12 votes

Missouri Gop Rep. Turns The Tables On Dems: Introduces Bill That Makes Proposing Gun Control Laws A Felony

Here's the kind of bills we should be pushing! Go MO!
http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_301_32872.php




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Let us encourage, Not discourage this.

Then more will make the move to promote such protections.

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Patriot-Party-CC-Nati...

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Even the author of the bill has no nope it will pass

It is a nice gesture, but we have to stop counting on "the political process" - the legitimate government was overthrown before most of us were born. It is time to figure out how to self govern, and hope that higher ideal becomes the next grassfire before it is too late. Government is ALWAYS backed by a threat of violence. How can those who embrace the non-aggression principal expect a government to ever represent their will?

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

This will have no impact at

This will have no impact at all. It is probably somebody wanting attention or wanting to improve their score or grade with the NRA. But it will likely achieve nothing.

Larry in North Carolina
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men and women to not support Ron Paul!

Though it'd be nice,

Wouldn't this contradict freedom of speech? I guess it's possible when you consider that there are certain things you are no longer allowed to say without fear of being arrested.

It Ceases to be Freedom of Speech When it becomes a DESIGN.

And turn their speech into action; Then they EXCEED THEIR AUTHORITY. And exceeding their authority establish the act of war against the people. See John Locke on Civil Government below.

We are a Republic(S) not a Democracy; Authority created in the Original Compact can Never Change. The Ratifying and Amendment process is limited to changes "WITHIN" the "Delegated" powers.

Arrogating New Powers (such as infringing on reserved rights) is "EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED":

See Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788:
In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...

Therefor the federal government can NEVER have the authority to infringe upon the right to bear ANY TYPE or KIND of ARM. If they attempt it, the federal government EXCEEDS the AUTHORITY ALLOWED THEM, establishing the act of WAR against the people who had set the limits to that authority in the Original Compact i.e. the Constitution, which powers were defined in the Ratifying Conventions.

--------

John Locke on Civil Government:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/Locke_Civil_Government/lo...

Chapter 19 - Dissolution of Government

212: "...When any one, or more, shall take upon them to make laws whom the people have "not appointed so to do", they make laws without authority, which the people are not therefore bound to obey; by which means they come again to be out of subjection, and may constitute to themselves a new legislative, as they think best, being in full liberty to resist the force of those who, without authority, would impose anything upon them..."

220. In these, and the like cases, when the government is dissolved, the people are at liberty to provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative differing from the other by the change of persons, or form, or both, as they shall find it most for their safety and good. For the society can never, by the fault of another, lose the native and original right it has to preserve itself, which can only be done by a settled legislative and a fair and impartial execution of the laws made by it. But the state of mankind is not so miserable that they are not capable of using this remedy till it be too late to look for any. To tell people they may provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative, when, by oppression, artifice, or being delivered over to a foreign power, their old one is gone, is only to tell them they may expect relief when it is too late, and the evil is past cure. This is, in effect, no more than to bid them first be slaves, and then to take care of their liberty, and, when their chains are on, tell them they may act like free men. This, if barely so, is rather mockery than relief, and men can never be secure from tyranny if there be no means to escape it till they are perfectly under it; and, therefore, it is that they have not only a right to get out of it, BUT TO PREVENT IT..."

221. There is, therefore, secondly, another way whereby governments are dissolved, and that is, when the legislative, or the prince, either of them act contrary to their trust.

For the legislative acts against the trust reposed in them when they endeavour to invade the property of the subject, and to make themselves, or any part of the community, masters or arbitrary disposers of the lives, liberties, or fortunes of the people.

222. The reason why men enter into society is the preservation of their property; and the end while they choose and authorise a legislative is that there may be laws made, and rules set, as guards and fences to the properties of all the society, to limit the power and moderate the dominion of every part and member of the society. For since it can never be supposed to be the will of the society that the legislative should have a power to destroy that which every one designs to secure by entering into society, and for which the people submitted themselves to legislators of their own making: whenever the legislators endeavour to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence. Whensoever, therefore, the legislative shall transgress this fundamental rule of society, and either by ambition, fear, folly, or corruption, endeavour to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people, by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and by the establishment of a new legislative (such as they shall think fit), provide for their own safety and security, (APP Note: See this in the Declaration of Independence) which is the end for which they are in society. What I have said here concerning the legislative in general holds true also concerning the supreme executor,who having a double trust put in him, both to have a part in the legislative and the supreme execution of the law, acts against both, when he goes about to set up his own arbitrary will as the law of the society. He acts also contrary to his trust when he employs the force, treasure, and offices of the society to corrupt the representatives and gain them to his purposes, when he openly pre-engages the electors, and prescribes, to their choice, such whom he has, by solicitation, threats, promises, or otherwise, won to his "designs", and employs them to bring in such who have promised beforehand what to vote and what to enact. Thus to regulate candidates and electors, and new model the ways of election, what is it but to cut up the government by the roots, and poison the very fountain of public security? For the people having reserved to themselves the choice of their representatives as the fence to their properties, could do it for no other end but that they might always be freely chosen, and so chosen, freely act and advise as the necessity of the commonwealth and the public good should, upon examination and mature debate, be judged to require. This, those who give their votes before they hear the debate, and have weighed the reasons on all sides, are not capable of doing. To prepare such an assembly as this, and endeavour to set up the declared abettors of his own will, for the true representatives of the people, and the law-makers of the society, is certainly as great a breach of trust, and as perfect a declaration of a "design"...

...to subvert the government, as is possible to be met with. To which, if one shall add rewards and punishments visibly employed to the same end, and all the arts of perverted law made use of to take off and destroy all that stand in the way of such a >>"design", and will not comply and consent to betray the liberties of their country, it will be past doubt what is doing. What power they ought to have in the society who thus employ it contrary to the trust that along with it in its first institution, is easy to determine; and one cannot but see that he who has once attempted any such thing as this cannot any longer be trusted.

232. Whosoever uses force without right -- as every one does in society who does it without law -- puts himself into a "STATE OF WAR" with those against whom he so uses it, and in that state all former ties are cancelled, all other rights cease, and every one has a right to defend himself, and to resist the aggressor.

237: "...Two cases there are, I say, whereby a king, ipso facto, becomes NO KING (no executive, no legislative, no representative), and LOOSES ALL POWER and regal authority over his people, which are also taken notice of by Winzerus.

The first is, if he endeavour to overturn the government -- that is, if he have a purpose and design to ruin the kingdom and commonwealth, as it is recorded of Nero that he resolved to cut off the senate and people of Rome, lay the city waste with fire and sword, and then remove to some other place; and of Caligula, that he openly declared that he would be no longer a head to the people or senate, and that he >>>>>had it in his thoughts to cut off the worthiest men of both ranks, and then retire to Alexandria;

and he wished that the people had but one neck that he might dispatch them all at a blow.

>>>>>>Such "DESIGNS" as these, when any king harbours in his thoughts, and >>>>>"SERIOUSLY PROMOTES", he "IMMEDIATELY" gives up all care and thought of the commonwealth, and, consequently, "FORFEITS THE POWER" of governing his subjects, as a master does the dominion over his slaves whom he hath abandoned...."

239. "...in whatsoever he has "NO AUTHORITY", there he is no king, and may be resisted: for wheresoever the authority ceases, the king ceases too, and becomes like other men who have "NO AUTHORITY". And these two cases that he instances differ little from those above mentioned, to be destructive to governments, only that he has omitted the principle from which his doctrine flows, and that is the breach of trust in not preserving the form of government agreed on, and in not intending the end of government itself, which is the public good and preservation of property. When a king has dethroned himself, and put himself in a state of war with his people, what shall hinder them from prosecuting him who is no king, as they would any other man, who has put himself into a state of war with them,..."

202 "Wherever law ends, tyranny begins, if the law be transgressed to another's harm; and whosoever in authority exceeds the power given him by the law, and makes use of the force he has under his command to compass that upon the subject which the law allows not, ceases in that to be a magistrate, and acting without authority may be opposed, as any other man who by force invades the right of another. This is acknowledged in subordinate magistrates. He that hath authority to seize my person in the street may be opposed as a thief and a robber if he endeavours to break into my house to execute a writ, notwithstanding that I know he has such a warrant and such a legal authority as will empower him to arrest me abroad. And why this should not hold in the highest, as well as in the most inferior magistrate, I would gladly be informed....

...For exceeding the bounds of authority is no more a right in a great than a petty officer, no more justifiable in a king than a constable. But so much the worse in him as that he has more trust put in him, is supposed, from the advantage of education and counsellors, to have better knowledge and less reason to do it,..."

226. Thirdly: I answer, that this power in the people of providing for their safety anew by a new legislative when their legislators have acted contrary to their trust by invading their property, is the best fence against rebellion, and the probable means to hinder it.

For rebellion being an opposition, not to persons, but "AUTHORITY", which is founded only in the constitutions and laws of the government: those, whoever they be, who, by force, break through, and, by force, justify their violation of them, are truly and properly rebels. For when men, by entering into society and civil government, have excluded force, and introduced laws for the preservation of property, peace, and unity amongst themselves, those who set up force again in opposition to the laws, do rebellare -- that is, bring back again the state of war, and are properly rebels, which they who are in power, by the pretence they have to authority, the temptation of force they have in their hands, and the flattery of those about them being likeliest to do, the proper way to prevent the evil is to show them the danger and injustice of it who are under the greatest temptation to run into it.

227. "...And if those, who by force take away the legislative, are rebels, the legislators themselves, as has been shown, can be no less esteemed so, when they who were set up for the protection and preservation of the people, their liberties and properties shall by force invade and endeavour to take them away; and so they putting themselves into a state of war with those who made them the protectors and guardians of their peace, are properly, and with the greatest aggravation, rebellantes, rebels.

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Educate Yourself, Educate Others.

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

GO! MO!

All it takes is a vote and to put some state and local law enforcement teeth behind it.

Then Slap'em in irons!

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

I wish

we could get it passed. That would make me proud to be a Missourian.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record