• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Missouri Governor Will Sign Bill Nullifying Federal Gun Laws...My soon to be home state.

This is a stated as a direct Quote,

"Missouri is not attempting to nullify federal law," Parson and Schmitt wrote in a letter to Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton of DOJ's Civil Division. "Instead, Missouri is defending its people from federal government overreach by prohibiting state and local law enforcement agencies from being used by the federal government to infringe Missourians’ right to keep and bear arms."

So as you can see that like any "employer" they have the authority to control their employees. So Garland's Communist Minions are spouting shit as that is all they have.

I know first hand that the State, County, City or Town Law Enforcement Agencies have no "Jurisdiction" over Federal law, Unless the Federal Law is Codified as state law or regulation, and enforced and prosecuted as a violation of state law or regulation, or The State, County, City, or Town Agencies are purposely empowered to enforce such laws. Usually that requires that those on the State or lessor levels be "Cross" Deputized as federal agents.
 
Last edited:
Biden DOJ upset that Missouri made itself a sanctuary from federal gun rules; says state lacks authority to shield against enforcement of federal laws

www.theblaze.com

Biden DOJ upset that Missouri made itself a sanctuary from federal gun rules; says state lacks authority to shield against enforcement of federal laws

With the stroke of his pen, Missouri Gov. Mike Parson (R) made the Show Me State a sanctuary from federal gun laws. No longer will Missouri law enforcement officials be allowed to enforce — or help the feds enforce — federal firearms rules. But the move is not sitting well with President Joe...
www.theblaze.com www.theblaze.com
 
jpk said:
I loath the executive order abuse that has become the norm in recent decades.....but in the case of Trump and the re-priortization of funding to the wall.....that was done via legislative approval passed long long ago and had been exercised by previous presidents

It wasnt the movement of funds that dems and some republicans had issue with.....it was that TRUMP did it and he did it to fund wall construction
Click to expand...

Call it what you will. The President said, "I wanna do something. Give me money." Congress specifically said, "No" on that particular expenditure. The President went ahead and did it anyway, by robbing Peter to pay Paul.

No matter what President it is, no matter what the issue is, that's not the way the Constitution spells it out. The branches of the government need to work together whether they like it or not.

Who cares if previous Presidents had done it. That might be part of the "executive order abuse that has become the norm in recent decades," which you say you loathe. Why is it better if Trump does it?
 
Picton said:
Call it what you will. The President said, "I wanna do something. Give me money." Congress specifically said, "No" on that particular expenditure. The President went ahead and did it anyway, by robbing Peter to pay Paul.

No matter what President it is, no matter what the issue is, that's not the way the Constitution spells it out. The branches of the government need to work together whether they like it or not.

Who cares if previous Presidents had done it. That might be part of the "executive order abuse that has become the norm in recent decades," which you say you loathe. Why is it better if Trump does it?
Click to expand...
If I recall, The Congress already Authorized the Construction of the Border Wall, and President Trump used his Executive Authority to redirect money, to pay for it. Oh, The last I recalled, It went to the USSC and they concurred.
 
FisherTech said:
This is a stated as a direct Quote,

"Missouri is not attempting to nullify federal law," Parson and Schmitt wrote in a letter to Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton of DOJ's Civil Division. "Instead, Missouri is defending its people from federal government overreach by prohibiting state and local law enforcement agencies from being used by the federal government to infringe Missourians’ right to keep and bear arms."

So as you can see that like any "employer" they have the authority to control their employees. So Garland's Communist Minions are spouting shit as that is all they have.

I know first hand that the State, County, City or Town Law Enforcement Agencies have no "Jurisdiction" over Federal law, Unless the Federal Law is Codified as state law or regulation, and enforced and prosecuted as a violation of state law or regulation, or The State, County, City, or Town Agencies are purposely empowered to enforce such laws. Usually that requires that those on the State or lessor levels be "Cross" Deputized as federal agents.
Click to expand...
Looks like "task forces" which include local LE agencies assisting federal agents will no longer be operating in Missouri. They can't take away the authority of federal agents, but they don't have to cooperate with them either.
 
BOOTKNIFEFAN said:
Looks like "task forces" which include local LE agencies assisting federal agents will no longer be operating in Missouri. They can't take away the authority of federal agents, but they don't have to cooperate with them either.
Click to expand...
Funny how what’s good for the goose (Democrats illegal immigrant sanctuary states) ISN’T good for the gander (2A federal overreach sanctuary states).

Suck it up princesses. You all started this.
 
bearingarms.com

Missouri Police Chief Resigns Over 2A Preservation Act

The police chief in O'Fallon, Missouri has resigned over the wording of the new law. It sounds like his officers may have dodged a bullet.
bearingarms.com bearingarms.com

"Dupuis claims he’s a firm supporter of the Second Amendment, but feels that he can’t do his job without sovereign immunity protecting him from civil lawsuits when he goes beyond what he’s legally allowed to do."

It's probably best he quit. What a chump.
 
timbo said:
bearingarms.com

Missouri Police Chief Resigns Over 2A Preservation Act

The police chief in O'Fallon, Missouri has resigned over the wording of the new law. It sounds like his officers may have dodged a bullet.
bearingarms.com bearingarms.com

"Dupuis claims he’s a firm supporter of the Second Amendment, but feels that he can’t do his job without sovereign immunity protecting him from civil lawsuits when he goes beyond what he’s legally allowed to do."

It's probably best he quit. What a chump.
Click to expand...

Yeah.

Your underlined excerpt there? That's everything wrong with modern policing. It's disturbing that a CoP can admit in public that he feels a need to go "beyond what he's legally allowed to do" and gets nothing but heartfelt support from his municipal overlords.
 
Picton said:
Yeah.

Your underlined excerpt there? That's everything wrong with modern policing. It's disturbing that a CoP can admit in public that he feels a need to go "beyond what he's legally allowed to do" and gets nothing but heartfelt support from his municipal overlords.
Click to expand...
And here again, when someone says they support the 2A and then literally the very next word is "but", I will always tell that person to their face that they are puking a crock of shit...and I've done it a few times.

2A: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I see no "but" in that amendment, at all.
 
Picton said:
Yeah.

Your underlined excerpt there? That's everything wrong with modern policing. It's disturbing that a CoP can admit in public that he feels a need to go "beyond what he's legally allowed to do" and gets nothing but heartfelt support from his municipal overlords.
Click to expand...
Robert Kraft's masseuse probably wishes she was allowed to go beyond what she was legally allowed to do...
 
daekken said:
Robert Kraft's masseuse probably wishes she was allowed to go beyond what she was legally allowed to do...
Click to expand...

I mean, it's hard for me to imagine that from any responsible public servant. If the DPW head or the school superintendent claimed they couldn't do their job without protection for those times when they completely overstepped their authority, I'd expect them to get fired tout suite.

I'm sure I'd be disappointed, though.
 
Picton said:
I mean, it's hard for me to imagine that from any responsible public servant. If the DPW head or the school superintendent claimed they couldn't do their job without protection for those times when they completely overstepped their authority, I'd expect them to get fired tout suite.

I'm sure I'd be disappointed, though.
Click to expand...
A teacher (no offense) complaining they can't beat an unruly student with a yardstick without immunity....

It is indeed troubling. Then again you see that case in TN a while ago where the whole town's taxpayers had to pay up because the police were offended about a meme someone posted so they arrested the guy who posted it...readily admitting in texts between cops that they were violating his First Amendment rights, but they wanted to "teach him a lesson"...and it's not too surprising I guess.

But, the underlined words should be one of the truly "stunning revelations" kinds of statements.
 
FisherTech said:
This is a stated as a direct Quote,

"Missouri is not attempting to nullify federal law," Parson and Schmitt wrote in a letter to Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton of DOJ's Civil Division. "Instead, Missouri is defending its people from federal government overreach by prohibiting state and local law enforcement agencies from being used by the federal government to infringe Missourians’ right to keep and bear arms."

So as you can see that like any "employer" they have the authority to control their employees. So Garland's Communist Minions are spouting shit as that is all they have.

I know first hand that the State, County, City or Town Law Enforcement Agencies have no "Jurisdiction" over Federal law, Unless the Federal Law is Codified as state law or regulation, and enforced and prosecuted as a violation of state law or regulation, or The State, County, City, or Town Agencies are purposely empowered to enforce such laws. Usually that requires that those on the State or lessor levels be "Cross" Deputized as federal agents.
Click to expand...

Yet I would be willing to wager that the very same AG Garland would publicly look the other way when states allow selling of recreational or even medical weed to people. In 2017 when Trump was elected a lot of states started passing laws similar to this saying that local and state police cannot cooperate with the immigration agents. So as far as I'm concerned any state that snubs their nose at the feds is fine. It was fine in 2017, it's still fine now.
 
daekken said:
A teacher (no offense) complaining they can't beat an unruly student with a yardstick without immunity....

It is indeed troubling. Then again you see that case in TN a while ago where the whole town's taxpayers had to pay up because the police were offended about a meme someone posted so they arrested the guy who posted it...readily admitting in texts between cops that they were violating his First Amendment rights, but they wanted to "teach him a lesson"...and it's not too surprising I guess.

But, the underlined words should be one of the truly "stunning revelations" kinds of statements.
Click to expand...
None taken. That's a great parallel.

Or.

DPW Guy: I'm going to have to resign. That new state lawr...
Mayor: Oh yeah. I heard. Sorry to lose you, but exactly what's the problem?
DPW: Well, you know how I always steal a bunch of the town's road salt and give it to you and the rest of the Town Council for your driveways? And I always plow you guys out first?
Mayor: Oh, totally.
DPW: The new lawr says I can get sued for doing stuff like that. Like, for when I plow out your driveway and deposit all the snow in your neighbor's yard.
Mayor, shaking his head: What's this world coming to? Well. I'll issue a proclamation in recognition of your years of dedicated service. Just make sure you announce publicly that you can't keep the job because you can no longer break the law.
DPW: Hey thanks, man. I really appreciate it.
 
timbo said:
And here again, when someone says they support the 2A and then literally the very next word is "but", I will always tell that person to their face that they are puking a crock of shit...and I've done it a few times.

2A: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I see no "but" in that amendment, at all.
Click to expand...

I support the second amendment, but anyone who open carries is an idiot who’s not helping our cause and deserves to be arrested.

🤣
 
Mountain said:
Actually, I think the important difference will be whether or not Missouri has any balls. This could either get interesting or disappointing. I do like that Missouri is pushing the issue.
Click to expand...
They can always evict some federal tenants in some random fort by shooting canons at it, or something.
 
Based upon a 2019 study of weapons used in homicides. I am wondering what reasoning anyone could have for legitimately supporting any "assault (ugh)" weapon ban.

www.criminalattorneycolumbus.com

Weapons That Are Most Commonly Used for Homicides

Which Weapons Are Most Commonly Used for Homicides? With the renewed push by the federal government for an assault weapons ban, we couldn’t help but |
www.criminalattorneycolumbus.com www.criminalattorneycolumbus.com
 

Similar threads

Soon, they will be everywhere.
2 3
Replies
72
Views
2K
RKG
R
Missouri law being passed: If you home school, your home is now considered a school and you can't own guns
Replies
17
Views
608
Nhusa
N
Governors Sign Bills Barring Credit Cards From Tracking Gun Sales in Utah and Indiana
Replies
0
Views
59
Reptile
Reptile
California Dems Push Bill Requiring Guns to Be Registered Annually, with a Fee
Replies
7
Views
281
bigbravehog
bigbravehog
NEW- Gun Grab Bill Six-member conference committee to decide Legislature's gun control proposal
Replies
24
Views
990
StevieP
StevieP
Back
Top Bottom