect themselves. Who has a problem with that? Maybe soy boys will have a problem with it. I can see how they just might.
This law is not making it harder for “cops to figure out who pulled the trigger” it’s making it easier for people to protect themselves.
You can make numbers look and say anything you like. I’ve check the “NICS Firearm Background Checks: Month/Year by State” and find totally different numbers than what are reported in this post. Do a web search for “NICS Firearm Background Checks: Month/Year by State” and see what numbers you find. So, I don’t know why the guys who own guns shops in Missouri need to find some way to boost sales. I believe the gun stores in Missouri are doing just fine. They can sit back and enjoy the point of sales increase.
I don’t believe that idiot state legislator, Jered Taylor, and that idiot Governor, Mike Parson, have to worry about the gun business in Missouri collapsing any time soon.
I’ll say nothing about the Second Amendment, but isn’t the Tenth Amendment great?
Jun 11, 2021 @ 13:51:31
Seems to me this is more grandstanding. The state is already protected from having to gulp down Federal regulations.
Saying the state and local police don’t have to enforce Federal regulatory stuff ain’t a new thing. The liberal states have been doing that for a while now with so called immigrant sanctuary states and cities. That actually all goes back to a Supreme Court case (Printz vs.United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)) which ruled that state and local authorities could not be compelled to implement Federal regulatory programs. It was about the Brady Act and the initial demand that states do the Federal background checks. Alan is right. That was a Tenth Amendment interpretation.
So I guess in the Show Me State, you can show your short barreled rifle/pistol with arm brace to the local cops and they will look the other way.
I’ll really be interested in how that new New York law survives scrutiny. Like Smith and Wesson can legally sell a firearm to someone in an adjacent state, following all the laws of the state and nation. If somehow that gun ends up in a crime in NYS, its S&W’s fault?
We really need two separate nations. Both sides have gone just a little bonkers.
Jun 13, 2021 @ 06:06:23
I cannot think for one reason why anyone would think the owner who disarmed and endangered people on his [property was not responsible. Who but an abject cretin would think taking peoples guns from them will make them safer. Are there people that delusional and stupid?
I’m reminded of the founders who never had to put up with the lies and fabrications of gun control organisations and supporter parrots repeating these provable lies.
When the CDC wanting to challenge the congressional ban on producing gun control propaganda commissioned a survey of the available evidence and laws got this result did it change gun controls objectives? Did it make a single gun control supporter embarrassed at how foolish they had been think they were wrong. No, indoctrinated people are impervious to facts.
During 2000–2002, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, “shall issue” concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws. ***The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.***
Most people would think that a show stopper on the illegitimacy of gun laws and interventions but not gun control. I mean the CDC gun control propaganda factory produced that. OK they were stupid enough to believe their own lies and did the world a favour of showing just how useless every single gun law is. Has gun control packed up and gone home back to George Soros and his elitist friends.
Jun 13, 2021 @ 06:23:19
Imagine a people who need a government law to tell them what their rights are. People so under governments spell the best they can do is ask governments courts to do their duty. Then they are willing to abide by what governments courts tell them their rights are. The founder probably would have commit suicide if they had seen that. Why would anyone what to give any government the right to control by letting government redefine your rights? Is it too much trouble protect your rights? Will it annoy government if you do? No time? Or is it no value for the right?
I’m curious why will firerarm owners not protect their rights? They have given this up more than many tens of thousand times as gun law after gun law gets passed. Not one word of objection. No organised opposition, nothing learned, nothing said, nothing done. Every one of those laws was a victory to gun control. Who lost? How many more do you intend to lose?