6.8 SPC Forums banner
61 - 80 of 95 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
Has there ever been an EO that overnight made millions of people outlaws?
SAPA laws of various states do absolutely nothing to protect that states citizens from federal prosecution. Several people sitting in federal prison who thought they were protected by their states laws.
Not very many federal agents patrol the streets looking for fed gun violations . If a deputy or state trooper or city cop stops someone with a fed restricted gun they normally turn it and them over to the Feds for prosecution and show up in court as a witness . With Mo. SAPA law unless it’s a violent felon or drug trafficking the local , county nor state police are not allowed to take any action whatsoever and it’s a crime for them to turn it over to or assist the Feds . Now I’m sure if someone is stupid enough to post videos of themselves shooting a restricted or “ forbidden gun “ on social media or goes to an area where he is checked by a fed cop ( hunting migratory birds or anything on federal property )with one they will be in a world of hurt . When just one state allowed concealed carry nay sayer’s claimed it would make no difference nation wide now I can carry in any state I would want to go to with no worries . If every state passed SAPA laws like Missouri did it would definitely send DC a message 100 times as strong as any sent before .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
Prohibition and cocaine laws made citizens felons overnight. It has happened in the past and will happen again.
But prohibition was a law. Not an EO. My point was that to the best of my knowledge there has never been an executive order that made a large part of the population felons overnight so why sit around worrying about possibilities. "Worry about probabilities, not possibilities" (Ken Hackathorn).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
Not very many federal agents patrol the streets looking for fed gun violations . If a deputy or state trooper or city cop stops someone with a fed restricted gun they normally turn it and them over to the Feds for prosecution and show up in court as a witness . With Mo. SAPA law unless it’s a violent felon or drug trafficking the local , county nor state police are not allowed to take any action whatsoever and it’s a crime for them to turn it over to or assist the Feds . Now I’m sure if someone is stupid enough to post videos of themselves shooting a restricted or “ forbidden gun “ on social media or goes to an area where he is checked by a fed cop ( hunting migratory birds or anything on federal property )with one they will be in a world of hurt . When just one state allowed concealed carry nay sayer’s claimed it would make no difference nation wide now I can carry in any state I would want to go to with no worries . If every state passed SAPA laws like Missouri did it would definitely send DC a message 100 times as strong as any sent before .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So are there actually any gun related laws in Mo that are against federal law but ok according to MO state law?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
So are there actually any gun related laws in Mo that are against federal law but ok according to MO state law?
Technically most of the federal laws are against Mo. constitution . It is a crime punishable of up to a year and $ 10000 fine for any officer that turns over information , hands over evidence or in an way assists the Feds in arresting or prosecution of an otherwise law abiding citizen . If Trumps bump stocks executive order had held up or his suggestion he was going after suppressors would had become reality Or if AR s - 30 round magazine - pistol braces or whatever are outlawed legally or otherwise by the federal government all Mo police are required by law to ignore the Federal gun laws .
That goes for the new gun law that passed this summer with the help of our least favorite politician ,Roy Blunt. Our SAPA law is being challenged in court in the place no one can say is a surprise Saint Louis .

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
So if I have a short barreled rifle with no stamp the MO State Patrol, Sheriff and local cops will just look the other way? How about an M60 mounted to the hood of my Jeep? Ok by MO law?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,264 Posts
So if I have a short barreled rifle with no stamp the MO State Patrol, Sheriff and local cops will just look the other way? How about an M60 mounted to the hood of my Jeep? Ok by MO law?
What kind of bracing do you put under the hood for that M60?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
So if I have a short barreled rifle with no stamp the MO State Patrol, Sheriff and local cops will just look the other way? How about an M60 mounted to the hood of my Jeep? Ok by MO law?
Mo. Law says no machine guns so I don’t believe I would try it . As far a short barrel rifles they are legal to own and hunt with in Mo. and Mo. does not require a special stamp . The law is not to allow people to have rocket launchers or exploding bullets , both of which is against Mo . Law . What it is for is to insure no new executive orders or new federal gun laws are enforced . Will it hold up in the courts? Who knows . What I do know is Mo. has made it clear where it stands and it would be great if others did also . Several Mo. sheriffs have penned letters and posted ads in the paper saying they would not enforce any federal gun laws against otherwise law abiding citizens even if SAPA was over turned . Of course it would not surprise me if someone trying to get SAPA reversed or someone just plain stupid put an M60 on the hood of a vehicle and videos it like the braces on the shoulder videos .
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
Mo. Law says no machine guns so I don’t believe I would try it . As far a short barrel rifles they are legal to own and hunt with in Mo. and Mo. does not require a special stamp . The law is not to allow people to have rocket launchers or exploding bullets , both of which is against Mo . Law . What it is for is to insure no new executive orders or new federal gun laws are enforced . Will it hold up in the courts? Who knows . What I do know is Mo. has made it clear where it stands and it would be great if others did also . Several Mo. sheriffs have penned letters and posted ads in the paper saying they would not enforce any federal gun laws against otherwise law abiding citizens even if SAPA was over turned . Of course it would not surprise me if someone trying to get SAPA reversed or someone just plain stupid put an M60 on the hood of a vehicle and videos it like the braces on the shoulder videos .
So do you not see how the MO laws infringe on your second amendment rights? Even though they have a so called second amendment protection act? The second amendment was written with the idea that we as individuals should have the rights to the same type weapons the military has. How else would we be able to keep a tyrannical government in check? Why do they not allow machine guns or rocket launchers? Sounds like hypocrisy to me.
 

·
Premium Member
I got guns, you got guns, we all got guns! Free to the bone, please do not f**k with me.
Joined
·
3,787 Posts
Discussion Starter · #70 ·
So do you not see how the MO laws infringe on your second amendment rights? Even though they have a so called second amendment protection act? The second amendment was written with the idea that we as individuals should have the rights to the same type weapons the military has. How else would we be able to keep a tyrannical government in check? Why do they not allow machine guns or rocket launchers? Sounds like hypocrisy to me.
You're gonna need an F-15 pal! If you wanna fight my government!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
So do you not see how the MO laws infringe on your second amendment rights? Even though they have a so called second amendment protection act? The second amendment was written with the idea that we as individuals should have the rights to the same type weapons the military has. How else would we be able to keep a tyrannical government in check? Why do they not allow machine guns or rocket launchers? Sounds like hypocrisy to me.
Myself and reasonably sensible people believe that the second amendment is about small arms that can and are normally carried by infantrymen . The people who say it also means we should be able to have rocket launchers , F15s and even atomic bombs are hurting our cause and giving the anti gun people a bona fide reason to believe the second amendment should be repealed . Seriously would you want the gangbangers and black lives matters people to have nukes? Speaking of the second amendment I believe the SCOTUS did rule the second was talking about infantry carried weapons when it decided the short barrel shotgun was not protected under the second because infantrymen didn’t normally carry them in battle . Now that short barrel rifles are normally used by our infantrymen they should be protected under the second . Maybe Missouri law isn’t perfect and doesn’t make everyone happy but at least we are standing up to the Feds . Where does your state stand on new and future laws ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
I got guns, you got guns, we all got guns! Free to the bone, please do not f**k with me.
Joined
·
3,787 Posts
Discussion Starter · #74 ·
Myself and reasonably sensible people believe that the second amendment is about small arms that can and are normally carried by infantrymen . The people who say it also means we should be able to have rocket launchers , F15s and even atomic bombs are hurting our cause and giving the anti gun people a bona fide reason to believe the second amendment should be repealed . Seriously would you want the gangbangers and black lives matters people to have nukes? Speaking of the second amendment I believe the SCOTUS did rule the second was talking about infantry carried weapons when it decided the short barrel shotgun was not protected under the second because infantrymen didn’t normally carry them in battle . Now that short barrel rifles are normally used by our infantrymen they should be protected under the second . Maybe Missouri law isn’t perfect and doesn’t make everyone happy but at least we are standing up to the Feds . Where does your state stand on new and future laws ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The military arsenal should be in the hands of the people via the Naztional Guard. That's what the Guard should be.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
Myself and reasonably sensible people believe that the second amendment is about small arms that can and are normally carried by infantrymen . The people who say it also means we should be able to have rocket launchers , F15s and even atomic bombs are hurting our cause and giving the anti gun people a bona fide reason to believe the second amendment should be repealed . Seriously would you want the gangbangers and black lives matters people to have nukes? Speaking of the second amendment I believe the SCOTUS did rule the second was talking about infantry carried weapons when it decided the short barrel shotgun was not protected under the second because infantrymen didn’t normally carry them in battle . Now that short barrel rifles are normally used by our infantrymen they should be protected under the second . Maybe Missouri law isn’t perfect and doesn’t make everyone happy but at least we are standing up to the Feds . Where does your state stand on new and future laws ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think you are missing the point. It should not have to be a competition. It should not be us against the Feds. We are the Feds. They are our employees. Of the people, by the people and for the people remember? For a state to basically declare federal laws null and void is not far from what started the last civil war. Wouldn't it be better if we were to get our employees in line instead of declaring war against them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: earlytom

·
Premium Member
I got guns, you got guns, we all got guns! Free to the bone, please do not f**k with me.
Joined
·
3,787 Posts
Discussion Starter · #76 ·

Lets focus on the topic? This guy seems like he's smart. Books smarts ya know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,008 Posts
Not positive but I believe that if you can afford to pay the price to buy an F15 you can have one but you cannot have the guns and bombs that it is capable of carrying. So we are back at the 2nd Amendment infringements. :unsure:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woodstock

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
I think you are missing the point. It should not have to be a competition. It should not be us against the Feds. We are the Feds. They are our employees. Of the people, by the people and for the people remember? For a state to basically declare federal laws null and void is not far from what started the last civil war. Wouldn't it be better if we were to get our employees in line instead of declaring war against them?
Yes it would be better to get them in line and that is what Missouri is doing with SAPA and every other state should do . I know we also need to vote in the “ right “ people on a national level but we can’t just stop there . The Trump executive order power trip against bump stocks and comments on suppressors shows you can’t trust anyone . Politics starts at the local grass roots level . Had Georgia not stood alone and started the concealed carry movement do you believe it would be what it is today ? Do you think Georgia and all the states that followed should have waited until the Federal boys voted in concealed carry ? If Mo . SAPA stands in court and every pro gun state adopts a similar law then we will see results at the federal level . Fed elections are too corrupted to count on saving our republic on that level , we have to fight on county and one state at a time until We The People can take back control of DC . And I don’t mean the Republicans take all 3 branches I mean patriots .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
I am not sure what you are comparing concerning GA gun law. GA just passed "constitutional carry" law that basically says that anyone who can legally own a gun can legally carry it, open or concealed. It did not vote to allow people to violate any federal law or ban any law enforcement oficers from participating in the enforcement of federal law. What MO has done is akin to rebelling against the government that they are a part of. Why not just secede from the Union if you don't like the way things are going.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
Just for the record, people do own fighters, etc that were previously owned by the military. You can see a lot in one place here if you attend. Aircraft Areas | EAA AirVenture Oshkosh

I think an F15 would be problematic without any source for parts and as someone else said, the weapons normally used on them. But, seems to me that the things that happened in the Middle East and even Ukraine proves that it's possible for loosely formed citizens of a country to stalemate militaries that have overwhelming forces.

I'm not really understanding why this thread derailed into who's the best/worst for "our" cause. Seems like poster's posts depend on personal opinions, "news" sources, "anecdotal evidence from govt employees", etc. and not facts.

Everybody has opinions but having one doesn't make you right.
 
61 - 80 of 95 Posts
Top