|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
MO: Controversial Missouri gun rights law has taken a toll on fighting crime
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The officials told CNN that local officials in Cape Girardeau decided their officers couldn't assist federal authorities because there was a chance a drug dealer had a gun in the home.
City officials cited the law -- which was passed by state lawmakers in June and goes into effect this weekend -- that the state's Republican governor says is aimed at protecting Second Amendment rights, and the possibility that federal authorities may seize guns meant that local officers couldn't provide assistance to the federal officers, the US law enforcement officials said. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/27/2021)
|
It seems to me that the cited decision was executed with a broadaxe instead of a scalpel.
The guns in that instance are incidental, and if drugs are the target of the warrant and were indeed found, federal law prohibiting felons in possession of firearms, de facto, is not unconstitutional.
The MO law's stated purpose is to protect peaceable citizens from unconstitutional federal gun laws.
In this case, invoking the MO law is a non sequitur. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
