Speaker of the House Philip Gunn issued the following release at a press conference today at the capital. Governor Bryant and several other officials stood behind him as he announced:
Jackson, MS—Speaker of the House Philip Gunn today held a press conference at the State Capitol to address Second Amendment rights and gun control. He was joined in the rotunda by Governor Phil Bryant and members of the House of Representatives.
“We are here to assure Mississippians that we are going to continue to fight for their Second Amendment rights to bear arms,” said Speaker Gunn. “These are dangerous times, and people have a constitutional right to protect themselves and their property.”
27 comments:
Same thing Bennie Thompson said when appointed by Biden to vice-chair the 'take their guns' committee.
I'm hoping Obama's orders are all for show and nothing more. He could very easily come out with Exe Orders that replicate existing laws on the books and not many (including me) would be the wiser. However, if any of them limit what you can purchase, it will be a fight like we've never seen in history. With regard to Bennie Thompson, he, like Obama is above the law, so he can write whatever he wants, he doesn't have to obey it and his constituents will continue to vote for him to help keep them in poverty.
Pure political pandering, a moronic stunt, same thing with the other side yesterday at the Capitol in regards to the PERS stuff. Mississippi voters, not that there are that many of them in relation to the total state population, love a moron, regardless of party, to vote for.
If the liberals and "progressives" want civil war then civil war is what they will receive.
Kinda' silly if you ask me. Pandering does come to mind. The administration didn't really do much today in the way of trampling rights.
The request is premature in my mind. I mean, we are talking about a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of the United States.
Come's off as "pry this cold rake from my hand."
Legally this is giving me a migraine....Let's just say I hope this is just posturing on Phil's part and he really does not believe such an act would be constitutional or enforceable. Not to mention is a PURE logical fallacy
1. If an executive order is deemed unconstitutional (which would be a REAL twist) it is automatically unenforceable.
2. Until there is such a determination (and a COURT makes this not a governor), the order is deemed constitutional and to refuse to enforce federal law is.... well lets just say Mississippi's record with defying federal laws is poor...
The political wind has shifted on guns and the Republican might get burned on it if they look unreasonable. If the Governor and Speaker put public safety on the pedestal they put guns on, we could get technocratic improvements like the gun show loopholes, mental health alerts to NCIS, keeping guns from felons, pilots programs for school guards, citizen gun training, etc.
Then the Kenyan can send in the troops.
But making allusions to the Civil Rights era on this issue makes you a numbskull.
No, the political wind in MS has not shifted.
Maybe we should just past a law making it a crime to kill some one. That should solve the problem since EVERYONE obeys all laws.
These alleged diabolical Executive Orders everybody seems so up in arms about are listed on NMC' s blog. They prose zero threat to the Second Amendment's right to bear arms and actually make a lot of sense. I own a bunch of guns, but I sure don't want convicted felons to be able to walk into a gun show and buy all they want. Same is true for lunatics.
Reality alert: Contrary to the scare tactics pushed by the NRA, nobody is proposing to take anybody's shotguns, pistols, or rifles away. And I don't want nor need a weapon of war designed for one thing, to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible.
I think Obama wanted to issue more far-reaching orders but when his lawyers started trying to draft them, they found a little problem in separation of powers.
To the person just above Kingfish:
"nobody is proposing to take anybody's shotguns, pistols, or rifles away"
really? I was under the impression that another assault weapons ban was proposed. Go look up the definition of "assault weapons" in the original ban.
"And I don't want nor need a weapon of war designed for one thing, to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible."
It doesn't matter if YOU want and it doesn't matter if anyone NEEDS. It matters that the Constitution, both state and federal, says your right to bear those arms shall not be infringed. Besides, no mass killing in the U.S. has used a weapon you described as long as I have lived, and I'm old. If we are going to start banning things based on wants and needs, lets start with alcohol, fast cars, cigarettes, public education, cell phones, gold watches, diamond earrings, leather chaps, chicken wings, etc
"Legally this is giving me a migraine...." said 6:04 .
Very simple 6:04 . Eat some Tylenol. It just may help your headache.
"And I don't want nor need a weapon of war designed for one thing, to kill
as many people as possible as fast as possible ".
..said 9:57 PM.
OK, ... then don't buy one 9:57. I live in Jackson, so I definitely need a war weapon.
Vagisil Maximum Strength Cream may be the best choice for happiness for both of these "progressives".
Remember boys, there is no crime in Jackson !! It's just perception.
If January 16, 2013 at 9:57 PM doesn't want lunatics to be able to purchase firearms then he/she must agree that PBPike should never be allowed to own a gun. Because if there is any lunatic @ NMC's it is Pike.
Kangaroo assures: "The administration didn't really do much today in the way of trampling rights."
Is this similar to the assurance you posted that 'nobody is talking about taking away anything from current retirees'?
Although your assessment of what the administration did yesterday is not accurate, it's not so much a matter of 'trampling rights' as it is Obama's continual EXPANSION of the government's rights and roles. The section about medical doctors asking about guns in the home didn't escape my radar. Do you actually think that was just a harmless, meaningless addendum? NO, it's fully intended to worm records of gun ownership into the Affordable Care Act's tentacles.
Why the hell else does anyone think he included it in his 'orders'?
Dot Connecting anyone?
executive orders are just that. If not legal than they can not be enforced. Also will be up to the Federal Courts to determine. Nothing the state can do other than file suit in Federal Court to challenge. Unfortunately these executive orders have become commonplace. Bush and Clinton used just as much if not more.
Thank goodness we are being protected from "anti-constitutional violations."
Bush and Clinton used just as much if not more.
Prove it.
SFX = DOT + L = DOLT
Connected.
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html
Lists the subject and numbers of executive orders
Thanks' Kapt Roo,
Great clarification of a simple mathematical problem .
Explaining Shadowfax is very similar to trying to
make a third grade student understand the concept of
Negative "times" positive equals negative, ect.
While these guys are pandering, Tate is doing the work of the people.
Executive Orders do nothing more than set executive policy. They are not federal "law." They are directives from the Chief Executive to the Executive Branch of government.
While these guys are pandering Tate is stuffing his face with more cheeseburgers.
I have an idea for you 'root'. Instead of your constant, silly insults, how about answering the post to which you seem to object. You seem to think your popularity is enhanced when you act a fool.
9:16, you can't be serious. Executive order are federal law and we've had to follow them, as issued, for generations. Consider 11246.
Post a Comment