Gun Rights Sanctuary State bill proposed - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Advertise Here
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would you consider this unconstitutional? CJ64421 Firearms General Discussion 122 02-22-2019 05:04 PM
Alleged intent of gun control vs. actual observable goals AllOutdoor.com AllOutdoor.com 5 11-07-2018 11:26 PM
New state gun laws for 2018 InOmaha Firearms General Discussion 1 07-17-2018 11:02 PM
Gun control debate, advice needed OhioMan Firearms General Discussion 92 04-09-2018 07:19 PM
State firearm laws and federal preemption? loki81 General Discussion 18 02-16-2017 05:18 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-09-2019, 09:49 PM
Rawhide76's Avatar
Rawhide76 Rawhide76 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern California
Posts: 81
Thanks: 32
Thanked 98 Times in 39 Posts
Exclamation Gun Rights Sanctuary State bill proposed



Advertise Here

Hello all. Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but a Missouri Senate bill has been proposed that wants to turn Missouri into a gun rights sanctuary state.
Quote:
SB 367 - This act creates the "Second Amendment Preservation Act", and lists various declarations of the Missouri General Assembly regarding the United States Constitution and the scope of the federal government's authority. In addition, the act declares that federal supremacy does not apply to federal laws that restrict or prohibit the manufacture, ownership, and use of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition within the state because such laws exceed the scope of the federal government's authority. Laws necessary for the regulation of the land and the United States Armed Forces are excluded from the types of federal firearms laws that exceed federal authority.

This act declares as invalid all federal laws that infringe on the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution. Some laws declared invalid under this act include certain taxes, certain registration and tracking laws, certain prohibitions on the possession, ownership, use, or transfer of a specific type of firearm, and confiscation orders.

The act declares that it is the duty of the courts and law enforcement agencies to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.

Under this act, no public officer or state or local employee has the authority to enforce firearms laws declared invalid by the act.

Any public officer or state or local employee who tries to enforce the firearms declared invalid by the act or any person who acts under the color of law to deprive a Missouri citizen of rights or privileges ensured by the federal and state constitutions shall be liable for redress. In such an action attorney's fees and costs may be awarded, and official or qualified immunity shall not be available to the defendant as a defense. Such officer or employee may also be prohibited from serving as a law enforcement officer for the state or political subdivision.

This act contains a severability clause.

This act is similar to HB 786 (2019), HB 1760 (2018), and similar to provisions in HB 1439 (2014).

CHARLEY MERRIWEATHER
This was taken from https://www.senate.mo.gov/19info/BTS...BillID=3128198

Here is a blog post summary of it: https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.co...nt-and-future/

Here is a video on it: https://youtu.be/YLoQaVXWCEA

If any of you are from Missouri, please contact your local representative and tell them that YOU WANT THIS BILL!
Quick reply to this message
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Rawhide76 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 10:04 PM
justin22885 justin22885 is offline
Awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 15,909
Thanks: 0
Thanked 25,839 Times in 8,453 Posts
Default

if they're not going to let people buy full auto, suppressors, and SBRs without a $200 stamp and not require background checks, then theyre not really doing ****, are they?
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to justin22885 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 10:21 PM
Rawhide76's Avatar
Rawhide76 Rawhide76 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern California
Posts: 81
Thanks: 32
Thanked 98 Times in 39 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justin22885 View Post
if they're going to let people buy full auto, suppressors, and SBRs without a $200 stamp and not require background checks, then theyre not really doing ****, are they?
I don't understand what you mean. All this law does is make it easier for law abiding citizens to legally obtain firearms. If a criminal wanted to illegally obtain a full auto, all they would need is a mill or a few hundred bucks at your local black market.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rawhide76 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 10:23 PM
justin22885 justin22885 is offline
Awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 15,909
Thanks: 0
Thanked 25,839 Times in 8,453 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawhide76 View Post
I don't understand what you mean. All this law does is make it easier for law abiding citizens to legally obtain firearms. If a criminal wanted to illegally obtain a full auto, all they would need is a mill or a few hundred bucks at your local black market.
aah.. i forgot the "not" after "if they're" and before "going to"

the 68 GCA and background checks was democrats first major assault on gun rights since 1934 and is is the basis for almost all gun control legislation that has come since.. if this is just one of those "we're just not going to enforce FUTURE federal gun control that'll probably never happen anyway" then its just for show.. i'd like to see a gun sanctuary state with the balls to openly defy existing laws
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to justin22885 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 10:30 PM
Rawhide76's Avatar
Rawhide76 Rawhide76 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern California
Posts: 81
Thanks: 32
Thanked 98 Times in 39 Posts
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by justin22885 View Post
aah.. i forgot the "not" after "if they're" and before "going to"

the 68 GCA and background checks was democrats first major assault on gun rights since 1934 and is is the basis for almost all gun control legislation that has come since.. if this is just one of those "we're just not going to enforce FUTURE federal gun control that'll probably never happen anyway" then its just for show.. i'd like to see a gun sanctuary state with the balls to openly defy existing laws
No, this one is different. It states that they will not enforce any future, past, or present laws. Including the NFA of 1934. Making full autos, suppressors, and SBRs completely legal without a tax stamp in Missouri. As well as any taxes on firearms being considered illegal and unconstitutional. There's much more. Watch the video. It's pretty mind-blowing.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Rawhide76 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 10:43 PM
hawk55732's Avatar
hawk55732 hawk55732 is offline
The Hawks Nest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 13,703
Thanks: 13,236
Thanked 24,207 Times in 8,626 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawhide76 View Post
No, this one is different. It states that they will not enforce any future, past, or present laws. Including the NFA of 1934. Making full autos, suppressors, and SBRs completely legal without a tax stamp in Missouri. As well as any taxes on firearms being considered illegal and unconstitutional. There's much more. Watch the video. It's pretty mind-blowing.
As nice as it would be, I just dont see the government allowing people to have full autos, whether it is legal in the state or not. Whats to stop the FBI or AFT from coming in and arresting people?
__________________
Father, husband, son, Marine.

"A terrorist is only as strong as the fear he creates."

"Things you own end up owning you"
- Tyler Durden
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to hawk55732 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 11:12 PM
Ghost863's Avatar
Ghost863 Ghost863 is online now
Si vis pacem, para bellum
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,557
Thanks: 59,767
Thanked 22,542 Times in 6,185 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk55732 View Post
As nice as it would be, I just dont see the government allowing people to have full autos, whether it is legal in the state or not. Whats to stop the FBI or AFT from coming in and arresting people?
They won't let it happen. As much as I would like to believe it but it has already been tried. As Mr. SockPuppet pointed out to me the following link will explain:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montan...ms_Freedom_Act
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ghost863 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 11:27 PM
Rawhide76's Avatar
Rawhide76 Rawhide76 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern California
Posts: 81
Thanks: 32
Thanked 98 Times in 39 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost863 View Post
They won't let it happen. As much as I would like to believe it but it has already been tried. As Mr. SockPuppet pointed out to me the following link will explain:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montan...ms_Freedom_Act
Well, that's disappointing. I heard that if the state does not comply or enforce federal law, it makes it very difficult for feds to enforce the law. Feds would have to come into Missouri and enforce the law themselves as the state and county officials would not comply with federal law due to SB 673. Feds would not be able to force state and county officials to enforce federal law due to the anti-commandeering doctrine.

So it would be up to ATF to enforce it all by themselves and we know how inefficient the feds are.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rawhide76 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 11:30 PM
Ghost863's Avatar
Ghost863 Ghost863 is online now
Si vis pacem, para bellum
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,557
Thanks: 59,767
Thanked 22,542 Times in 6,185 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawhide76 View Post
Well, that's disappointing. I heard that if the state does not comply or enforce federal law, it makes it very difficult for feds to enforce the law. Feds would have to come into Missouri and enforce the law themselves as the state and county officials would not comply with federal law due to SB 673. Feds would not be able to force state and county officials to enforce federal law due to the anti-commandeering doctrine.

So it would be up to ATF to enforce it all by themselves and we know how inefficient the feds are.
I hope you are correct. I was considering moving to Wyoming because of their gun laws are so lax (you do not need a concealed permit to carry there) But if Mo. does this I might consider moving there because currently I am fighting to get my rights restored due to a false report of dv and a subsequent conviction. Never laid a finger on her but the courts wanted to make examples of people like me so they did not care if the accusation was fabricated or not.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Ghost863 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2019, 11:58 PM
Rawhide76's Avatar
Rawhide76 Rawhide76 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern California
Posts: 81
Thanks: 32
Thanked 98 Times in 39 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost863 View Post
I hope you are correct. I was considering moving to Wyoming because of their gun laws are so lax (you do not need a concealed permit to carry there) But if Mo. does this I might consider moving there because currently I am fighting to get my rights restored due to a false report of dv and a subsequent conviction. Never laid a finger on her but the courts wanted to make examples of people like me so they did not care if the accusation was fabricated or not.
Even if you did commit domestic violence, it is still unconstitutional for them to take away your natural born right to self-preservation . If this passes and is successful, I would love to move to MO after college, but I fear property prices will skyrocket. Becoming worse than NY and CA combined!
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Rawhide76 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-10-2019, 12:07 AM
Ghost863's Avatar
Ghost863 Ghost863 is online now
Si vis pacem, para bellum
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,557
Thanks: 59,767
Thanked 22,542 Times in 6,185 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawhide76 View Post
Even if you did commit domestic violence, it is still unconstitutional for them to take away your natural born right to self-preservation . If this passes and is successful, I would love to move to MO after college, but I fear property prices will skyrocket. Becoming worse than NY and CA combined!
some how I do not see that happening for quite a while. People think of Mo about as much as they do us Floridians, that we are nothing more than a bunch of dumb ass rednecks that don't know nothing about nothing (little do they know, they are wrong ) And as far as your first statement in here I agree, unfortunately the law does not at the moment. The right to life is a God given right that no man has authority to take away, and being that the number one law of nature is self preservation it only stands to reason that the right to self defense is inherited from the right to life. Which means by the government infringing on my right to keep and bear arms they are essentially infringing on my right to life.
Quick reply to this message
Old 05-10-2019, 01:14 AM
Rawhide76's Avatar
Rawhide76 Rawhide76 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern California
Posts: 81
Thanks: 32
Thanked 98 Times in 39 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost863 View Post
some how I do not see that happening for quite a while. People think of Mo about as much as they do us Floridians, that we are nothing more than a bunch of dumb ass rednecks that don't know nothing about nothing (little do they know, they are wrong ) And as far as your first statement in here I agree, unfortunately the law does not at the moment. The right to life is a God given right that no man has authority to take away, and being that the number one law of nature is self preservation it only stands to reason that the right to self defense is inherited from the right to life. Which means by the government infringing on my right to keep and bear arms they are essentially infringing on my right to life.
Beautifully stated! As for Florida, we think y'all are a bunch of grumpy senior citizens who spend their retirement playing too much golf. That or a bunch of fratboys and hillbillies hunting crocodiles while high on bath salts who eat peoples faces from time to time
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Rawhide76 For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
firearm, law, missouri, politics



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net