O'Fallon loon Cynthia Davis is terrified that mean ol' Kenyan Communist Dictator Barrack Hussein Obama is going to take away her gun.
Just read between the lines of state Rep. Davis' latest newsletter about why our forefathers added the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
When they inserted the Second Amendment, it was to insure that should the Federal Government become tyrannical, the citizens could protect themselves. History is riddled with examples of oppressive governments that began their régimes with disarming the citizenry.Davis makes it clear she's talking about boogie man B.O. by noting three bills that she's filed to "strengthen the right of the citizens to protect them selves [sic]."
There's H.B. 1230,
the "Missouri Firearms Freedom Act," which Davis cribbed from similar
legislation in Montana. "This law says that guns and ammunition made in
Missouri and used in Missouri are not subject to federal regulation.
... This is just one way we can show them that they are not allowed to
regulate that which happens within our state."
Take that, tyrannical government.
Then there's a H.B. 1239, which would make concealed-carry permits good for five years.
And finally, Davis followed through with her promise to fight for gun rights in church (H.B. 1232).
Davis' stance on this issue is clearly with the intent to protect
abortion providers in houses of worship. I'm sure the first case Davis
will cite is that of George Tiller, the Wichita abortion provider who was assassinated while ushering at a Wichita church. For this, I applaud her.
This is all very serious stuff. But Davis, much like Sarah Palin,
likes to lighten things up for her loyal readers. Count me as one of
them. So starting this week, I'll be sharing Davis' weekly "a little
bit of humor" jokes that accompany her enlightening newsletters. I
present to you, "A Horse Named Buddy."
An out-of-townerCynthia, I beg you. Follow your heart and chase your comedic dreams.drove his car into a ditch in a desolated area. Luckily, a local farmer
came to help with his big strong horse named Buddy.
He hitched Buddy up to the car and yelled, "Pull, Nellie, pull." Buddy didn't move.
Then the farmer hollered, "Pull, Buster, pull." Buddy didn't respond.
Once more the farmer commanded, "Pull, Jennie, pull." Nothing.
Then the farmer nonchalantly said, "Pull, Buddy, pull." And the horse easily dragged the car out of the ditch.
The motorist was most appreciative and very curious. He asked the farmer why he called his horse by the wrong name three times.
The farmer said, "Oh, Buddy is blind, and if he thought he was the only one pulling, he wouldn't even try!"
Showing 1-22 of 22
I know I'll be ready to fight when the government tries to bust down my door with their predator drones and long range bunker busting missiles. Their robotics and advanced satellite imagery will be no match for my pistol and redneck assault rifle.
And THAT's how you write a comment of the week.
Just a little heads up! Comments that are longer than the article they're written about usually don't get read!!
Gun nuts sure do love their guns. They would be funny if they weren't so damn dangerous.
Wow, Justin. You don't know anything about the Constitution, do you? Davis is correct that the Founders' intent in penning the Second Amendment was to ensure that the People would always have the means to overthrow oppressive government. While it may be argued that Obama is worse than Bush - who was worse than Clinton - who was worse than Bush I... the fact that Americans remain as free as they are may indeed be largely due to the fact that we outgun our federal government. Given that over 100,000,000 people were slaughtered by their OWN governments in the past century, it is your puerile, naive world view that doesn't seem to acknowledge that seemingly "good" government can go bad in short and deadly fashion if not restrained by their citizens.
You clearly do not understand the connection between the 2nd and 10th Amendments, nor the over-reaching application of the Commerce Clause by the feds, nor, most likely have you ever even heard of the Slaughterhouse Cases or Wickard v. Filburn - let alone understand the background for those cases.
Given that CCPs can be revoked for cause, why shouldn't they be good for 5 years? Such would reduce cost and administrative overhead and be a step towards Vermont-style carry (which you've likely never heard of either).
Finally, if you'll google cases of people being killed in churches, you might recognize that bad guys most often kill more people in "victim disarmament zones", that is, places like churches and schools where they count on rules disarming their victims. Cho, at Virginia Tech went on a shooting spree that killed 32 and wounded 69. And somehow, he didn't seem to mind the fact that having a gun on campus was against the rules.
What's your solution to the bad guy taking a gun into a church with the intent to kill as many people as possible? Oh, let me guess: "I say STOP! And if you do not stop, I will say STOP again!"
Good luck with that.
The ranter above me asked since when constitutional rights have been up for debate.
I would say pretty much since before the first constitutional convention, but I know that wouldn't get me anywhere because the right wing believe they're the only people in America who know anything about the constitution, the end.
WOW: this article needs to be re-titled to "The hoplophob Center"!
What useless LIB garbage...
INTRASTATE COMMERECE. If one bullet is sold across a state line it becomes interstate commerce. Get a Efin clue. This woman should be home schooled for MO's safety
Here we are again with another socialist loon.The alleged reporter of this article.Look fuck-tard if you believe that the population be disarmed that is your right to believe that.It does not entitle you to slander someone else just because You dont believe that way.This is an idiotic debate.Since when are constitutional rights a subject of debate.Like another poster said what if there were strict regulations and taxation with the press.Oh that's right we couldn't have that.I get really tired of the media always crying when freedom of the press is attacked,but then think it is perfectly acceptable to influence people to be against other alleged constitutional guarantees. Most people i have come across in my life that wish to promote the restrictions on gun ownership are 1)would be fascists,2)law enforcement,3)or silver spoon fed cocksuckers who don't have to deal with the day after day crime.These fucks usually live in some place like Johnson County.Besides as I've stated before in previous posts,the prostitution,er..,constitution is a constitution of provision.There was no general consensus with the arcane ratification of the constitution.People seem to forget that the bill of rights was an after thought.This is why they are appropriately called amendments.The Corpus Politico is the separation of powers and delegation of authority contained within the primary body of the so called constitution.It is very clear that the creators of the document were more interested in first establishing their own power first.One only needs to look at the consistent erosion of the so called "Bill of Rights" and ask themselves, if these are guarantees then why has the government effectively eroded these rights from the beginning.The logic follows that in true function and form they are not rights at all and are ,have been and will continue to be only privileges to be granted or denied at the pleasure of the executive level.This government and indeed all forms of government are by their nature tyrannies.When ever you have a very small group of people that are making decisions for all the masses,this is elitism and a dictatorship,pure and simple.Figure it out people.The idea of representative government is a smoke screen.It does not exist and never has.It is the stench of the lie that you continue to believe in.Which of course is a grave and deadly error on your part.Till next time boys and girls.And remember keep your guns loaded and your powder kegs dry.Cheers!!!!!!!
Here we are again with another socialist loon.The alleged reporter of this article.Look fuck-tard if you believe that the population be disarmed that is your right to believe that.It does not entitle you to slander someone else just because You dont believe that way.This is an idiotic debate.Since when are constitutional rights a subject of debate.Like another poster said what if there were strict regulations and taxation with the press.Oh that's right we couldn't have that.I get really tired of the media always crying when freedom of the press is attacked,but then think it is perfectly acceptable to influence people to be against other alleged constitutional guarantees. Most people i have come across in my life that wish to promote the restrictions on gun ownership are 1)would be fascists,2)law enforcement,3)or silver spoon fed cocksuckers who don't have to deal with the day after day crime.These fucks usually live in some place like Johnson County.Besides as I've stated before in previous posts,the prostitution,er..,constitution is a constitution of provision.There was no general consensus with the arcane ratification of the constitution.People seem to forget that the bill of rights was an after thought.This is why they are appropriately called amendments.The Corpus Politico is the separation of powers and delegation of authority contained within the primary body of the so called constitution.It is very clear that the creators of the document were more interested in first establishing their own power first.One only needs to look at the consistent erosion of the so called "Bill of Rights" and ask themselves, if these are guarantees then why has the government effectively eroded these rights from the beginning.The logic follows that in true function and form they are not rights at all and are ,have been and will continue to be only privileges to be granted or denied at the pleasure of the executive level.This government and indeed all forms of government are by their nature tyrannies.When ever you have a very small group of people that are making decisions for all the masses,this is elitism and a dictatorship,pure and simple.Figure it out people.The idea of representative government is a smoke screen.It does not exist and never has.It is the stench of the lie that you continue to believe in.Which of course is a grave and deadly error on your part.Till next time boys and girls.And remember keep your guns loaded and your powder kegs dry.Cheers!!!!!!!
Realist, i think maybe you took my post a bit too far. i was simply pointing out that the Constitution/10th amendment DO NOT give the gov't the power to regulate intrastate commerce, which was (in my interpretation) the main issue being discussed. there are several things laid out in Article 1 Section 8 that the feds are specifically given power over. anything else is states rights. now, the fact that the feds raid certain things or what-have-you does not make it right or constitutional for them to do so. WE THE PEOPLE have simply let them walk all over us until now most people simply accept it as acceptable when it is not. this is essentially what the whole State Sovereignty movement is about.
CCW and Churches: Does the state have a role to play?
http://hubpages.com/hub/CCW-an...
So, uh, Neil? If federal law doesn't take precedence over state law, how is it the feds are able to raid medical marijuana clinics in states that allow such things?
Mind you, I'm not saying this is right - just saying that's how it is. You can come up with all the creative interpretations of the Constitution you like, but until a court (preferably the Supreme Court) agrees with you, it's all just a bunch of hot air.
Aside from the series of ad hominem attacks, what exactly is the author ranting against?
Moving to 5 year CCW/RTC permits, like a couple dozen other states have? Seems a step in the right direction (Vermont and Alaska require no permit). How would the author feel about having to beg gov't permission for, and pay a tax on, 1st Amendment rights every year or so?
Cutting down on the list of exceptions where people may not defend themselves? Where is it shootings happen again? Big red targets saying "come here where your targets will be disarmed"...like schools, churches, and ghettos such as Chicago and Baltimore.
sadly, i cant edit my original post. but along with the 10th amendment, please also take a read of Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution. specifically the following: "The Congress shall have Power to...regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and AMONG THE SEVERAL STATES...". nowhere is the federal government given the power to regulate commerce within a state.
@ justin/realist:
please read the 10th amendment. federal law is only applicable on commerce between states. commerce WITHIN the state is not subject to federal law per many cases/laws already on the books. this piece of legislation would simply solidify INTRAstate commerce, as opposed to INTERstate commerce. that particular bill would be practical to apply to ANY goods within the state, it just gets more attention when applied to the "scary" guns.
as for the other stuff, i say more power to her. CCW permits being good for 5 years brings them more in line with your standard driver's license. incidentally, cars kill more people every year than guns.
Justin, I'm pretty sure you're right.
A lawmaker who doesn't understand anything about the law - that really explains a lot, y'know?
like
dislike
