JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
1,238
Reactions
1,862
Just found this today every state need to follow suit, all gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be enforced.
Source: Missouri Senate Bans All Federal Gun Control Laws in Proposed Bill

A stipulation of the newly passed bill states:

"All federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court 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 I and 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."

For added measure, SB367's authors went into great detail on what federal laws will be "considered null and void and of no effect."

(a) Any tax, levy, fee, or stamp imposed on firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition not common to all other goods and services which might reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;

(b) Any registering or tracking of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which might reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;

(c) Any registering or tracking of the owners of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which might reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;

(d) Any act forbidding the possession, ownership, or use or transfer of a firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition by law-abiding citizens; and

(e) Any act ordering the confiscation of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition from law-abiding citizens
 
The only problem? Federal Case precedents, such as the Montana Firearms Freedom Act of 2008, Kansas' similar law, and so on, have been judged as invalid and null and void... and the District Courts have determined that magazine limits, bans on certain classes of firearms, bans on certain features "does not infringe" on the 2A :mad:. And the SCOTUS have not chosen to hear the various 2A suits brought up.
 
I may just have to Look for a new home in Missouri !
Finally , a state with Balls !
But will it hold up in a federal court?
Yes. The bill's main provision calling on the entire state to cease enforcing federal gun control measures stands on solid legal ground under the anti-commandeering doctrine. Court precedent from 1842 to 2012 stipulates that the feds simply cannot require a state to help them violate your Constitutional rights, and allows states the power to refuse to enforce such federal laws it deems unConstitutional. Besides, the feds simply don't have the manpower to do it at the state level without the assistance and partnership of state and local agencies.
I like it !
 
I liked the analogy to the marijuana industry made in the comments section by user "(State) Law Abiding Citizen". After such a law, you get a large influx of enthusiasts and the industry booms (no pun intended).
 
Last Edited:
Not a chance this would pass -- if any state is in an interesting situation right now its Texas as it looks like it may turn blue on next election. All the Libs rushing into Austin has the state nearly 50/50 and Beto will probably take over Cruz's spot... not sure what will happen after that.

Mostly focusing on Oregon as I have no plans to leave this state; I'm pretty sure my wife and I are settled here for the long run.
 
The Kansas law was modeled after the 2008 Montana Firearms Freedom law; the problem is that they were specific to the NFA items which the District Courts have ruled as invalid because "they would reasonably impact the market of such items outside the State" :rolleyes:

What Missouri propose may be passable, but again, it is up to the courts to interpret; and there is a very good chance it would also fail because of the Federal Supremacy Clause and because Interstate Commerce :rolleyes::rolleyes: :confused:
 
the feds turn the other way about pot...which is NOT a Right.

yet, theyre are all gung-ho to jump on any chance to bust a good guy exercising his rights.


im curious to find out exactly how many bumpstocks ACTUALLY get turned in.
 
Not a chance this would pass -- if any state is in an interesting situation right now its Texas as it looks like it may turn blue on next election. All the Libs rushing into Austin has the state nearly 50/50 and Beto will probably take over Cruz's spot... not sure what will happen after that.

Mostly focusing on Oregon as I have no plans to leave this state; I'm pretty sure my wife and I are settled here for the long run.

According to the article it already passed once but the Govnuh at the time vetoed it. Maybe they have a 2A friendly Govnuh this time. If so, I think it will pass. Other states routinely ignore federal laws they don't like and little has been done to punish them. Missouri may be onto something.
 
According to the article it already passed once but the Govnuh at the time vetoed it. Maybe they have a 2A friendly Govnuh this time. If so, I think it will pass. Other states routinely ignore federal laws they don't like and little has been done to punish them. Missouri may be onto something.
Usually even with a majority it's rare to go that far which makes this a unique case. Opposition from law enforcement is too bad and the NRA on a few specifics... I've more or less lost hope that a turn around could happen, at least legislatively but also hope to be proven wrong.
 
According to the article it already passed once but the Govnuh at the time vetoed it. Maybe they have a 2A friendly Govnuh this time. If so, I think it will pass. Other states routinely ignore federal laws they don't like and little has been done to punish them. Missouri may be onto something.

And if they are I'm sure they would be over run with people wanting to be free if you could put up with the heat and 100% humidity in the summer time. :eek:
 
the feds turn the other way about pot...which is NOT a Right.

It IS a right.

You have the right to ingest into your body whatever substance you wish to ingest.

It just isn't legal.

Just because the Constitution doesn't explicitly enumerate the right to smoke pot doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The rights in the BOR are 'Natural Rights' - they exist before and outside the Constitution, which just enumerates some of those rights, not all of them.

Natural Rights are 'Negative Rights':

Negative rights, or negative freedom, means freedom from something. ... Examples of negative rights are the right to live, to be free, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from violence, freedom from slavery, and property rights.

If you don't have the right to do with your body as you wish, then you are not truly free. That includes the right to ingest whatever you want, to refuse medical treatment, to not wear a helmet or a seat belt and so on.

None of us are free because it is human nature for humans to try to control other humans, but that doesn't mean you don't have the right to do something as long as that action doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

As for Missouri - I applaud the sentiment, but it is mostly a waste of time.:(
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top