Rick Perry to Meet, Recruit CT and NY Gun Manufacturers to Texas

[TX69]

Rick Perry to Meet, Recruit CT and NY Gun Manufacturers to Texas

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) will be in Connecticut June 17 to meet with firearm manufacturers who find their businesses penalized and hampered by the new gun control laws enacted by Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy (D) on April 4.

Perry will also meet with some firearm manufactures in New York whose businesses face new regulations under the gun control laws Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) signed in January.
Connecticut-based firearm companies include Colt, Ruger, Mossberg, and Stag Arms. Of these, Mossberg already sent a letter to Connecticut Gov. Malloy, voicing their disapproval of the anti-gun climate in the state.

ETA:

 

[Younggun]

I bet those govs are searching for a way to ban perry from their state.

You know it's got to piss them off immensely.

 

[oldguy]

Hope Perry gets Stag Arms from Connecticut. good company IMO.

 

[TX69]

I bet those govs are searching for a way to ban perry from their state.

You know it's got to piss them off immensely.

They'd have to close the airport since there are MANY states throwing out offers to get them to move lol.

 

[macshooter]

Man wouldn't it be great if Texas became the gun manufacturing center of the world. Then we could secede and tell the rest of the country to suck it.

 

[rushthezeppelin]

Man wouldn't it be great if Texas became the gun manufacturing center of the world. Then we could secede and tell the rest of the country to suck it.

Speaking of which I think its high time we reignite the secession fire under Perry's butt again. Probably our last hope for avoiding all out revolution at this point. Becoming pretty obvious that there is little hope of changing the DC dog and pony show.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[Dred]

He needs Cruz at his side.

 

[AcidFlashGordon]

Aw, he pissed off the Kommiefornians. They'll probably try to pass some legislation to prevent businesses from moving or to prevent out-of-state advertisements for business opportunities. I wouldn't put it past the dipshits in the Peoples' Socialist Яepublik of Kalifornia to propose some stupidity like that.

 

[PPTerry]

.....

 

[inceptor]

Speaking of which I think its high time we reignite the secession fire under Perry's butt again. Probably our last hope for avoiding all out revolution at this point. Becoming pretty obvious that there is little hope of changing the DC dog and pony show.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

People are working on that right now

 

[Eagles1181]

I mainly want to see the companies move. Moving to Texas would be a bonus. I want states to see very tangible ecenomic impart of gun control legislation.

Philip

Sent with Tapatalk and my Galaxy S3
Please excuse any tpyos.

 

[M. Sage]

Aw, he pissed off the Kommiefornians. They'll probably try to pass some legislation to prevent businesses from moving or to prevent out-of-state advertisements for business opportunities. I wouldn't put it past the dipshits in the Peoples' Socialist Яepublik of Kalifornia to propose some stupidity like that.

They've been throwing around ideas to tax the piss out of businesses that relocate for a while now. They've even thrown out the idea of taxing wealthy individuals who leave.

But then, what do you expect from a state that has taxed the amount of income tax you pay them? With them, the only answers are tax, spend and ban.

 

[PPTerry]

.....

 

[M. Sage]

Not to pick nits, but it wouldn't be treason, it would be sedition. Well, unless it comes down to a shooting match over the question...

 

[Younggun]

Well, when I worked for a federal agency I took an oath to protect & defend the US Constitution...against all enemies....I no longer work for the federal government, but my oath is still binding. I believe talk of secession could be considered treasonous by many parties, especially those that monitor these websites.

A newspaper editor I once knew expressed the sentiment that the Civil War settled the question of secession, once & for all. I'm inclined to agree with him. Any perogative to secede which the Treaty of Annexation might have given to Texas was forfeited when Texas seceded and joined the Confederacy. Texas' membership in the Confederate States of America and the CSA's subsequent defeat by the Union inextricably bound Texas to the USA.

When I was in the military I took that same oath.

According to that oath the military should probably be surrounding Washington right now to get rid of all the domestic enemies holed up there.

The civil war didn't settle anything relating to secession. The US invaded a sovereign nation and won after four years of the bloodiest fighting in this nations history.

Yes, it is sedition. But that's not always a bad thing. It's the reason this country exists. If they wanted me for it they would have gotten me when I signed the petition on whitehouse.org. More to send a message than belief that it would actually happen.

To say a state has no right to secede is saying that we aren't really free. Also, if a state declares it's independence it is probably not concerned with breaking the laws if a nation it doesn't consider itself to be part of.

That may cause a strong difference of opinion that must be settled one way or another, but you don't really own something if you have to kill it to make it yours.

 

[winchster]

When I was in the military I took that same oath.

According to that oath the military should probably be surrounding Washington right now to get rid of all the domestic enemies holed up there.

The civil war didn't settle anything relating to secession. The US invaded a sovereign nation and won after four years of the bloodiest fighting in this nations history.

Yes, it is sedition. But that's not always a bad thing. It's the reason this country exists. If they wanted me for it they would have gotten me when I signed the petition on whitehouse.org. More to send a message than belief that it would actually happen.

To say a state has no right to secede is saying that we aren't really free. Also, if a state declares it's independence it is probably not concerned with breaking the laws if a nation it doesn't consider itself to be part of.

That may cause a strong difference of opinion that must be settled one way or another, but you don't really own something if you have to kill it to make it yours.

Well spoken. Well spoken indeed.

 

[inceptor]

You should try reading this:

Articles of Confederation : March 1, 1781

To all to whom these Presents shall come, we the undersigned Delegates of the States affixed to our Names send greeting.

Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
[h=3]I.[/h]The Stile of this Confederacy shall be

"The United States of America".​

[h=3]II.[/h] Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

[h=3]III.
[/h]The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.


No where does it say that once you enter into this agreement, it cannot be broken. Article II states "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence". Are you saying that now the federal govt trumps this and the constitution?

 

[breakingcontact]

True story, I thought I saw Gov Perry in Academy one night. But on examination of the hair, decided it wasn't him.