Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SayWut

(153 posts)
39. Right.
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:09 PM
Feb 2013

How many of those laws mandated surrendering, rendering inoperable or outright prohibited the possession of currently owned firearms (with or without compensation from the state)?

Failure to comply resulting in felony charges, followed by inevitable confiscation, seizure of previously legally owned property.


"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."


"frivolous as case of grandstanding as legislative activity" you say?

The author of the ban knows full well that his bill has zero chance of making it out of committee hearings, let alone passing a floor vote.
Which leads me to conclude that he's either making some lame statement ('someone needs to do something'), pandering to a specific voting bloc, or just plain naive (perhaps all that and and more).



They are crazy are they riverbendviewgal Feb 2013 #1
Well, it is just a class D! lupulin Feb 2013 #21
its beyond Crazy... AsahinaKimi Feb 2013 #53
Good grief! AndyA Feb 2013 #2
game on. nt bubbayugga Feb 2013 #3
Another Banana Republican. Those state-level guys are hilarious. TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #4
Don't give them any ideas. arbusto_baboso Feb 2013 #44
The Second Amendment trumps the First Amendment. onehandle Feb 2013 #5
They hate the First Amendment ... earthside Feb 2013 #8
well, YEAH,.. Volaris Feb 2013 #56
How come they all seem to forget one of the first words?? Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #6
Okay, let's extend this to restricting women's choices csziggy Feb 2013 #7
There you go with that liberal logic Hugabear Feb 2013 #15
He'd better make one about involuntary admittance to the looney bin since he's on his way. sinkingfeeling Feb 2013 #9
well if that were the case PatrynXX Feb 2013 #10
USSR? East Germany? China? SoapBox Feb 2013 #11
God I absolutely hate MO legislatives WHO DO NOTHING to HELP this state. benld74 Feb 2013 #12
That is fine as long as he also gets a felonly for proposing a gun law. nt Lucky Luciano Feb 2013 #13
Good god, it's one lunatic after another in this godforsaken country. nt valerief Feb 2013 #14
Too broad....East Kansas is trying to corner the market on "teh crazee"... Moostache Feb 2013 #17
repugs get stupider all the time samsingh Feb 2013 #16
Apparently they don't love the first amendment quite as much as the second. n/t Downtown Hound Feb 2013 #18
Because introducing new laws would be....unlawful! BadgerKid Feb 2013 #19
A cornerstone of democracy is privilege for legislators to propose legislation geek tragedy Feb 2013 #20
Is he this protective of the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights? yardwork Feb 2013 #22
I thought this was from the Onion but sadly it isn't .... n/t cosmicone Feb 2013 #23
sorry, legislative immunity Deep13 Feb 2013 #24
I wouldn't get bent out of shape over this. SayWut Feb 2013 #25
Talk about false equivalency caraher Feb 2013 #34
Right. SayWut Feb 2013 #39
We duly note that Your Pearls Have Been Clutched! 66 dmhlt Feb 2013 #55
Wrong. ronnie624 Feb 2013 #58
I never fail to be amazed at how incredibly ignorant Zoeisright Feb 2013 #26
It is the state nuts we have to worry about. redstatebluegirl Feb 2013 #27
He's bonkers! City Lights Feb 2013 #28
WTF?! sakabatou Feb 2013 #29
yeah. oh yeah. struggle4progress Feb 2013 #30
Missouri: The home state of Todd Akin and Rush Limbaugh Loup Garou Feb 2013 #31
And to think I moved from the sane state of North Dakota to live here. RC Feb 2013 #41
Lucky man mpcamb Feb 2013 #32
WTF? VA_Jill Feb 2013 #33
just more proof of their delusion and paranoia Skittles Feb 2013 #35
Proposing a law would be covered under the 1st amendment. yellowcanine Feb 2013 #36
Even better loyalsister Feb 2013 #37
At last, some creativity! duhneece Feb 2013 #38
the right of an individual to bear arms, as set forth under the second amendment AlbertCat Feb 2013 #40
With all the people dropping dead of bullet holes, how well regulated can they be? RC Feb 2013 #42
Grandstanding, and stupid at that. krispos42 Feb 2013 #43
When did Missouri change it's motto to SwankyXomb Feb 2013 #45
Seems to me that Missouri is.... 47of74 Feb 2013 #51
Yeah, well I propose Hayabusa Feb 2013 #46
Yep! That is the gist of my post #13 above. Lucky Luciano Feb 2013 #47
He can join my sheriff xmas74 Feb 2013 #48
so it would be illegal to introduce legislation to... mwooldri Feb 2013 #49
F/ck that sh!t blkmusclmachine Feb 2013 #50
It is established jurisprudence... Veri1138 Feb 2013 #52
What's Turbineguy Feb 2013 #54
This is actually a standard MO of many an NRA pushed legislation. Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2013 #57
Ongoing assault by the NRA against public health issues. Ikonoklast Feb 2013 #59
Funny that the NRA's response to Sandy Hook was "It's not guns, it's mental health!" Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2013 #60
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Missouri Republican Wants...»Reply #39