Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old February 20th, 2014 #1
NewsFeed
News Bot
 
Post Missouri Senate Votes to Nullify Federal Gun Control 23-10



Missouri Senate Votes to Nullify Federal Gun Control 23-10

Activist Post

Activist Post

February 20th, 2014


A Missouri bill which seeks to nullify virtually every federal gun control measure on the books, “whether past, present or future,” passed the Senate Thursday. SB613 would ban the state from enforcing virtually all federal gun control measures, and includes criminal charges for federal agents attempting to violate the right to keep and bear arms in Missouri.

The measure passed 23-10.

SB613 counts as what could be the strongest defense against federal encroachments on the right to keep an bear arms ever considered at the state level. It reads, in part:

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.

Federal acts which would be considered “null and void and of no effect” include, but are not limited to:

(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 legislation specifically bans all state employees from enforcing or attempting to enforce any acts running counter to the proposed law. Such a tactic is an extremely effective way to stop a federal government busting at the seams. Even the National Governors Association admitted the same recently when they sent out a press release noting that “States are partners with the federal government in implementing most federal programs.”

That means states can create impediments to enforcing and implementing “most federal programs.” On federal gun control measures, Judge Andrew Napolitano suggested that a single state standing down would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible to enforce” within that state.

James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” advised this very tactic. Madison supplied the blueprint for resisting federal power in Federalist 46. He outlined several steps that states can take to effective stop “an unwarrantable measure,” or “even a warrantable measure” of the federal government. Madison called for “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” as a way to successfully thwart federal acts.

FRIENDLY FIRE

The bill passed despite strong opposition from the law enforcement community. According to a Report from the Institute of Justice, Missouri law enforcement cashed in to the tune of $34,462,153 in forfeiture from 2001 to 2008. They only get this money if they do the bidding of the federal government.

The NRA also came out against the legislation due to a proposed amendment. Anti-gun Senator Jamilah Nasheed added language requiring gun owners to report a stolen firearm to police no more than 72 hrs after the discovery of the theft. The NRA claimed the amendment also included penalties.

Those who are unable to report a lost or stolen firearm within this arbitrary amount of time, would be subject to penalties including: a $1,000 fine, Class A misdemeanor and the loss of their Right to Carry Permit.

But the actual text of the amendment included no such language. ( read it here )

Bill author Sen. Brian Nieves and Nasheed agreed to reconsider and the amendment was removed earlier this week, removing the source of NRA opposition.

PENALTIES

In what many legal experts consider a controversial move, the Missouri bill also includes criminal charges for any federal agent who violates the state law. Under the law, state and local law enforcement would have “discretionary power” to determine determine if they will press charges.

Inside sources say this was done to alleviate concerns from Missouri Law Enforcement organizations who actively lobbied against the effort in 2013, citing a requirement to arrest “federal law enforcement partners in the field” as a primarily concern.

While constitutionally valid within the original understanding of the Constitution, “legal experts” and federal courts won’t likely support this provision. Even so, every bill in Missouri is severable. That means if a court finds part of it unconstitutional, the rest remains. And the main provision calling on the entire state to stop enforcing federal gun control measures stands on solid legal ground under the anti-commandeering doctrine. Court precedent going from 1842 to 2012 holds the feds simply cannot require state to help them violate your rights. And the feds don’t have the manpower to do it themselves.

STATE CONSTITUTION

Also today, a measure supporters say will work hand-in-hand with SB613 passed the Senate. Senate Joint Resolution 36 (SJR36) proposes an amendment the Missouri state constitution with text obligating the state government to uphold the right to keep and bear arms. It passed the Senate today by a vote of 29-4. If passed by the House, it will go to Missouri voters for approval this fall.

According to Missouri First , as a constitutional amend

----- snip -----


read full article at source: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/misso...l-23-10_022014
 
Old February 21st, 2014 #2
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,684
Rounder
Default

This is strong evidence that legislators are reacting to lots of heavy pressure from their constituents. Whitey is frightened. His personal safety is on the line. He wants his guns, and he wants the muds to know he's got them.

Now, let's hope the JOG surrounds the state capitol building in Jefferson City, with gun-and-bayonet tottin, "All American" troops from the 82d Airborne Division, and arrests those "traitors" inside. Then we'll know the revolution is getting somewhere.

Oh, glory day !!
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire




 
Old February 21st, 2014 #3
ELF
Senior Member
 
ELF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: In the land of Hockey Hosers(Canada)
Posts: 2,592
ELF
Default

It's nice to know that there are still good and sane people in the US government who are will to pretty well risk their freedom and maybe even their lives to stay true to the *True Democracy* that the US's founding fathers fought for.
 
Old February 21st, 2014 #4
Ironguard1940
Senior Member
 
Ironguard1940's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,910
Ironguard1940
Default Watch how the big money votes on any issue

"The bill passed despite strong opposition from the law enforcement community."

"The NRA also came out against the legislation due to a proposed amendment."

Interesting how the very organizations who are supposed to protect us and our rights came out against this law.
 
Old February 21st, 2014 #5
Fred
Commie Killer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,462
Fred
Default

I like the idea of the bill but isn't it more symbolic than anything?

Federal law supersedes State law. There can be consequences if a State violates Federal law.
 
Old February 21st, 2014 #6
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,684
Rounder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred View Post
I like the idea of the bill but isn't it more symbolic than anything?

Federal law supersedes State law. There can be consequences if a State violates Federal law.
Good points, Fred. We need an attorney's honest insights into this. Politicians do and say all sorts of "symbolic" crap in order to fool/mislead voters.
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire




 
Old February 21st, 2014 #7
313Chris
Senior Member
 
313Chris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,139
313Chris
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewsFeed View Post
(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;
I presume this is directed at 'Class III' items -- suppressors, SBR's, full-auto firearms, high explosives, etc.

I'm encouraged that Americans are becoming increasingly assertive and arbitrary about their Second kwAmendment rights, but some of those items, even if they were legal, I would personally have no interest in owning.

Suppressors - perhaps on a handgun, but on a kwAR-15 for example, they severely over-gas the operating system and cause premature wear. No thanks.

SBR - 5.56mm NATO was optimized for a 20-inch barrel with a 12-inch gas system. Going shorter than the ATF-legal 16-inch barrel is too compromising for the bullet velocity for my tastes, and most kwassault-type rifles are plenty small enough as it is. Again, no thanks.

Full auto - too inaccurate when applied to anything but submachine gun calibers for me to consider useful, and it's a waste of valuable ammo. If anyone else wants it though, I say have at it. But I'll pass.

All that said, I applaud the citizens and legislators of Missouri for their aggression and boldness.
 
Old February 21st, 2014 #8
Pierre-Marc
 
Pierre-Marc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 333
Pierre-Marc
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounder View Post
Good points, Fred. We need an attorney's honest insights into this. Politicians do and say all sorts of "symbolic" crap in order to fool/mislead voters.
Well, at least they're not trying to go against the will of the people. I'm quite amazed at the defiance of certain States and American politicians regarding the Second Amendment. In Switzerland, States don't fight the Federal government and tell the people it's okay not to do it.
__________________
Il n’est pire sourd que celui qui ne veut pas entendre.
 
Old February 21st, 2014 #9
Nate Richards
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,431
Nate Richards
Default

Quote:
I like the idea of the bill but isn't it more symbolic than anything?

Federal law supersedes State law. There can be consequences if a State violates Federal law.
There needs to be even greater consequences if federal employees attempt to violate Missouri's laws.
__________________
No time for the old in 'n out, love. I've just come to read the meter.
 
Reply

Tags
Gun control, Activism, Missouri, Tax, Ammunition

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:20 PM.
Page generated in 0.08439 seconds.