The Second Amendment is Sacrosanct. The First? Not So Much.

This goes beyond the fruitless endeavor of preemptively nullifying federal law to banning proposals for new laws.

Yesterday, Missouri state Rep. Mike Leara (R) proposed legislation making it a felony for lawmakers to so much as propose many bills regulating guns. Leara’s bill provides that “[a]ny member of the general assembly who proposes a piece of legislation that further restricts the right of an individual to bear arms, as set forth under the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States, shall be guilty of a class D felony.”

As ThinkProgress points out, this would be unconstitutional under the Missouri Constitution in addition to the United States Constitution, with the latter being more obvious.

But, you know, I’m sure Mike Leara is a strict constitutional “originalist” at heart.

Missouri State Rep. Mike Leara

  • Victor_the_Crab

    I propose legislation that would make individuals like Mike Leara who come up with legislation that reads “ignorantly stupid” on the intelligence meter like the one he just proposed, to be automatically found guilty of being a douchebag and immediatly be sentenced to a swift kick in their nutsack by a steel toed boot.

  • tommo

    Is there a list of all the well-regulated militia’s these nutjobs belong to, report to, get their training and ammo from, that hold them accountable for each weapons’ discharge, etc.? Will Mike Leara cry and stomp his iddy biddy feet when he learns he cannot by a bazooka, flame thrower, or small nuke?

    • stacib23

      I was in a gun debate a couple days ago with a person that trains people on how to shoot. His response when I brought up the militia piece of the 2nd amendment – “people really don’t understand what the word militia means”. After that, I was pretty much done. How does one argue with that kind of reasoning?

  • GrafZeppelin127

    I think I may have finally stumped the gun nuts.

    I posted a couple of comments over at HuffPo (look here and here), arguing (tongue firmly in cheek) that gun manufacturers and sellers are infringing on my absolute, unconditional, God-given natural right to Keep and Bear Arms, by making me pay money for those guns and charging more than I’m able, or willing, to pay. After all, if this is a God-given natural right, as many gun fans insist that it is, then there should be no preconditions whatsoever to my ability to exercise that right. The Second Amendment does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to “the right to keep and bear [only those] Arms [that you can afford, or that you’re willing to pay for].” Neither does it specify that only the government is forbidden from infringing on my right to bear Arms; unlike the First Amendment, which says “Congress shall make no law…”, the Second Amendment is phrased in the passive: “…shall not be infringed,” but it doesn’t specify by whom. Therefore the right can’t “be infringed” by anyone, in any way, ever.

    The best they could do is accuse me of wanting “free stuff.” How about that?

    • Draxiar

      Bravo Graf!

    • David Latona

      Excellent argument! Highlighting the ultimate absurdity of the 2nd Amendment is exactly what more and more gun control advocates should be doing. Congrats.

  • Draxiar

    Shoot him. See how he feels about it then.

  • LeShan Jones

    As I often say, the republican’ts dont really believe in the Constitution.

    They believe in the NRAs definition of the second amendment (as opposed to the real definition of the second amendment… )
    and they only believe in (part) of the first amendment for themselves only.
    They would overturn the whole thing if they could.

    • Treading_Water

      The only parts of the Constitution that they believe in are the 2nd amendment, the 10th amendment, and a couple of the 10 amendments that the founding father Moses gave unto our country.