Defensive Carry banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 535 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,161 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Jefferson City, Mo (May 8, 2013) – Tonight, the Missouri State House voted to send Governor Jay Nixon what could arguably be the strongest defense against federal gun control measures in American history. The vote was 116-38.
HB436, introduced by Representative Doug Funderburk in February, was initially passed by the House in April by a vote of 115-42.

Last week, the State Senate approved the bill with an amendment which did not change any of its nullification aspects. The vote there was 26-6. The bill then needed one final vote in the house which happened just before 10pm local time this evening.

Missouri Legislature Nullifies All Federal Gun Control Measures by a Veto-Proof Majority ? Tenth Amendment Center Blog


As law, HB436 would nullify virtually every federal gun control measure on the books – or planned for the future. It reads, in part:

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.


Lets see how this one pans out.

Thoughts? Lets discuss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,550 Posts
Do we have to discuss this again?:blink:

(LOVE that law, by the way) :smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,473 Posts
TY for posting this! Too sleepy to think or give thoughts but it does look like great news! Midnight thirty here on the East coast.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,161 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Do we have to discuss this again?:blink:

The last discussion was hypothetical. This one is law...it happened and some of our government worshippers said it would never happen.

Its this sort of legislation that scares some of the tyrants in the Federal Government to death because it is a loss of control.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,182 Posts
Start here, if you think this is "isolated" to a few states. Note many have passed and gone to Govenors, and even signed, after the April 24th updates:

Firearm Freedom Acts by STATE : (map last updated April 24th)

Map : http://firearmsfreedomact.com/map.gif

site and state by state info : http://firearmsfreedomact.com/state-by-state/#ks


Many of the states, like those that show "blue" say ..... "introduced bill " ..... but like Alabama, it has passed both houses, just not yet signed.


OKLAHOMA is about there too .... passed House before and should be approved and signed soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,550 Posts
I'd like to see them try to interpret or spin this one in any other way than written. My wife laughed when I read it to her. "Tell us what you REALLY think" indeed!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Hmmm...I wonder if this could be twisted to allow NFA weapons without the federal transfer/making taxes...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,955 Posts
Bless their hearts. The Feds pushed too hard and were to ignorant in the way they did it. NY and the other few states that went whacko I think woke up the free states which are a great majority of the states. Feds are backs to the wall but trust they will come out kicking screaming and throwing a tantrum because enough states are in open defiance of them to legally deliver some well needed butt kicks using the constitutions procedures to do it
Hold the line in your state support your pro gun reps write them, and slam dunk the anti gun ones and fence sitters. If this trend holds and I see no reason to think it wont by the states the Feds will have no choice but to back down or be taken to the mat in a Constitutional Convention. Exactly where they never ever want to be.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,088 Posts
Time to start distributing CAD plans for select fire lowers and sears and suppressors and getting out hacksaws and ... and ... and ... Thudddd



Sorry, back now, hyperventilated just a bit. ... and switchblades and walletguns and shoestrings (hahahahahahah)



Where is that 90% now?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
Go Bold, or Go Home!

I think the gloves are off and we are seeing the beginning of good old fashioned street fight between State Sovereignty and the Feds.

Let's see how long it takes for Eric Holder to send Missouri one of his strongly worded letters!

We'll see if Gov. Jay Nixon has the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing and sign it. He's a Democrat, but he's been pretty good as the former Attorney General, and has not impeded any of the recent changes in our CCW laws. It's a good sign.

If the former Governor Matt Blunt (son of US Senator Roy Blunt) was still in office, it'd be a done deal already. Matt chose not to run again, and I respect his decision not to run. He believed in what the founding fathers had intended. Do your time in public office as service to your community, but don't get intoxicated with power and stay too long. But we all wished he would have run again. I'm all for term limits... But when you get a good one, you kind of hate to see them leave so fast. He only stayed for one term.

Keeping my fingers crossed that Nixon will sign the bill. Just not sure if he's going to go for this one. It's a pretty bold and gutsy move by the legislature. More and more states are starting to grow a spine though. They've had enough intrusion by the Feds and seeing their sovereignty melt away bit by bit.

We'll know how worried they are by how fast it takes Eric Holder threaten to take us to court.

Bring it on Eric, you little puppet.
Molon Labe :comeandgetsome:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Kudos to Missouri citizens and legislators! :eek:k:

It's about time folk stand up for the Second Amendment's protections. Glad to see so many states doing the right thing, in that regard.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
Then again, we may not have to worry about Gov. Nixon. I just read this from the origninal story Hotguns linked to.

Tenth Amendment Center said:
The votes in both the House and Senate are by a strong veto-proof majority. Local activist Matt Radcliffe acknowledged as much when he said, “Governor Nixon can do nothing and it will automatically become law July 1st. Or he can sign it into law. Or he can veto it then his veto will be overridden in the house and it will become law anyway!”
The following is one of the comments at the end of the article.

Looks like Missouri just decided that the ATF no longer says what goes in their state. It will be very interesting to watch things develop. Some people here don't seem to understand that the US constitution never gave the federal supreme court the power to be the final decider of constitutionality, and that means that the 10th amendment applies in this situation. Which means that the states decide what's constitutional. Also, the supremacy clause of the US constitution only applies to _constitutional_ laws. If the states decide the laws aren't constitutional, they're not supreme. In other words, if the federal government twists the meaning of the constitution, the states have the right and the duty to call them on it.

The other states need to support Missouri and Kansas. They're reading the US constitution correctly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,496 Posts
AWESOME. First KS comes in with a good ole one-two, then MO steps into the ring and puts the FEDs into a corner. Any other states want a go while MO's got 'em pinned?

Is the Fed Gov't gonna tap out, or will we have to win by KO?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
AWESOME. First KS comes in with a good ole one-two, then MO steps into the ring and puts the FEDs into a corner. Any other states want a go while MO's got 'em pinned?

Is the Fed Gov't gonna tap out, or will we have to win by KO?
Military Arms Channel posted that if Eric Holder was panicked about the new law in Kansas, he's probably giving birth to a cow right about now! :rofl: :hand9:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,476 Posts
I wish Florida had passed this, it was introduced but died in committee like all but I think 1 of the other gun related bills, good and bad. To bad, because there were a couple of good ones. Well, at least nothing really bad got through.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,067 Posts
Nice, but do they think these are paid by the purchaser at the checkout counter?
(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;
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
621 Posts
I think this one will have a few more legal hurdles than the Kansas Law. This one will bring a law suit.

I'm not sure the Supreme's have the moral fortitude to rule in the States' favor.

Kansa Law said the Feds can't go beyond the Boundries the Fed has set. This one says they didn't have the Authority to even set those Boundries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hopyard

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,427 Posts
Nice, but do they think these are paid by the purchaser at the checkout counter?
(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;
Of course they do. And they're right.

ALL taxes on goods and services are ultimately paid by the purchaser at the checkout counter. Just because it's not itemized on your receipt doesn't mean you're not paying it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
The one for S.C.,has been a live bill in the Senate Judiciary committee,since 01/08/13.Not sure,what the latest,on this is.
Good for the people of Missouri.
 
1 - 20 of 535 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top