Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
krome2ez

Missouri Bill To Confiscate Firearms

Recommended Posts

xgwp-logo.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Ivpmd1XuUF.jpg

Missouri Democrats

Introduce Legislation to Confiscate Firearms

– Gives Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in Weapons

Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, February 14, 2013, 9:52 AM

500x141xGun-Control-Works.jpg.pagespeed.ic._iatlLdN39.jpg

Missouri Democrats introduced an anti-gun bill which would turn law-abiding firearm owners into criminals. They will have 90 days to turn in their guns if the legislation is passed.

Dana Loesch Radio reported on the new legislation being pushed by Missouri Democrats:

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.

Here’s part of the Democratic proposal in Missouri:

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.

UPDATE: It’s not just Missouri…

Minnesota Democrats Introduce Law to Confiscate Guns…

Using Same Language as Missouri Democratshttp://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/02/missouri-democrats-intruduce-legislation-to-confiscate-firearms-gives-gunowners-90-days-to-turn-in-guns/

Edited by krome2ez
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is begining to smell like trouble for those that want to follow in A. Hitlers foot steps. I am thinking that The USA is begining to look like the defunked USSR. :angry:

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the bill . No where does it say anything about confiscation .

Shame on this web site for trying to instill fear in the masses.

It reads like the old assult weapon ban that we went through years ago. It sucks.

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE BILL NO. 545

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVES ELLINGER (Sponsor), SCHUPP, MCNEIL AND WALTON GRAY (Co-sponsors).

<A name=2>0776L.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 571, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of any assault weapon or large capacity magazine, with a penalty provision.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 571, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 571.023, to read as follows:

571.023. 1. As used in this section the following terms shall mean:

(1) "Assault weapon", any:

(a) Semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:

a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

b. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand;

c. A folding or telescoping stock; or

d. A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel;

(B) Semi-automatic pistol, or any semi-automatic, centerfire or rimfire rifle with a fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition;

© Semi-automatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:

a. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand;

b. A folding, telescoping or thumbhole stock;

c. A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel; or

d. The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol grip;

(d) Semi-automatic shotgun that has one or more of the following:

a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

b. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand;

c. A folding or telescoping stock;

d. A fixed magazine capacity in excess of five rounds; or

e. An ability to accept a detachable magazine;

(e) Shotgun with a revolving cylinder; or

(f) Conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

Assault weapon does not include any firearm that has been made permanently inoperable;

(2) "Detachable magazine", an ammunition feeding device that can be loaded or unloaded while detached from a firearm and readily inserted into a firearm and includes a magazine that can be detached by merely depressing a button on the firearm either with a finger or by use of a tool or bullet;

(3) "Fixed magazine", an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action;

(4) "Large capacity magazine", any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:

(a) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten rounds;

(B) A twenty-two caliber tube ammunition feeding device; or

© A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.

2. No person, corporation or other entity in the state of Missouri may manufacture, import, possess, purchase, sell, or transfer any assault weapon or large capacity magazine.

3. This prohibition shall not apply to:

(1) Any government officer, agent, or employee, member of the armed forces of the United States, or peace officer, to the extent that such person is otherwise authorized to acquire or possess an assault weapon or large capacity magazine, and does so while acting within the scope of his or her duties;

(2) The manufacture of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition feeding device by a firearms manufacturer for the purpose of sale to any branch of the armed forces of the United States, or to a law enforcement agency in the state of Missouri for use by that agency or its employees, provided the manufacturer is properly licensed under federal and state laws; or

(3) The sale or transfer of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition feeding device by a dealer that is properly licensed under federal, state, and local laws to any branch of the armed forces of the United States, or to a law enforcement agency in the state of Missouri for use by that agency or its employees for law enforcement purposes.

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.

  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha it figures Dog.. Obviously the morons writing these bills have no clue about guns! Freakin idiots.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone that abides by that is a fool! I say come and get um!!

May I direct you to the "Oath Keepers'" website and their theme of MOLON LABE (King Leonidas of Sparta sent the response to the Persian's when they demanded a surrender of their arms. 'MOLON LABE'-Come and take them!)

There are other good organizations out there that have started to form. Join them, support them, stay connected and talk to others!

'If you know your enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.' Sun TZU

Edited by parmenio
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who ever gave me the neg let me thank you.

I have never in my entire life been a follower

If its bull crap its bull crap . You all know who`s side im on by now.

But I will not blindly follow proaganda no matter what side its coming from.

So my FELLOW patriots

Negg away

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TO ALL GUN OWNERS/PRO-CONSTITUTION AMERICANS...PASS THIS ALONG TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILIES:

D I C K ACT of 1902 . . . CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN)

the Trump Card Enacted by the Congress

Further Asserting the Second Amendment as Untouchable

The D I C K Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

The D I C K Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.

Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, "the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States."

The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.

The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.

Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: "The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States." In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, "that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it."

"This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power."

The Honorable William Gordon

Congressional Record, House, Page 640 - 1917

www. angelfire. com/retro/voices/page2.html#1902

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

xgwp-logo.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Ivpmd1XuUF.jpg

Missouri Democrats

Introduce Legislation to Confiscate Firearms

– Gives Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in Weapons

Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, February 14, 2013, 9:52 AM

500x141xGun-Control-Works.jpg.pagespeed.ic._iatlLdN39.jpg

Missouri Democrats introduced an anti-gun bill which would turn law-abiding firearm owners into criminals. They will have 90 days to turn in their guns if the legislation is passed.

Dana Loesch Radio reported on the new legislation being pushed by Missouri Democrats:

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.

Here’s part of the Democratic proposal in Missouri:

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.

UPDATE: It’s not just Missouri…

Minnesota Democrats Introduce Law to Confiscate Guns…

Using Same Language as Missouri Democratshttp://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/02/missouri-democrats-intruduce-legislation-to-confiscate-firearms-gives-gunowners-90-days-to-turn-in-guns/

D I C K ACT of 1902 . . . CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN)

the Trump Card Enacted by the Congress

Further Asserting the Second Amendment as Untouchable

The D I C K Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

The D I C K Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.

Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, "the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States."

The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.

The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.

Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: "The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States." In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, "that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it."

"This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power."

The Honorable William Gordon

Congressional Record, House, Page 640 - 1917

www. angelfire. com/retro/voices/page2.html#1902

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the bill . No where does it say anything about confiscation .

Shame on this web site for trying to instill fear in the masses.

It reads like the old assult weapon ban that we went through years ago. It sucks.

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE BILL NO. 545

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

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.

If not confiscation, what do you think would happen to you and your weapon,

if your still in possession of the weapon after Sept 2013?

I think for one to think "confiscation" as well as jail time, would not be far fetched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Missouri Democrats need to remember one thing. They are in Missouri. Last I knew Missouri was in the South. It does not show much brain power to think that the Southerns are going to give up their guns because the governement says to do so. I would suggest that if the Dems feel so strongly about this bill that they take the responsibility to take them.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read it again Dog53 slowly

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.

Read more:

You have 90 days to remove it from the state or face proscution

No Surrender No Retreat and No Compromise

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who ever gave me the neg let me thank you.

I have never in my entire life been a follower

If its bull crap its bull crap . You all know who`s side I'm on by now.

But I will not blindly follow propaganda no matter what side its coming from.

So my FELLOW patriots

Negg away

dog.... it was me..... I was trying to give you a plus..... those 2 buttons are way too close together!!!!! I know where you stand and I appreciate your intellectual honesty in calling a spade a spade!!!! There is a lot of hype on both sides of this argument for sure!!! Here's what I do know and have found true in research..... There are numerous Dem's in high ranking positions who have openly stated that they desire America to be a gun fee zone everywhere!!! I'm gonna take them at their word that this is their desire...... If these guys get total control, I can only assume that they are going to do what they said they wanted to do....... like I stated on a different post...... papaw always said to hope for the best but plan for the worst!!!!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May I direct you to the "Oath Keepers'" website and their theme of MOLON LABE (King Leonidas of Sparta sent the response to the Persian's when they demanded a surrender of their arms. 'MOLON LABE'-Come and take them!)

There are other good organizations out there that have started to form. Join them, support them, stay connected and talk to others!

'If you know your enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.' Sun TZU

Thanks parmenio. Much appreciated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D I C K ACT of 1902 . . . CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN)

the Trump Card Enacted by the Congress

Further Asserting the Second Amendment as Untouchable

The D I C K Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

The D I C K Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.

Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, "the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States."

The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.

The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.

Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: "The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States." In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, "that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it."

"This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power."

The Honorable William Gordon

Congressional Record, House, Page 640 - 1917

www. angelfire. com/retro/voices/page2.html#1902

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read it again Dog53 slowly

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.

Read more: http://dinarvets.com.../#ixzz2Kzia64Zk

You have 90 days to remove it from the state or face proscution

No Surrender No Retreat and No Compromise

No how about you read what I posted. Its the actual bill off the GOVT web site. There is absolutly nothin in it like you have written above. What you have written is not the proposed bill.

Ahhhhhh hahahahah Sorry my bad

Wow thats unbeliveble.

I wouldnt think those missouri boys would be putting up with this kind of crap

Edited by dog53
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Dog and Sentinel..., you're on the same team. Someone just didn't read it right.

Yeah that would be me smile.gif

Damm when this thing RV`s I will be able to afford some real reading glasses.

along with my new socks

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. M....

I personally do not support this type of legislation and our association has not yet taken any official position on the many MN gun bills that have been introduced in this years legislation…..

I doubt this proposed legislation will get many Sheriffs support…….Thank you…..

Jim Franklin

Executive Director

Minnesota Sheriffs’ Association

1951 Woodlane Drive

Woodbury, MN 55125

this what my sheriff wrote back to me.

go a head and thank him if you want

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dog!! +1 for digging down to the actual proposal.... Now I can come off the ceiling having hit it when I read the first post...... Wow.....

Its important to track this stuff for sure and voice opposition when it emerges, but crying wolf will too soon de-sensitize people such that they won't respond appropriately when they SHOULD respond. Lets hope there aren't idiots out there trying to do just that,...... de-sensitize people to the point they will stop paying attention and responding, and then this stuff gets slipped in..... dry.gif

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who ever gave me the neg let me thank you.

I have never in my entire life been a follower

If its bull crap its bull crap . You all know who`s side im on by now.

But I will not blindly follow proaganda no matter what side its coming from.

So my FELLOW patriots

Negg away

DOg, you spoke out and i support you. Their is always some smart person trying to spin a story. When you call them on it, the negs come flying. We may not agree on all things but on this i support you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.