When it comes to people’s rights, we need as few burdens as possible for the free exercise of those rights. Preemption is one effort to curtail efforts to restrict rights–gun rights, in particular.

Of course, a lot of people want to curtail those rights. They don’t like the idea that local communities cannot enforce stricter gun control laws.

In Missouri, one of the most pro-gun states in the nation, there’s an effort now underway seeking to put an end to preemption once and for all.

Following another weekend of violence in both St. Louis and Kansas City, Missouri voters could get to decide if counties should be allowed to enact their own firearm regulations.

Missouri is perceived by some to have some of the laxest gun laws in the country. Since the General Assembly isn’t making any moves to strengthen state statute, a new nonprofit said it wants to give counties the opportunity to approve their own rules on the access and carrying of firearms.

“When one goes from county to county, encounters different traffic laws, different regulations of all kinds, we see no reason why that same logic shouldn’t apply to firearm regulations,” Richard Rosenfeld said.

…

“The needs and preferences of residents in small, rural counties are not the same as those in larger, more urbanized counties,” Rosenfeld said. “We think the best way forward here is to permit counties to establish firearm regulations that meet their own needs.”

So Rosenfeld supports those smaller communities voting to ignore a state regulation if they so desire?

Like, let’s say he gets his way here and then down the road, Missouri approves an assault weapon ban. Yeah, I know that’s unlikely as things currently stand, but bear with me for a second.

Does Rosenfelt support a small county in the state voting to permit these weapons to be bought, sold, and owned within that county?

I think we all know the answer to that one. It’ll be a resounding, “No!”

That’s how you know this is a disingenuous argument. It’s not about local communities determining which laws fit their needs, it’s about maximizing the amount of gun control possible. That’s all it’s ever about.

States without preemption don’t allow rural communities to determine their own gun control rules. They’re still required to abide by what the state says. They just aren’t required to pass any of their own.

Yet if it were truly about self-determination for various communities, then anything should be on the table. The only gun control laws that should exist within the state are those that the local government determines for itself.

If Rosenfeld and his allies get this, don’t expect them to sit back and call it a day. They’ll start pushing for something else, something at the state level that local governments won’t be able to exempt themselves from.

This while cities pass more and more gun regulation and more and more law-abiding citizens get tripped up over gun charges.

What they want is as much gun control as possible covering as many people as possible. If they can’t blanket a state, then they want an end to preemption. If they can, well, they still don’t like preemption because they like cities to pass even more.

They’re not even being clever about hiding it.