Repeal of stand your ground...um no?

Dead. That what that is. Dead.

That bill also calls for mag limits, liability insurance, and new "safety" regulations.
 
Last edited:
This should give everyone a look into what the left's end game is. If this is what they're going for on their first round, just think about what they're end game might be.
 
Same old nonsense they're always prattling on about. Of course it means we must be forever vigilant and is a warning and example of how politicians will always try to take power away from those whose interests they're supposed to be looking out for.
 
Throw it against the wall, and see what sticks. Liberal playbook, page 3...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Can someone explain the procedure here to me?

Does this get brought up on the floor and then referred to a committee where it should die? Or should this have already died in a committee and never seen the light of day?
 
Climberman said:
Can someone explain the procedure here to me?

Does this get brought up on the floor and then referred to a committee where it should die? Or should this have already died in a committee and never seen the light of day?
Click to expand...
It was filed yesterday and currently sits in judiciary 1 where it will likely just die. Recall, if you will, the problems we've had getting pro 2A bills out if committee. It was sponsored by Harrison and Insko primarily and supported by Fisher, Cunninghsm, and Floyd, undoubtedly all urban democrats.
 

Attachments

  • H723v0.pdf
    174.3 KB · Views: 2
I called my house member today to complain about it. No one answered. But I did leave a message.
 
Section 14-409.44 states that anyone who intends to own or owns a firearm must carry $100,000 of liability insurance to cover damages from negligent or willful acts involving said firearm, including stolen but unreported ones.

Clearly these idiots don't understand how insurance works.
 
noway2 said:
Section 14-409.44 states that anyone who intends to own or owns a firearm must carry $100,000 of liability insurance to cover damages from negligent or willful acts involving said firearm, including stolen but unreported ones.

Clearly these idiots don't understand how insurance works.
Click to expand...

Yes they do. They create a requirement for you to buy something that may not exist, or make you buy something that's so expensive that you can't really buy it. They're not restricting your rights, they're just making you pay a 3rd party for the privilege of exercising those rights. Ammo tax hasn't worked so well for them, so now they'll try another common sense measure, the responsibility tax.
 
Jayne said:
Yes they do. They create a requirement for you to buy something that may not exist, or make you buy something that's so expensive that you can't really buy it. They're not restricting your rights, they're just making you pay a 3rd party for the privilege of exercising those rights. Ammo tax hasn't worked so well for them, so now they'll try another common sense measure, the responsibility tax.
Click to expand...
Touché. Make possessing unobtainium a requirement for possessing a gun and you make guns unobtainium. You can't buy insure to cover committing criminal acts, so make having such insurance mandatory and you've elimated the ability to own guns.

While it would be unlikely to be upheld by the courts, the fact that they would propose such a measure should result in a modern day equivalent of tar and feathering. Orange County. Enough said. It's a stain on this state.
 
noway2 said:
Section 14-409.44 states that anyone who intends to own or owns a firearm must carry $100,000 of liability insurance to cover damages from negligent or willful acts involving said firearm, including stolen but unreported ones.

Clearly these idiots don't understand how insurance works.
Click to expand...
I have a fairly large umbrella policy. Even covers if my dogs go nuts on an intruder.
This a55hat is just out for a power grab.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Long_Hunter said:
Passed first reading...SHAME!
Click to expand...
I think first reading is just to get it assigned to committee where it dies. I don't think that there is even an option to kill it, it just gets sent to die a lonely death.
 
Keep an eye on this. If anyone is in the area of a supporter then run against them. It may take enough votes away, or you might win!

-R
 
The cost of introducing such a bill should be their jobs at the next election cycle.
 
Sent my disappointment and disapproval to our state rep a minute ago.
 
It is likely that one day idiots like this will have a majority in the legislature. Are you willing to do what's necessary to be free or will you bow before them because you fear what you know in the deepest parts of your being what needs to be done? Are you prepared to take such action against those you've been programmed to believe are an "authority"? (Hint, they're not really).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom