Bill in Missouri would require every person between the age of 18 and 35 to own an AR-15

[Swordsmyth]

https://twitter.com/NewsBreaking/status/1106707708638449664

1106707708638449664

[Stratovarious]

How about every 'household' .

I doubt this bill goes anywhere though.

There was a city ordinance somewhere that required
gun ownership.

[brushfire]

Certainly much better than the other extreme. Why not mandate the SR25?

[oyarde]

Excellent . Tax refunds for arming oneself .

[Pauls' Revere]

Another mandate?

[jon4liberty]

If it gets through committee he plans on scrapping the mandate and just focusing on tax break.

[Krugminator2]

I mean. What? This is *almost* as anti-liberty as taking away AR-15's. What a terrible idea. And no. The government should not be giving tax breaks for owning guns. Just like the government should not be giving tax breaks to buy Teslas or homes or solar panels or having kids and just like the government shouldn't be putting extra taxes on things like sodas or cigarettes.

[phill4paul]

Never looked into it before, can a state require it's citizens to serve in it's militia?

ETA: Why yes, in Colonial times every able-bodied man was required to serve and furnish weapons.

[Swordsmyth]

Never looked into it before, can a state require it's citizens to serve in it's militia?
I believe there are laws that say they can.

[Krugminator2]

Never looked into it before, can a state require it's citizens to serve in it's militia?

Slavery was abolished. And thank god Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand laid the foundation for ending the draft.

[Pauls' Revere]

I mean. What? This is *almost* as anti-liberty as taking away AR-15's. What a terrible idea. And no. The government should not be giving tax breaks for owning guns. Just like the government should not be giving tax breaks to buy Teslas or homes or solar panels or having kids and just like the government shouldn't be putting extra taxes on things like sodas or cigarettes.

That's how they pick winners and losers and modify our behavior.

[Swordsmyth]

The Constitution requires Congress to arm the militia and the law defines all able bodied adult males as the militia.

[kona]

Preparation for secession?

[phill4paul]

Slavery was abolished. And thank god Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand laid the foundation for ending the draft.

I have no problem with a State requiring militia service and firearms and tactics training annually. It might do the populace some damned good. Even at 54 I'd be more than happy to contribute.

[kona]

Per zerohedge, bill was introduced to highlight absurdity of gun control laws. McDaniel says if it was actually going to advance in the state legislature, he would strip out the mandate and just focus on the tax credit.

[Stratovarious]

I have no problem with a State requiring militia service and firearms and tactics training annually. It might do the populace some damned good. Even at 54 I'd be more than happy to contribute.


I must kindly ask you and your friends to get off my lawn......youngster.....

[oyarde]

Never looked into it before, can a state require it's citizens to serve in it's militia?

ETA: Why yes, in Colonial times every able-bodied man was required to serve and furnish weapons.

Indiana state constitution specifies age for militia . Age 17 your in . Governor is commander in chief . There will be an Adjutant General who will be appointed by the Gov . 1974 amended to allow conscientious objectors a pass . Indiana also has an Indiana Guard Reserve that serves under the Governor . Ist Brigade HQ Fort Wayne , three Battalions , 2nd Brigade HQ Lafayette , 3rd Brigade HQ Bedford , four Battalions , 4th Brigade HQ Shelbyville , three battalions . These are to cover ea quarter of the state .

[Anti Globalist]

Get rid of the mandate and it'll be all good.

[oyarde]

It has more standing for a mandate than health insurance . LOL , based on that alone any court challenge would be a waste of time .

[nobody's_hero]

Honestly if they're gonna do this, they might as well revive the militia (I'm talking about formal militias the way they used to be run by the states, not treating it like some secret club where you dress up in camo and shoot pop bottles). I think formal recognition by the states would go a long way in taking some of the taboo factor away from the concept of militias. They could always do some sort of conscientious objector exemption like Kennesaw, GA has.

[phill4paul]

Honestly if they're gonna do this, they might as well revive the militia (I'm talking about formal militias the way they used to be run by the states, not treating it like some secret club where you dress up in camo and shoot pop bottles). I think formal recognition by the states would go a long way in taking some of the taboo factor away from the concept of militias. They could always do some sort of conscientious objector exemption like Kennesaw, GA has.

I agree 100%. The Governor is the commander. Plenty of ex-military to put together specifics. Command structure, logistics, etc. Conscientious objectors can train and serve as medics or leave the state.

[kona]

A lot more happening in Missouri:

https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/02/20/missouri-senate-votes-to-nullify-federal-gun-control-23-10/

[jon4liberty]

SB613 is huge! Every state should be "shooting" for these bills passing their house, senate, and then the governor's desk.

[Swordsmyth]

A lot more happening in Missouri:

https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/02/20/missouri-senate-votes-to-nullify-federal-gun-control-23-10/


SB613 is huge! Every state should be "shooting" for these bills passing their house, senate, and then the governor's desk.

:up:

[Anti Federalist]

There was a city ordinance somewhere that required
gun ownership.

Kennesaw GA. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia)

Kennesaw is noted for its unique firearms legislation in response to Morton Grove, Illinois' law mandating gun prohibition. In 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21]:[21]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

Crime statistics

In 2001, violent crime rates were about 60% below national and state rates. Property crime rates were from 46–56% below national and state rates. From 1999 to 2011, Kennesaw crime statistics reported that both property and violent crimes had decreased, though from 2003 to 2008 the trend in both violent and property crime rates slightly increased.[19] The increase in crime rate overall is attributed to the population growth rate of 37.41%. The population growth rate is much higher than the state average rate of 18.34% and is much higher than the national average rate of 9.71%.[20]

[Stratovarious]

Kennesaw GA. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia)

Kennesaw is noted for its unique firearms legislation in response to Morton Grove, Illinois' law mandating gun prohibition. In 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21]:[21]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

Crime statistics

In 2001, violent crime rates were about 60% below national and state rates. Property crime rates were from 46–56% below national and state rates. From 1999 to 2011, Kennesaw crime statistics reported that both property and violent crimes had decreased, though from 2003 to 2008 the trend in both violent and property crime rates slightly increased.[19] The increase in crime rate overall is attributed to the population growth rate of 37.41%. The population growth rate is much higher than the state average rate of 18.34% and is much higher than the national average rate of 9.71%.[20]


I found a few other cities with like ordinances; mandatory and suggested firearm (and ammo thereof) .
The one I that I was thinking of was Spring City Utah, but yea, it looks like Kennesaw started
the concept in 'this' era. I would imagine that up through the 1800's each household had
several to many firearms, in all rural towns.




Nelson, Georgia
2013.
Mandatory

Nucla, Colorado
Year ; 2013

Gun Barrel City, Texas

Virgin, Utah
year; 2000
Mandatory

Spring City changed the ordinance wording to
recommend 'firearm in every home'

[TheTexan]

Requiring every man to have an AR-15 seems a bit excessive.

A Remington 300 is more than adequate, if this bill's intention is to reduce the local deer population.

[Superfluous Man]

What is the punishment for people who refuse?

[Stratovarious]

What is the punishment for people who refuse?

None , not enforced.

At least one of the cities as I mentioned reworded the ordinance as recommended,
wording that they should all use.

[Superfluous Man]

None , not enforced.

At least one of the cities as I mentioned reworded the ordinance as recommended,
wording that they should all use.

Are you talking about the bill introduced in Missouri? Or some other city ordinance in "one of the cities you mentioned"?

[Stratovarious]

Are you talking about the bill introduced in Missouri? Or some other city ordinance in "one of the cities you mentioned"?

Anywhere.

No City should 'mandate' this kind of ordinance .

[Superfluous Man]

Anywhere.

No City should 'mandate' this kind of ordinance .

I totally agree. But the link in the OP isn't clear about what this bill does, and it says it does require it.

[Krugminator2]

Conscientious objectors can train and serve as medics or leave the state.

I have a better idea. Instead of anti-slavery people leaving the state, politicians who reinstate slavery (which is exactly what requiring military or militia service is) can leave the earth- in a body bag. Drafting someone into a militia or the military is the most evil thing a government can do.

"Of all the statist violations of individual rights in a mixed economy, the military draft is the worst......One of the notions used by all sides to justify the draft, is that “rights impose obligations.” Obligations, to whom?—and imposed, by whom? Ideologically, that notion is worse than the evil it attempts to justify: it implies that rights are a gift from the state, and that a man has to buy them by offering something (his life) in return. "

Ayn 3:16 http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/draft.html

[Stratovarious]

I totally agree. But the link in the OP isn't clear about what this bill does, and it says it does require it.

I don't believe anyone enforces it, they're trying to instill in their towns that we should
rely on ourselves for protection which would mean with firearms, and not expect law enforcement
to stop crime, they can't , they can't protect any of us from thugs.
The attempt is to send a very clear message that they are in full support of the 2nd amendment.

It should be changed like some of the other towns, 'encouraged' to highly encouraged.


They wouldn't be out of line to offer incentives to self 'arm' as it will ease the burden of law
enforcement, through diminished frequencies of assaults/ home invasions etc.

[Superfluous Man]

I don't believe anyone enforces it

There's nothing to enforce. It's not a law yet, just a bill that will never pass or even come up for a vote that some legislator introduced to be cute. But I would want to know what the bill actually says before praising or condemning it.

[Stratovarious]

There's nothing to enforce. It's not a law yet, just a bill that will never pass or even come up for a vote that some legislator introduced to be cute. But I would want to know what the bill actually says before praising or condemning it.

If you said blue was blue and I agreed , you'd find a way to turn it into a fkg argument.

:facepalm:

[Swordsmyth]

If you said blue was blue and I agreed , you'd find a way to turn it into a fkg argument.

:facepalm:
Yup.

[kona]

I totally agree. But the link in the OP isn't clear about what this bill does, and it says it does require it.
"If the bills were to actually advance in the state legislature, McDaniel says that he would strip out the ownership mandates and focus on tax credits."
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-16/missouri-bill-would-require-every-resident-aged-18-34-possess-ar-15

[kona]

https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/02/20/missouri-senate-votes-to-nullify-federal-gun-control-23-10/
Focus on SB613!

The AR-15 bill was more to trigger the left than to accomplish anything.

[phill4paul]

I have a better idea. Instead of anti-slavery people leaving the state, politicians who reinstate slavery (which is exactly what requiring military or militia service is) can leave the earth- in a body bag. Drafting someone into a militia or the military is the most evil thing a government can do.

"Of all the statist violations of individual rights in a mixed economy, the military draft is the worst......One of the notions used by all sides to justify the draft, is that “rights impose obligations.” Obligations, to whom?—and imposed, by whom? Ideologically, that notion is worse than the evil it attempts to justify: it implies that rights are a gift from the state, and that a man has to buy them by offering something (his life) in return. "

Ayn 3:16 http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/draft.html

I'm just throwing shade here, fella. No, I don't believe anyone should be compelled to fight. Just saddened that nobody is willing to fight for anything but lone white supremacists and Jihadists.
Everyone else seems quite the pussy these days.