Missouri Legislature Nullifies All Federal Gun Control Measures by a Veto-Proof Majority

[BigK]

Just think if they taught this stuff in schools, again. :D

 

I think you hit the nail right on the head, my friend. Civics and government are barely skimmed over in school these days. I don't think this is by accident, either. I believe we are rearing generations of voters who have no clue how/why this country was formed. There are those (mostly on the left) that want it that way...<oops, dropped my tinfoil hat>

 

Cartoons are available 24/7, so there's no Schoolhouse Rocks on Saturday morning to help either.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think you hit the nail right on the head, my friend. Civics and government are barely skimmed over in school these days. I don't think this is by accident, either. I believe we are rearing generations of voters who have no clue how/why this country was formed. There are those (mostly on the left) that want it that way...<oops, dropped my tinfoil hat>

 

Cartoons are available 24/7, so there's no Schoolhouse Rocks on Saturday morning to help either.

I think you're right. They are purposely not teaching civics, unless it is pablum fed liberal crap they call civics.

That makes it up to us to make sure our kids learn it, even if it means some of us have learn it at the same time.

the reason I said that is because this has been going on for decades, now, and some around here will freely

admit they don't know it, either. Nothing wrong with a little adult education, though. :D

[Ramjo]

Wow, this is stuff that needs to happen across the nation. We, as law abiding citizens, should be allowed to own anything we want for any legal use. Problem is most, if not all, people would not risk loosing everything they own as well as their freedom without the backing of a government entity.

 

What act is that?

 

If you are talking about the 1986 ban on sales of new MG to civillians then voiding the 1934 act also voids the 1986 ban.

 

 

That's what I meant. I wasn't sure if it was 85 or 86...guess I could've googled it before posting on it.

[Seabeejason]

Makes me proud that I am from Missouri.  If this becomes law my family and friends in Missouri will be very happy.  The only hurdle it has right now is Governor Jay Nixon, who is a Democrat.

Edited May 12, 2013 by Seabeejason

[Worriedman]

Makes me proud that I am from Missouri.  If this becomes law my family and friends in Missouri will be very happy.  The only hurdle it has right now is Governor Jay Nixon, who is a Democrat.

"Veto Proof" being the operative clause here, Dear Governor can NOT shut it down if the legislators stand their ground.

[DaveTN]

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/05/missouri-legislature-nullifies-all-federal-gun-control-measures-by-a-veto-proof-majority/

 

Here is some good info on what can/can’t happen. However, when they say there isn’t much the feds can do I think they are forgetting that manufacturers and FFL’s are licensed by the Feds; not the state. The Feds can and will pull the license of anyone violating federal law. Gun dealers without an FFL can’t get guns sent in or ship them across state lines.

 

This is much like the states legalizing pot. They can do it and the Feds can arrest the sellers on federal charges. A gun start-up company could start making fully automatic guns or converting AR’s to M16’s for sale within the state (if the state doesn’t outlaw it), but the Feds would put them in prison.

 

We have a watered down version of this under the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act (except for fully automatic). We have had it for four years and it hasn’t been tested yet.

 

 

[Moped]

I don't see it being tested anytime soon either.  Got to have someone willing to spend time in the pokey if we lose and I don't see any takers yet.

[JAB]

Nice in principle, but likely pretty meaningless. Expect lots of taxpayer money to be wasted on the supreme court case of BATFE vs. State of Missouri. 

 

Well, if enough states would pass such nullification laws and enough people decide that these nullification laws do have meaning then it may not matter what the Supreme Court says.

 

If I remember my history classes correctly, when Andrew Jackson was POTUS, the Supreme Court ruled in a case blocking him from removing the Cherokee from their native lands.  Jackson responded that they had made their decision but he wanted to see them enforce it.  They could not, of course, and so the Trail of Tears proceeded.

 

Why not a reversal of that?  If enough states declared such Federal laws 'null and void' - instructing the state agencies and LEO within their states to not enforce these Federal laws and perhaps even to block Federal enforcement of said laws?  What if enough of the citizenry of those states supported their state lawmakers in doing so?  In such an instance, it would be sort of a reversal of the Andrew Jackson situation - as in the Supreme Court has made their decision supporting the Feds, now let's see them enforce it.

 

The Feds would then be left with a choice: stop enforcing such laws or send Federal forces to overwhelm local and state forces as well as private citizens in order to enforce them.  I don't think anyone wants another Civil War so that option would likely not be a very attractive one for the Feds.

Edited May 13, 2013 by JAB

[DaveTN]

Well, if enough states would pass such nullification laws and enough people decide that these nullification laws do have meaning then it may not matter what the Supreme Court says.

 

If I remember my history classes correctly, when Andrew Jackson was POTUS, the Supreme Court ruled in a case blocking him from removing the Cherokee from their native lands.  Jackson responded that they had made their decision but he wanted to see them enforce it.  They could not, of course, and so the Trail of Tears proceeded.

 

Why not a reversal of that?  If enough states declared such Federal laws 'null and void' - instructing the state agencies and LEO within their states to not enforce these Federal laws and perhaps even to block Federal enforcement of said laws?  What if enough of the citizenry of those states supported their state lawmakers in doing so?  In such an instance, it would be sort of a reversal of the Andrew Jackson situation - as in the Supreme Court has made their decision supporting the Feds, now let's see them enforce it.

 

The Feds would then be left with a choice: stop enforcing such laws or send Federal forces to overwhelm local and state forces as well as private citizens in order to enforce them.  I don't think anyone wants another Civil War so that option would likely not be a very attractive one for the Feds.

No one wants a civil war; it would be the end of our country as we know it. The problem is that the legislators don’t have a personal interest in some of this stuff. The citizens are the ones at risk. It’s a dangerous game.

 

Take for instance the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act. The state has said you can make, sell, and buy all the suppressors you want. Do you see any for sale without a transfer? No, because the Feds have said they will put in prison. Who will help you when you are in Federal custody? The state can’t keep the Feds off you.

 

I believe I have a right to be armed. I believe that right is inalienable and does not come from the 2nd amendment. The courts do not agree with me. But I know with absolute certainty that I do not have a right to bear arms under the 2nd amendment in this state or most others.

 

I believe in States’ Rights. That means the Feds can’t say that you can or can’t carry a gun in this state because they are not responsible for law enforcement in this state and I don’t want them to be. I understand that the South lost the war over States Rights, but they made sure no one wants to fight it again.

 

Are the Feds going to march troops into any state to enforce laws? Not for gun laws they aren’t. The Feds control ALL licensed gun dealers. They can stop all legal gun manufacturers, distributors and dealers from moving any firearms into or out of this state. You think we have a gun and ammo shortage now, what do you think it would be if illegal gun traffickers were our only source of guns and ammo.

 

If all states would unite on this? If all states would unite on this we wouldn’t be having this discussion; the 2nd amendment would be the law of the land.

 

Gun carry will always be controlled by the states; it can’t happen any other way. I want my chicken chit legislators to quit threatening the Feds with non-sense that they don’t have the horse power to back up and make this a Constitutional carry state that recognizes the 2nd amendment as an individual right of the citizens of the state of Tennessee. I hate Obama, but he didn’t do this and he won’t get anything done. You want someone to blame? Blame your own home grown good ole boys at the capitol in Nashville; because if they make the decision that the 2nd amendment applies to you chances are the feds won’t do squat.

[Worriedman]

 You want someone to blame? Blame your own home grown good ole boys at the capitol in Nashville; because if they make the decision that the 2nd amendment applies to you chances are the feds won’t do squat.

 

On this you are 100% correct.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Say, for example, if the Missouri law was challenged in the federal court system, and it made it to the Supreme

Court. If it was upheld, it would be precedent for the nullification of the 1934,1968 and the 1986 gun laws. It

may not, but it could even go as far as nullifying each one. I'm not saying I expect something like that, but it

would be a good test case, and I seriously have my doubts about the liberals wanting to challenging it, especially

if there are any thinking liberals left.

Edited May 14, 2013 by 6.8 AR

[peejman]

Say, for example, if the Missouri law was challenged in the federal court system, and it made it to the Supreme

Court. If it was upheld, it would be precedence for the nullification of the 1934,1968 and the 1986 gun laws. It

may not, but it could even go as far as nullifying each one. I'm not saying I expect something like that, but it

would be a good test case, and I seriously have my doubts about the liberals wanting to challenging it, especially

if there are any thinking liberals left.

 

 

I agree and think that it would be a fantastic thing for the state's legislation to be upheld, but I suspect the SCOTUS would simply say... "We've already addressed that, see decision XYZ which says states can't do that."  Must be nice to be able to pick which cases you get to hear.

[JAB]

If all states would unite on this? If all states would unite on this we wouldn’t be having this discussion; the 2nd amendment would be the law of the land.

 

That was kind of what I was getting at - if enough states would pass such laws.  I'm not saying that I think they will but if they did and if the state legislatures, state LEO and local LEO had the determination needed to enforce them then it really wouldn't matter what the SC said.  In that case, such state laws wouldn't be 'meaningless'.

 

 

Gun carry will always be controlled by the states; it can’t happen any other way. I want my chicken chit legislators to ...make this a Constitutional carry state that recognizes the 2nd amendment as an individual right of the citizens of the state of Tennessee...Blame your own home grown good ole boys at the capitol in Nashville; because if they make the decision that the 2nd amendment applies to you chances are the feds won’t do squat.

 

I agree with you on this.  That is partly why I say that neither the Dems nor the Repubs are our 'friends' on this issue.  The Repubs whine that if we would just vote for them then they would change things - then we give them control of the legislature and the Governor's mansion and all they do is hem and haw about how they can't pass more pro-gun laws because it would hurt businesses and other such bullcrap.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think it would be more complicated than that. It would be difficult for even the Supreme Court to re-define

what Missouri and the 2nd Amendment say. They happen to agree. I think someone like Scalia would grin from ear

to ear at it if it made it to the court.

[Chief07]

It will be interesting to watch.

What if the majority of the states did the same thing?

Hey Oblamo ignores the Constitution and laws, how is he and his

little puppet going to enforce their will against all the states?

They ignore the 10th amendment which is illegal and unconstitutional.

The left uses "civil disobedience" all the time.

Hey why not?