Missouri House Votes to Nullify all Federal Gun Control Laws

[DmL5]

:thumb:

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/20 ... es-115-42/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Today, in the shadows of a pro gun-rights rally at the state capitol, the Missouri House voted to approve House Bill 436 (HB436), the 2nd Amendment Preservation Act, by a strong veto-proof majority.

Earlier this week, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed into law what many are calling the strongest state-level protection against federal infringements on the 2nd Amendment in the country. But that title might be short-lived, as Missouri’s HB436 (and the companion bill, SB325) up the ante.

The bill, which passed by a vote of 115-42, would nullify virtually all federal gun control measures on the books – “past, present, or future.”

<snip>

[DmL5]

All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

(2) Such federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations include, but are not limited to:
(a) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1934;
(b) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968;
(c) Any tax, levy, fee, or stamp imposed on firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition not common to all other goods and services which could have a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;
(d) Any registering or tracking of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which could have a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;
(e) Any registering or tracking of the owners of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which could have a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;
(f) Any act forbidding the possession, ownership, or use or transfer of any type of firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition by law-abiding citizens; and
(g) Any act ordering the confiscation of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition from law-abiding citizens.

[DmL5]

http://www.kcur.org/post/missouri-house ... ghts-rally" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Missouri House has passed the so-called Second Amendment Preservation Act, less than 24 hours after it received first-round approval from the same body.

House Bill 436 would do several things. They include making it a misdemeanor for any federal officer to try and enforce any federal gun control laws that conflict with a Missourian’s right to “keep or bear arms.” It would allow K-12 schools to designate an employee who’s also a conceal-carry holder to be an armed “school protection officer,” and it would lower the conceal carry age from 21 to 19.

<snip>

[500SWfan]

Go Mizzou :thumb:

[Rapier1772]

Go Mizzou :thumb:

Ditto! :clap:

[Cyberfly]

Wow...all this after they BLASTED MO reps on the radio for being so liberal and anti-gun?
I wonder? Are their congresscritters lib but their state reps conservative?

[PainKillaX]

I wonder how this will play out. It's like how Washington decriminalized marijuana but it is steal illegal federally. I bet BATFE will actually do something, unlike DEA, though... :laugh:

[DmL5]

Wow...all this after they BLASTED MO reps on the radio for being so liberal and anti-gun?
I wonder? Are their congresscritters lib but their state reps conservative?

Claire McCaskill and Jay Nixon are bad.

Other than that, we're doing pretty good. This bill passed by a veto-proof majority.

And McCaskill would've been booted for sure in the last election if weren't for the Todd Akin controversy.

[panzermk2]

Wow...all this after they BLASTED MO reps on the radio for being so liberal and anti-gun?
I wonder? Are their congresscritters lib but their state reps conservative?

Claire McCaskill and Jay Nixon are bad.

Other than that, we're doing pretty good. This bill passed by a veto-proof majority.

And McCaskill would've been booted for sure in the last election if weren't for the Todd Akin controversy.

:thumb:

[grimmond]

BATFE doesn't have then man power to do anything nor will they have any other effect on MO laws. It will be nothing more then attempts at legal wrangling and possible loss of federal funding help, just like Washington and the legalization of Marijuana.

[huddleston101]

:clap: Go MO I hope more states follow there example :clap:

[dhpierre]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St Louis will be importing brand new fully auto M16s or AK47s anytime soon, then they are higher than we can get here in CO with our "legal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

[Rapier1772]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand.

I'm glad you can put so much faith into our government to do the right thing :skep:

[dhpierre]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand.

I'm glad you can put so much faith into our government to do the right thing :skep:

I don't have any faith in our government to do the right thing :lmao: That's my point. The 1934 and 1968 gun laws are bad law and have been mostly upheld by the SCOTUS. If you think that the feds and the SCOTUS are going the let some jokers in the MO government rain on their parade then I just don't know what to tell ya. I'm sorry MO but it ain't gonna be happening for ya. I feel this way because I do have faith that our government will do the wrong thing.

[Mister Freeze]

No NFA in MO?

[Michigan Bob]

The problem you run in to is that you cannot have a state law that forces the violation of a federal law or restricts the right of the federal authorities to enforce federal law.

Not a lawyer but do know a little about this. Marijuana was mentioned. In Michigan we have a medical marijuana law (which is coming to a state near you soon...lol). The way it deals with the federal csa is that

1/ No one is required to get a license, and if they do get a license they are not REQUIRED to use it. So you can obey both Michigan Law (you can get a card that protects you from prosecution under state law) but you don't have to use it (so you are fine under federal law).

2/ The federal authorities can still enforce federal marijuana laws. This makes a difference because 99%+ of marijuana prosecutions are under state law alone.

A state cannot pass a law the either requires the violation of federal law, nor can it 'stop' federal agents from enforcing federal law. It can say that state law enforcement will not enforce federal law (it isn't their job, nor are they required to do it anyhow) or perhaps they will not turn cases over to the feds, but good luck trying to tell a fed they can't enforce federal law or trying to arrest them under state law for doing so.

Problem two, again from the marijuana laws in Michigan. There are many courts and cops that clearly know something is specifically legal under state law, but choose to enforce federal law because it suits them.

I am just as curious as the rest of you as to how this will play out. But honestly, I don't expect to see a stinger in a sporting goods store anytime soon.

Bob

[Reverend Herc]

We need to focus on the positive and not on the what if's. We need to encourage the representatives in the states that we live in to push for this type of legislation. We need to stop with the should of, could of, would of and send Missouri and Kansas representatives "thank you" emails. "I do not live in your state but I thank you for doing what is right!"

Godspeed

[grimmond]

Amen Reverend Herc.

[500SWfan]

Here are a couple brief accounts of the Kansas law signed into effect and alluded to in the OP.
http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/court ... rce=feedly" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism ... un-Control" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Eric Holder is "furious" :p

[Stitches1974]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills. The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now. There are still hoops to jump through to buy a full auto, but there won't be people importing full auto M16's and AK's to Missouri. No clue if the bills will pass. If it does, then I have an excuse to buy a suppressor or 2.

2 amendments to the bill that were approved:

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 04.01F.pdf


http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 03.13H.pdf

(2) In any jurisdiction in which open carry of firearms is prohibited by ordinance, open carry
of a firearm shall not be prohibited in accordance with the following:
(a) Any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement who is open carrying a firearm
shall be required to have a valid concealed carry endorsement from this state or a permit from
another state permit which is recognized by this state in his or her possession at all times;
(b) The open carrying of a firearm shall be limited to a firearm sixteen inches or less in
overall length;
(c) Any person open carrying a firearm in such jurisdiction shall display his or her concealed
carry endorsement upon demand of a law enforcement officer;
(d) In the absence of any reasonable and articular suspicion of criminal activity, no person
carrying a concealed or unconcealed handgun shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law
enforcement officer unless under arrest; and
(e) Any person who violates this subdivision shall be subject to the penalty provided in
section 571.121.

[Stitches1974]

Bill passed house yesterday: 116-38

http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and- ... 3e1c7.html

[dhpierre]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills. The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now. There are still hoops to jump through to buy a full auto, but there won't be people importing full auto M16's and AK's to Missouri. No clue if the bills will pass. If it does, then I have an excuse to buy a suppressor or 2.

2 amendments to the bill that were approved:

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 04.01F.pdf


http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 03.13H.pdf

(2) In any jurisdiction in which open carry of firearms is prohibited by ordinance, open carry
of a firearm shall not be prohibited in accordance with the following:
(a) Any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement who is open carrying a firearm
shall be required to have a valid concealed carry endorsement from this state or a permit from
another state permit which is recognized by this state in his or her possession at all times;
(b) The open carrying of a firearm shall be limited to a firearm sixteen inches or less in
overall length;
(c) Any person open carrying a firearm in such jurisdiction shall display his or her concealed
carry endorsement upon demand of a law enforcement officer;
(d) In the absence of any reasonable and articular suspicion of criminal activity, no person
carrying a concealed or unconcealed handgun shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law
enforcement officer unless under arrest; and
(e) Any person who violates this subdivision shall be subject to the penalty provided in
section 571.121.

You should re read the bill. There is nothing in the bill that says only guns made MO are exempt from the NFA. If you are referring to this subsection

"(8) The people of Missouri have vested the general assembly with the authority to regulate the manufacture, possession, exchange, and use of firearms within this state's borders, subject only to the limits imposed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Missouri Constitution."

then you are mistaken. Re read that subsection and you will see that you are wrong. :thumb:

[Stitches1974]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills. The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now. There are still hoops to jump through to buy a full auto, but there won't be people importing full auto M16's and AK's to Missouri. No clue if the bills will pass. If it does, then I have an excuse to buy a suppressor or 2.

2 amendments to the bill that were approved:

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 04.01F.pdf


http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 03.13H.pdf

(2) In any jurisdiction in which open carry of firearms is prohibited by ordinance, open carry
of a firearm shall not be prohibited in accordance with the following:
(a) Any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement who is open carrying a firearm
shall be required to have a valid concealed carry endorsement from this state or a permit from
another state permit which is recognized by this state in his or her possession at all times;
(b) The open carrying of a firearm shall be limited to a firearm sixteen inches or less in
overall length;
(c) Any person open carrying a firearm in such jurisdiction shall display his or her concealed
carry endorsement upon demand of a law enforcement officer;
(d) In the absence of any reasonable and articular suspicion of criminal activity, no person
carrying a concealed or unconcealed handgun shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law
enforcement officer unless under arrest; and
(e) Any person who violates this subdivision shall be subject to the penalty provided in
section 571.121.

You should re read the bill. There is nothing in the bill that says only guns made MO are exempt from the NFA. If you are referring to this subsection

"(8) The people of Missouri have vested the general assembly with the authority to regulate the manufacture, possession, exchange, and use of firearms within this state's borders, subject only to the limits imposed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Missouri Constitution."

then you are mistaken. Re read that subsection and you will see that you are wrong. :thumb:

I've read the bill and was at the reading of the bill on the gun rally day in Jefferson City. I'm not basing it off that sub section, but was read at the bills reading.
You can also read this link:http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_32/52551 ... _4_29.html

[dhpierre]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills. The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now. There are still hoops to jump through to buy a full auto, but there won't be people importing full auto M16's and AK's to Missouri. No clue if the bills will pass. If it does, then I have an excuse to buy a suppressor or 2.

2 amendments to the bill that were approved:

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 04.01F.pdf


http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 03.13H.pdf

(2) In any jurisdiction in which open carry of firearms is prohibited by ordinance, open carry
of a firearm shall not be prohibited in accordance with the following:
(a) Any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement who is open carrying a firearm
shall be required to have a valid concealed carry endorsement from this state or a permit from
another state permit which is recognized by this state in his or her possession at all times;
(b) The open carrying of a firearm shall be limited to a firearm sixteen inches or less in
overall length;
(c) Any person open carrying a firearm in such jurisdiction shall display his or her concealed
carry endorsement upon demand of a law enforcement officer;
(d) In the absence of any reasonable and articular suspicion of criminal activity, no person
carrying a concealed or unconcealed handgun shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law
enforcement officer unless under arrest; and
(e) Any person who violates this subdivision shall be subject to the penalty provided in
section 571.121.

You should re read the bill. There is nothing in the bill that says only guns made MO are exempt from the NFA. If you are referring to this subsection

"(8) The people of Missouri have vested the general assembly with the authority to regulate the manufacture, possession, exchange, and use of firearms within this state's borders, subject only to the limits imposed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Missouri Constitution."

then you are mistaken. Re read that subsection and you will see that you are wrong. :thumb:

I've read the bill and was at the reading of the bill on the gun rally day in Jefferson City. I'm not basing it off that sub section, but was read at the bills reading.
You can also read this link:http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_32/52551 ... _4_29.html

Well if you have read the bill then you already know that there is nothing in the bill that says anything about only guns and ammo made in the state of Missouri being exempt from Federal gun laws. Please show me the section that you believe says that. You wont be able to.

Further more, the authors of the bill have left a big "Catch 22" in the proposed bill. The proposed bill nullifies all Federal gun laws that they deem unconstitutional but does not nullify any existing Missouri gun laws, specifically 571.020., which makes illegal to knowingly possess, manufacture, transport, repair or sell a machine gun, a short-barreled rifle, short-barreled rifle shotgun, or a firearm silencer
without the appropriate Federal license.

So the proposed new law that nullifies proported unconstitutional Federal Gun laws lets stand existing Missouri gun laws that make it crime not to be in compliance with said proported unconstitutional Federal Gun laws. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The bottom line is that under our Constitution if the states determine that a law is unconstitutional they can take to the SCOTUS. If the states don't like the SCOTUS ruling we have a process to amend the Constitution. We should use it.

[Stitches1974]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills. The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now. There are still hoops to jump through to buy a full auto, but there won't be people importing full auto M16's and AK's to Missouri. No clue if the bills will pass. If it does, then I have an excuse to buy a suppressor or 2.

2 amendments to the bill that were approved:

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 04.01F.pdf


http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 03.13H.pdf

(2) In any jurisdiction in which open carry of firearms is prohibited by ordinance, open carry
of a firearm shall not be prohibited in accordance with the following:
(a) Any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement who is open carrying a firearm
shall be required to have a valid concealed carry endorsement from this state or a permit from
another state permit which is recognized by this state in his or her possession at all times;
(b) The open carrying of a firearm shall be limited to a firearm sixteen inches or less in
overall length;
(c) Any person open carrying a firearm in such jurisdiction shall display his or her concealed
carry endorsement upon demand of a law enforcement officer;
(d) In the absence of any reasonable and articular suspicion of criminal activity, no person
carrying a concealed or unconcealed handgun shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law
enforcement officer unless under arrest; and
(e) Any person who violates this subdivision shall be subject to the penalty provided in
section 571.121.

You should re read the bill. There is nothing in the bill that says only guns made MO are exempt from the NFA. If you are referring to this subsection

"(8) The people of Missouri have vested the general assembly with the authority to regulate the manufacture, possession, exchange, and use of firearms within this state's borders, subject only to the limits imposed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Missouri Constitution."

then you are mistaken. Re read that subsection and you will see that you are wrong. :thumb:

I've read the bill and was at the reading of the bill on the gun rally day in Jefferson City. I'm not basing it off that sub section, but was read at the bills reading.
You can also read this link:http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_32/52551 ... _4_29.html

Well if you have read the bill then you already know that there is nothing in the bill that says anything about only guns and ammo made in the state of Missouri being exempt from Federal gun laws. Please show me the section that you believe says that. You wont be able to.

Further more, the authors of the bill have left a big "Catch 22" in the proposed bill. The proposed bill nullifies all Federal gun laws that they deem unconstitutional but does not nullify any existing Missouri gun laws, specifically 571.020., which makes illegal to knowingly possess, manufacture, transport, repair or sell a machine gun, a short-barreled rifle, short-barreled rifle shotgun, or a firearm silencer
without the appropriate Federal license.

So the proposed new law that nullifies proported unconstitutional Federal Gun laws lets stand existing Missouri gun laws that make it crime not to be in compliance with said proported unconstitutional Federal Gun laws. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The bottom line is that under our Constitution if the states determine that a law is unconstitutional they can take to the SCOTUS. If the states don't like the SCOTUS ruling we have a process to amend the Constitution. We should use it.

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... B0170I.htm


Section A. Chapter 571, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 571.048, to read as follows:
571.048. 1. It shall be unlawful for any officer or employee of this state, or any political subdivision, or any federal firearms dealer licensed under 19 U.S.C. Section 923 to enforce or attempt to enforce any act, law, statute, rule, or regulation of the federal government relating to a personal firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that is owned or manufactured commercially or privately in the state of Missouri and that remains exclusively within the boundaries of the state of Missouri.

You were saying?

[dhpierre]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills. The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now. There are still hoops to jump through to buy a full auto, but there won't be people importing full auto M16's and AK's to Missouri. No clue if the bills will pass. If it does, then I have an excuse to buy a suppressor or 2.

2 amendments to the bill that were approved:

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 04.01F.pdf


http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... 03.13H.pdf

(2) In any jurisdiction in which open carry of firearms is prohibited by ordinance, open carry
of a firearm shall not be prohibited in accordance with the following:
(a) Any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement who is open carrying a firearm
shall be required to have a valid concealed carry endorsement from this state or a permit from
another state permit which is recognized by this state in his or her possession at all times;
(b) The open carrying of a firearm shall be limited to a firearm sixteen inches or less in
overall length;
(c) Any person open carrying a firearm in such jurisdiction shall display his or her concealed
carry endorsement upon demand of a law enforcement officer;
(d) In the absence of any reasonable and articular suspicion of criminal activity, no person
carrying a concealed or unconcealed handgun shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law
enforcement officer unless under arrest; and
(e) Any person who violates this subdivision shall be subject to the penalty provided in
section 571.121.

You should re read the bill. There is nothing in the bill that says only guns made MO are exempt from the NFA. If you are referring to this subsection

"(8) The people of Missouri have vested the general assembly with the authority to regulate the manufacture, possession, exchange, and use of firearms within this state's borders, subject only to the limits imposed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Missouri Constitution."

then you are mistaken. Re read that subsection and you will see that you are wrong. :thumb:

I've read the bill and was at the reading of the bill on the gun rally day in Jefferson City. I'm not basing it off that sub section, but was read at the bills reading.
You can also read this link:http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_32/52551 ... _4_29.html

Well if you have read the bill then you already know that there is nothing in the bill that says anything about only guns and ammo made in the state of Missouri being exempt from Federal gun laws. Please show me the section that you believe says that. You wont be able to.

Further more, the authors of the bill have left a big "Catch 22" in the proposed bill. The proposed bill nullifies all Federal gun laws that they deem unconstitutional but does not nullify any existing Missouri gun laws, specifically 571.020., which makes illegal to knowingly possess, manufacture, transport, repair or sell a machine gun, a short-barreled rifle, short-barreled rifle shotgun, or a firearm silencer
without the appropriate Federal license.

So the proposed new law that nullifies proported unconstitutional Federal Gun laws lets stand existing Missouri gun laws that make it crime not to be in compliance with said proported unconstitutional Federal Gun laws. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The bottom line is that under our Constitution if the states determine that a law is unconstitutional they can take to the SCOTUS. If the states don't like the SCOTUS ruling we have a process to amend the Constitution. We should use it.

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... B0170I.htm


Section A. Chapter 571, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 571.048, to read as follows:
571.048. 1. It shall be unlawful for any officer or employee of this state, or any political subdivision, or any federal firearms dealer licensed under 19 U.S.C. Section 923 to enforce or attempt to enforce any act, law, statute, rule, or regulation of the federal government relating to a personal firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that is owned or manufactured commercially or privately in the state of Missouri and that remains exclusively within the boundaries of the state of Missouri.

You were saying?

Exactly. You just proved yourself wrong. You said "Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now" The amendment that you quoted says nothing like that. It refers to "a personal firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that is owned or manufactured commercially or privately in the state of Missouri and that remains exclusively within the boundaries of the state of Missouri" The personal firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that is owned part says nothing about where that owned item was manufactured. That owned item could have been made anywhere.

Words have meaning. Read it again.

[Stitches1974]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills.The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now.

Yep you need to re read. YOU were the one talking about full auto M16's being imported, as an example. I said they could NOT, because they are not made in Missouri. I just added clarification. If this bill passes and is put into law, full autos MADE IN MISSOURI will be legal ( still with hoops to jump though ).

Some people are so hard headed.

EDIT: I still not be the first one to jump in and buy something, until the waters have been tested and proven to be not prosecutable.

[dhpierre]

It's cool that the MO state reps have nothing better to do than waste their time voting on unconstitutional laws that will probably never make it into law and if they do the the feds and the SCOTUS will never let them stand. If anyone thinks that someone from St L ... egal" pot. :lmao: If I'm wrong, then cool, I'm moving there.

Re read the bills.The NFA that they refer to has to be made in Missouri. Anything made outside of Missouri will have the same regulations as they do now.

Yep you need to re read. YOU were the one talking about full auto M16's being imported. I said they could NOT, because they are not made in Missouri. I just added clarification. If this bill passes and is put into law, full autos MADE IN MISSOURI will be legal ( still with hoops to jump though ).

Some people are so hard headed.

EDIT: I still not be the first one to jump in and buy something, until the waters have been tested and proven to be not prosecutable.

I just give up on you. You just don't get it. Anyhow I've wasted enough time with trying to explain it to you. Believe what you want, it really doesn't matter anyway.

[Stitches1974]

I'm just clarifying your example and letting what is going on in regards to the op. I live in Missouri's capital and somewhat active with the bills being pushed through that deal with 2A. Just a question, are you from Missouri and do you go to the bill readings?

[Rapier1772]

Looks like it is getting more traction, or attention at least, on a national level.
http://news.yahoo.com/federal-nullifica ... 43059.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Cyberfly]

The article speaks of the Supreme Court ruling in the past that Federal laws always trump the state, whether the state likes the laws or not.
How about the FedGov ENFORCING the laws that they have, instead of picking and choosing which ones THEY like? Perhaps then the states wouldn't feel backed into a corner.
We screwed up when we allowed the passage of the 17th Amendment. The STATE government was allowed to elect representation for themselves in Washington, but now, they're elected by the people. The people? The people with districts that look like puzzle pieces?
Don't get me started.

Our framers handed us a wonderful experiment and it only took a couple of hundred years to screw it up. I'm beginning to believe that mankind simply isn't wired right to handle true freedom. Those that have it, screw it up and those that don't, can't conceive it. And, really, those that DO have it, really don't...they just have the illusion of freedom.

[huddleston101]

The article speaks of the Supreme Court ruling in the past that Federal laws always trump the state, whether the state likes the laws or not.
How about the FedGov ENFORCING the laws that they have, instead of picking and choosing which ones THEY like? Perhaps then the states wouldn't feel backed into a corner.
We screwed up when we allowed the passage of the 17th Amendment. The STATE government was allowed to elect representation for themselves in Washington, but now, they're elected by the people. The people? The people with districts that look like puzzle pieces?
Don't get me started.

Our framers handed us a wonderful experiment and it only took a couple of hundred years to screw it up. I'm beginning to believe that mankind simply isn't wired right to handle true freedom. Those that have it, screw it up and those that don't, can't conceive it. And, really, those that DO have it, really don't...they just have the illusion of freedom.

man that's deep and yea :agree: on what you're saing

[Reverend Herc]

The article speaks of the Supreme Court ruling in the past that Federal laws always trump the state, whether the state likes the laws or not.
How about the FedGov ENFORCING the laws that they have, instead of picking and choosing which ones THEY like? Perhaps then the states wouldn't feel backed into a corner.
We screwed up when we allowed the passage of the 17th Amendment. The STATE government was allowed to elect representation for themselves in Washington, but now, they're elected by the people. The people? The people with districts that look like puzzle pieces?
Don't get me started.

Our framers handed us a wonderful experiment and it only took a couple of hundred years to screw it up. I'm beginning to believe that mankind simply isn't wired right to handle true freedom. Those that have it, screw it up and those that don't, can't conceive it. And, really, those that DO have it, really don't...they just have the illusion of freedom.

:ponder: Wow, Cyberfly I am speechless.... I completely agree....

[Cyberfly]

Sorry fellas.
Having a bad day and just vented a bit.
I probably shouldn't have said what I was really feeling.

[NWmissouriman]

Ahhh...thats my state. The next best thing to Texas haha. Seriously, if we could donate the city of St Louis to Illinois we would be a lot better off.

[Rapier1772]

Ahhh...thats my state. The next best thing to Texas haha. Seriously, if we could donate the city of St Louis to Illinois we would be a lot better off.

I'd second that, everything inside the loop

[ryr8828]

Ahhh...thats my state. The next best thing to Texas haha. Seriously, if we could donate the city of St Louis to Illinois we would be a lot better off.

Don't even think about it, we already have to deal with chicago and metro east.

[NWmissouriman]

Hahaha, alright alright....giving you guys St Louis would probably be very detrimental to your 2nd amendment...as well as all other conservative policies in general. We'll take one for the team and keep it in Missouri....for now. :wall: This will purely be an act of kindness, your welcome :laugh:

[Stitches1974]

Vetoed. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07 ... -gun-laws/

[DmL5]

MO expected to override Gov. Nixon's veto.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08 ... trol-laws/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Stitches1974]

And failed to override the veto:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/t/story/ ... l-20224865