You're welcome, humans!
First up, Montana crazy person Gary Marbut has proposed a "Sheriffs First" bill that would, in defiance of the Constitution, years of legal precedent and common sense, give local Sheriffs supremacy over Federal Law enforcement officers. Not only would FBI, ATF or Federal Marshalls have to get permission from the local yokel sheriff before arresting anyone, if they failed to do so the ensuing arrest would be considered kidnapping and the Federal agent could be arrested and charged.
Hey, who do you trust more?
Montana Bill Would Let Sheriffs Arrest FBI Agents for Arresting People
If Montana voters approve Gary Marbut's referendum in November 2014, any FBI agent who tries to arrest a Montanan for a federal crime could be arrested—and charged with kidnapping.
Marbut's "Sheriffs First" bill, which cleared a Montana state Senate committee last week, makes it a crime for a federal agent to take any law-enforcement steps without first getting permission from the county sheriff.
This might sound like the sort of whack-a-doo idea that would have no chance of passing, but. . .
The proposal already passed both houses of the Legislature once, in 2011, but was vetoed by then-Gov. Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat.
In Missouri, nutbag legislator Mike Leara has proposed a law which would make proposing a law against the law. Sounds complicated, but it isn't. In fact, the entire bill is only one sentence:
578.460. Any 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.
So if any member of the Missouri legislature were to propose, say, limiting magazine size or keeping assault weapons out of the hands of criminals, that legislator would himself become a criminal, but would probably still be able to own a small arsenal, because FREEDOMMMMMMMM!!!!!
I'm not sure what the legal theory is behind this, what interpretation of what law makes this lunatic think this law would stand up to the slightest legal scrutiny, but I think it's probably based on the legal precedent of Because I Want To v. Fuck You.
Not to be outdone, ironically named South Carolina State Senator Lee Bright has proposed a bill that would have high schools teach classes about guns.
I'm pretty sure this is not him, but Google image search seems to think she is.
Bright says he got the idea after hearing from older constituents who “remembered the days” when students could join a rifle team or learn about shooting during a school day. “We’ve got football, we’ve got basketball, and we’ve got baseball,” says Bright. “I think if they had a hunting team, it would be a great idea.
If there's any substantive difference between a basketball and a loaded rifle, I have yet to see it!
And then, of course, there's Kansas.
Kansas, where they want to pass a law requiring teachers to lie to their students.
Bill asks teachers to question climate change in class
HB2306 calls climate change 'scientific controversy'
House Bill 2306, introduced last week, says science classes must “provide information to students of scientific evidence which both supports and counters a scientific theory or hypothesis.”
Like gravity, or the Earth being round.
The bill says instruction about “scientific controversies” should be objective and include “both the strengths and weaknesses of such scientific theory or hypothesis.” The only controversy identified in the bill is “climate science.”
Because only 97% of scientist agree about global warming. That's hardly a consensus! Obviously both sides should get their viewpoints aired. Both the scientists funded by Exxon-Mobil and those funded by the Koch Brothers!
Well, that's enough for one night. I'm sure there are many more CRAAAAAAAZY laws being proposed by Republicans throughout this great land. There are damn sure more adorable kittens!
