Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant wants to block Obama's federal gun actions - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Minutes after the U.S. president laid out a 23-point plan for gun control, Gov. Phil Bryant and House Speaker Philip Gunn said they would block any federal measures limiting the right to bear and possess arms from being enforced in Mississippi. At a press conference hosted by Gunn and the Republican Caucus immediately following Obama’s address, State Rep. Chris Brown, R-Aberdeen, said he is drafting legislation to say that firearms manufactured in Mississippi would fall under state law and wouldn’t be subjected to federal regulations. Gunn said bad people, not guns kill. He said Mississippi is a rural state and in some places it can take law enforcement 15 to 20 minutes to respond to an emergency at a home in a rural area. “Guns are the only protection some people have,” Gunn said. The conference was scheduled shortly after Bryant sent a [URL="http://www.clarionledger.com/assets/pdf/D0199315116.PDF"][B]letter[/B][/URL] from his [URL="https://twitter.com/PhilBryantMS"][B]official Twitter account[/B][/URL] this morning to Lt. Gov. Tate Reeves and House Speaker Philip Gunn, R-Clinton, in anticipation of Obama signing an executive order addressing firearms. The president's executive actions include ordering federal agencies to make more data available for background checks. He also proposed a potential ban of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones used in the Newtown, Conn., school shooting. Bryant said he isn’t opposed to background checks and enforcing laws already on the books, but he doesn’t believe in limiting the type of guns or ammunition a person can possess. Bryant said criminals will still be able to get assault weapons and ammunition, and a ban would only hamper law abiding citizens who use their weapons for sporting or self-protection. “When it’s for self protection, you need as much firepower as needed to protect your family,” Bryant said. Backed by about 30 Republican lawmakers and a couple of Democratic lawmakers, Bryant and Gunn said they pledge to protect the 2nd Amendment rights. Brown, Bryant and Gunn expressed sympathy for the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting last month, calling it a senseless act. Bryant said in his letter to Gunn and Reeves that several states have introduced similar measures to stifle the executive order, which he called an “overreaching and anti-constitutional violation of our rights as American citizens.”[/QUOTE] Amen. Source: [URL]http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20130116/NEWS/301160042/Mississippi-Gov-Phil-Bryant-wants-to-block-Obama-s-federal-gun-actions?nclick_check=1[/URL]

[quote] At a press conference hosted by Gunn and the Republican Caucus immediately following Obama’s address, State Rep. Chris Brown, R-Aberdeen, said he is drafting legislation to say that firearms manufactured in Mississippi would fall under state law and wouldn’t be subjected to federal regulations. [/quote] Someone doesn't understand how the supremacy clause works

[QUOTE=scout1;39255940]Someone doesn't understand how the supremacy clause works[/QUOTE] IIRC, Montana was going to abolish the NFA/FOPA/GCA on state level, and was asking North Dakota, South Dakota, and Idaho to do the same. Edit: Found it: [url=http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/02/04/montana-firearms-freedom-act/] Montana Firearms Freedom Act(MFFA)[/url]

If it took a long time for police to reach where I live, I would want a pretty bad-ass gun I guess.

Way to go, Mississippi! Others will follow suit, no doubt.

better idea then a complete ban would be that for any weapon everyone in you're household over the age of 16 must undergo background checks and psych evals, and everyone must take a gun safety course, and provide proof that you own a gun locker

[QUOTE=Glitchman;39256018]If it took a long time for police to reach where I live, I would want a pretty bad-ass gun I guess.[/QUOTE] I live near a city, it's kinda farm country here and the response times are utter shite. Basically everyone here is armed and honestly I can't blame them. When it comes to a life-or-death situation, the only person you should ever trust with your life is yourself.

[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;39256238]I live near a city, it's kinda farm country here and the response times are utter shite. Basically everyone here is armed and honestly I can't blame them. When it comes to a life-or-death situation, the only person you should ever trust with your life is yourself.[/QUOTE] Local sheriff's office here can take roughly 20 minutes or more due to low manpower. They can not put anymore deputies on the road because of the lack of funds to be able to.

[QUOTE=HkSniper;39256261]Local sheriff's office here can take roughly 20 minutes or more due to low manpower. They can not put anymore deputies on the road because of the lack of funds to be able to.[/QUOTE] Once my sister accidentally called 911 and hung up out of panic. I didn't answer the phone when they called back because I assumed it was one of her friends. It took at least 15 minutes until the police officer arrived at my door. This is in a town that's not more than a kilometer wide and 2 kilometers (generous estimate) long, in the middle of the night, with no traffic on the roads. You can't rely on the police for everything, response times in this country are not that good.

I'm pro gun ownership but, just as with the Oregon sheriff, this is not the governor's decision to make. If a governor said that he would block any federal law guaranteeing the right for gays to marry, most everyone here would be up in arms. Endorsing the circumvention of the established legal processes when it's for a cause you support is misguided and just a little bit hypocritical.

[QUOTE=scout1;39255940]Someone doesn't understand how the supremacy clause works[/QUOTE] What is the 10th amendment? What is D.C. vs Heller?

[QUOTE=Broseph_;39256557]What is the 10th amendment? What is D.C. vs Heller?[/QUOTE] Yet none of that makes a lick of difference. Let's say, for example, Obama does something wildly unconstitutional. [B]THE STATES DO NOT GET A SAY IN WHETHER IT IS OR IS NOT.[/B] The supreme court could rule on it and strike it down, not the states. Governors do not get to [I]pick and choose[/I] what federal laws they want to follow.

[QUOTE=scout1;39256583]Yet none of that makes a lick of difference. Let's say, for example, Obama does something wildly unconstitutional. [B]THE STATES DO NOT GET A SAY IN WHETHER IT IS OR IS NOT.[/B] The supreme court could rule on it and strike it down, not the states. Governors do not get to [I]pick and choose[/I] what federal laws they want to follow.[/QUOTE] They don't, but it's like legalizing pot. No state cop in California will arrest you for it, but federal agents can.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;39256381]Once my sister accidentally called 911 and hung up out of panic. I didn't answer the phone when they called back because I assumed it was one of her friends. It took at least 15 minutes until the police officer arrived at my door. This is in a town that's not more than a kilometer wide and 2 kilometers (generous estimate) long, in the middle of the night, with no traffic on the roads. You can't rely on the police for everything, response times in this country are not that good.[/QUOTE] you have to remember, your call gets set in a priority queue. It may take a while for the police to get dispatched. Once dispatched, the average time is around 5-8 minutes. Blame dispatch and people who dont move over for emergency vehicles