Missouri may have just made the most monumental step towards freedom and individual liberty since the signing of the Bill of Rights. In an upcoming vote by Missouri’s state senate, the state is expected to pass a bill that would nullify ALL Federal gun laws and regulations, and make enforcement of those laws by federal officers within the State of Missouri a criminal offense. Republicans control both U.S. Senate seats and more than two-thirds of the seats in both the Missouri House and Senate.

Like it’s predecessor, SB613, Bill SB367 and it’s companion, House Bill HB786, would prevent all state agencies and their employees from enforcing any federal law that infringes the Second Amendment in any way, including gun registrations, fees, fines, licenses and bans. Originally authored in 2014, a former version of the bill was also passed, but vetoed by then Missouri Governor Jay Nixon.

Pro-Gun Legislation with teeth

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

Such language is designed to guarantee that the measure can’t be worked around or misninterpreted by legislators or law enforcement agencies. This is an example of pro-gun legislation with teeth.

Just HiPoint it

Law Enforcement will be losing their ill-gotten gains

The bill passed despite heavy opposition by Missouri’s law enforcement community, which should be no surprise, as Missouri law enforcement agencies raked in $34,462,153 in forfeitures from 2001 to 2008, according to a report by the Institute of Justice. That’s a lot of cash for doing Uncle Sam’s bidding, and now law enforcement officers will have to focus on collecting revenue from actual criminals, instead of stealing it from gun owners.

The bill’s other stiff opposition came from an unlikely source: the NRA. Anti-gun Senator Jamilah Nasheed tried to sneak language into SB367 that would require gun owners to report a stolen firearm to police no more than 72 hours after the discovery of the theft, or face a $1,000 fine and a misdemeanor charge. However, the actual text of the bill included no such language.

Bill author Senator Eric Burlison and bill saboteur Senator Nasheed agreed to reconsider and the stolen firearm reporting clause was removed earlier this week, thus satisfying the source of NRA opposition.

Here’s where things get interesting. The Missouri bill also includes criminal charges for any federal agent who violates SB367. As per the new law, state and local (municipal & county) law enforcement officers would be given “discretionary power” to determine if they will press criminal charges against federal agents who break the law by enforcing the now nullified federal gun control measures.

Suck on my freedom, Feds

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.

Just in case that isn’t enough, Missouri’s Senate also passed a measure supporters say will work hand-in-hand with SB367, solidifying it by codifying the Second Amendment into Missouri’s state constitution. Senate Joint Resolution 36 (SJR36) proposes an amendment to 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 be entered on the ballot for Missouri voters’ approval this fall. The amendment would elevate the Right to Bear Arms to “unalienable status,” thereby obligating the state, its courts and agencies to defend it as a guaranteed right of Missouri citizens.

Can you imagine if other states follow suit? It would spell the death of gun control in red states, at the very least, if not a step toward political Balkanization. Blue voters would leave red states for those states which prefer heavy-handed federal regulations, and red voters in blue states would have less incentive to continue having their rights treated as privileges. We’ll see if they can get it approved by Missouri’s Governor this time.


May we have a moment of your time?

Facebook recently decided to unpublish our Facebook page for covering their censorship of Rightwing outlets. Please consider donating as little as $1 to support our work and help us keep The Sentinel free of annoying ads: Support our journalism and fight censorship

240 COMMENTS

  1. That’s Fantastic! Way to Lead the way Missouri! Come on the rest of you States, Stand Up! Wake Up! And Follow Suit!

  2. Was this the knee jerk reaction to the mass shooting in New Zealand? Praise be!

    Was Remington padding the bank accounts of state Republican politicians? Thank you Jesus the Son of God!

    I assume both.

    Regardless this was a dumb move by those trying to abolish any restrictions on such devices that murdered 20 first graders and 6 adults in 262 seconds at Sandy Hook. But this new law is probably the will of God, right?

    I’m a responsible gun enthusiast. But you nut jobs are only giving fodder to the next democratic president who might use a fake “national emergency,” to enact even stricter laws at the federal level overriding this.

    This is both lame and very short sighted.

    • “Was this the knee jerk reaction to the mass shooting in New Zealand? Praise be!”

      No, it was put forth in the House and Senate before the Christchurch massacre happened.

      “Was Remington padding the bank accounts of state Republican politicians? Thank you Jesus the Son of God!”

      We buy plenty of guns in Missouri. Not the best idea to invest in marketing where you are already quite popular. It’s a waste of money. You invest where you aren’t popular in the hopes you will become popular.

      “Regardless this was a dumb move by those trying to abolish any restrictions on such devices that murdered 20 first graders and 6 adults in 262 seconds at Sandy Hook. ”

      Those devices murdered 20 people? Since only one thing can actually commit the physical act of murder, I take it that would imply the shooter didn’t commit murder? When you shift the blame to a device, it has to come off of the perpetrator. Way to give that sick fuck a pass.

      “I’m a responsible gun enthusiast. But you nut jobs are only giving fodder to the next democratic president who might use a fake “national emergency,” to enact even stricter laws at the federal level overriding this.”

      Doesn’t sound like it. Otherwise, you would realize this is fully within the states right (we are a union of states) and that nearly every piece of firearms legislation that’s been put forth for the last 90 years has been infringements on the Second Amendment and null and void.

      • Thank you for a great response TragikTimes, but such anti 2nd Amendment crap like that is to be expected by the real nut-cases.

      • Every mass shooter has been on some type of Psychotropic Med these meds can totally fuck a person’s mind up – so why aren’t they going after the Doctors who prescribe this poison or the manufacturers who make these mind altering drugs?

        Every mass shooting results in a hysterical push for a Grab the Guns from the fake news media and our bought and paid fors in DC. The New Zealand shooting has alot of controversy and all videos have been scrubbed to discourage copycats – but videos remain of 911 and the people jumping out of the Towers.

        50 muslims killed (supposedly) but 2 weeks ago 144 white Christians where murdered by Muslims in Africa – Not a Mention in the Fake Media

        Arm the teachers , school administrators , key personnel , install locks that work , cameras that cover all areas in our schools. Israel did just that and guess what – all their terrorist attacks at their schools Stopped.

        This law should pass and will be a model for the Nation . Trump won almost every county in America and Trump is a 2nd amendment supporter. Big changes coming in 2020 – 2024 and most will be good – fuck these liberal loons

        • Trump is not a supporter of the 2Nd Amendment. Look up his comment about taking people’s guns first then worrying about Due Process later. He is also a huge supporter of Red Flag Bills.

        • Except that Trump hasn’t supported the Second Amendment in his two-plus years in office. In fact, he has done the exact opposite. Trump pushed an administrative bumpstock ban where none was needed, wanted, or would have been. Because of him, thousands of otherwise good citizens who did not turn in or destroy items they paid good money for, are now technically Federal felons. Trump also supports Red Flag laws and raising the age to buy certain rifles from 18 to 21.

          Trump has not pushed for Nationwide CWP Reciprocity as he promised us in 2016. I seem to recall recently reading where Mitch McConnell or someone mentioned adding it to a pending bill and Trump waved them off from doing it.

          Donald Trump IS NOT a Second Amendment supporter.

          • Grigori- Yes. You are factually correct. POTUS, his actions and or intended lack of, are in direct opposition to the foundation of the 2nd Ammendment. Words spoken out of his own pie hole, on National TV, henceforth this fact occurred on March 18th, 2018. Boob Tube Video is there for all to see. A steady drip of a widdler. Carving away one piece at a time. State by State, County by County. It all began on 03/18/2018. Do what I say, not as I do, rules for thee but not for me etc etc etc…

    • The purpose of the Second Amendment was to be a counterbalance in case Congress neglected it’s obligation to provide for the arming and disciplining as clearly stated in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16. The murder of 20 first graders and 6 adults has no bearing on the requirement that our instituted governments secure the original right of self-preservation.

      The Missouri senate has passed a piece of legislation that captures the intent of the Second Amendment, and it is naturally elevated to unalienable status. As Samuel Adams put it in the Rights of the Colonists, every person has a right to life, a right to liberty, and a right to property, along with the right to employ the best means available to secure and defend them. As he further explains, it isn’t in the hands of one person or group of people, to give up our essential natural rights or the means of preserving. Whether it is caused by fear, fraud, or mistake, society will eventually turn against any renunciation … in this case, IGotAllMyTeeth’s appeal to “think about the children” represents fear, fraud, or mistake.

      • Hey man! Great to meet you!! I never thought I would find the dumbest fucker on the planet, yet here you are!! Good for you little buddy. Now, have your mommy wipe the Spaghetti O’s off your face, pull your hand out of your diaper, get down to the highway and scrape up some flat meat fer da stew

        • DentetedDoorKicker, You sound like a yellow bellied coward. It really is easy to talk shit here since you hide behind a screen name. Do you have the nerve to post your real name while denigrating someone else. You don’t have the nerve to face that man and talk to him personally. By the sound of your screen name, I guessing your are or were a cop which is a worthy profession but as in all walks of life, I’m also guessing that you had an inside job and not someone who actually worked the streets in a highly populated urban city..

      • I’m pretty happy about this bill too, but I do have to say that what you said was pretty dumb. These shootings and the f*ckers who do them are real. It doesn’t help liberty to deny these events and pretend that they aren’t. Nor is it respectful to the families of the actual children who were actually killed. I know I would be pretty pissed at someone who made a comment like you did if my children were there, and I’m sure most people would be as well.

        They are very real, and if anything being a conspiratorial nutjob like Alex Jones will only hurt our efforts at maintaining our rights. You don’t have to trust mainstream media. There are plenty of other sources that prove it happened. And there are plenty of other events beyond that particular one that are also very real events, even if you still manage to think Sandy Hook was a hoax.

        We need to address these things like normal people instead of raving about them like ignorant assholes.

        Then maybe we can actually have civilized discussions about gun rights, or at letter better exposed the nutjobs of the other side and prove that we’re coming from a perspective of reason.

    • No it wasnt a reaction to NZ.

      This has been a long time coming, basically decades in the making and with California and New York making huge gains on restrictions of gun ownership to the point of being nearly like Canada, these states are taking a stand.

      If anything, the NZ issue simply reinforced their determination to push this, given the very clear fallout, but the desire was already there.

      And the manifesto of the NZ mass murderer specifically outlined that he did his attack with guns in order to trigger politics and increase divides between gun control and gun rights groups.

      And it worked, what with the ban on semi autos coming to NZ now, and the gun control groups in the U.S., who have already stated their desire to see more “australian like laws come into effect”, watching this unfold and probably gaining steam from it.

      A gun is nothing more than metal parts which can resist the force of a controlled expansion of gasses that expel a projectile.

      Criminals can make guns on their own easily enough.

      The idea of demanding that guns be seen as anything more than tools or lumps of metal is asking to make them a fetish object. The gun control groups fetishize guns just as much, perhaps more, than gun right groups do, because only through giving a simple object which has no free will of its own such a status can it be seen as more than bent pieces of metal with pins and springs inside it.

    • Nobody at Sandy Hook was killed by a device. Rather, the criminal use of a lawful tool resulted in injury and loss of life. I’m sure Missouri will continue to have state laws against murder and unlawful use and modification of weapons. This just keeps the federal government from infringing. And don’t use the commerce clause as an excuse as the feds have done in the past.

      • The inter state commerce clause in the federal statue must be addressed by Missouri or it will be a back door for the feds.

      • “unlawful…modification of weapons”

        Won’t be any law against modification anymore, my man. It’s my gun, I’ll do with it what I damn well please. But if Fed law doesn’t apply anymore, that means The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 doesn’t hold effect anymore and I can buy an full-auto, as is my right according to the constitution. So really, there’s no need to modify them anymore. I can just buy it from people who know what their shit about gunsmithing.

    • No its the constitution. Read it. “Shall not be infringed” is now being inforced like it is suppose to be plain and simple. You seem to be the nut job not understanding plain english.

      • 1) Ever notice the first two clauses of the Second Amendment? “A well regulated militia”, and “being necessary to the security of a free State,” ? Clearly, the intent of the Amendment is to defend the State, not individual homes. If citizens want a home defense Amendment, they should get one passed.
        2) BTW: The fourth clause, “shall not be infringed.” can be considered to apply to all 3 of the previous clauses!

        • What is The State if not a collection of our citizens, homes, schools, churches, public works , and places of business?

        • Ever notice that all important comma? It separates those from the statement of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms”. It was a nice try though, a for effort

        • Complete failure of reading comprehension and the understanding of the context in which it was written.

          The state is the people. These are individual rights that amount to significant collective power.

          Collective rights are for pure democracies where tyranny of the majority tramples individual rights.

          We are a republic. The founders were and still are relevant and intelligent and got it perfectly right.

          If the constitution is followed and enforced by the people the way the founders intended, we will never be anything but a free nation.

          Free speech and gun rights are dead in Europe and the Europeans are literally a few generations from a certain genocide.

          America could easily be set on that same path with trashing the 2nd and 1st amendments. Compromising on rights is for the weak.

          • Free speech and gun rights never existed in Europe. Gun ownership was far and between, most real estate was and is privately or state owned, hunting by individuals who do not own the property is outlawed, on state owned land only possible with restrictions or “responsibilities “.

        • What you said is not in agreement with the Supreme Court ruling. They ruled that the 2nd amendment right is an INDIVIDUAL right. Also, why didn’t you mention clause 3? “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” that means not only to own, but carry. “Bearing” means having the firearm on your person or in your hands. Read it all.

        • Mr. Jolly…how about another amendment? Amendments 1 and 2 are always brought forth. How number 10? “The powers not delegated (given) to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved (given) to the States respectively, or to the PEOPLE. (emphasis mine) We (the people) own the country and the government. They are to do OUR bidding.

        • Sidney, read the comments by the 2nd Amendment authors and our forefathers – you’ll find the Amendment was intended to allow ALL individuals to own weapons.

        • Henry you have never read the Federalist Papers. If you had, your dumbass would understand the reasoning the Founders put behind all their legislation. Read, educate yourself and most of all…learn to think for yourself.

        • That interpretation has been debunked. Google it. There is a clear legislative history that shows the evolution or the wording. They never meant to restrict the right to bear arms, but rather to explain the primary reason it was necessary. Anyway, a militia is not a state entity. Its is just citizenry with weapons and a purpose.

        • Your interpretation is nice, but the supreme Court sees it differently, as they well should. You obviously understand the 1st amendment, let’s work on the 2nd. The “state” as you put it, is merely the land where “the people” live. The law is what the judges say it is.

    • A device(firearm) can’t on its own kill anyone or anything. Therefore a device(firearm) didn’t kill anyone at sandy hook or any other mass shooting. A person with ill intentions is the one who murdered those kids. Not a device(firearm)

    • I like coming back to these posts like 10 years later when what you predicted never happened, I do it all the time. Dems are always wrong. We are a constitutional republic, not a democracy. The reason for that is so a corrupt majority cannot vote our rights away. It doesn’t matter if I’m the only one left who stands by the second amendment, you’re not taking anything from me.

    • Sorry about your small penis and fear of inanimate objects. It must suck to live in fear of your fellow human beings, and feel a need to regulate their lives for your own comfort.

      My suggestions would North Korea or cyanide. You are not needed in this society.

      Speaking as an immigrant.

    • We left nys to escape the demo commie gun laws.
      I’d be very happy to help you move there… I’d even
      buy your house in Missouri, too.

    • IGotAllMyTeeth, what you’re actually saying is you’re one of those “Common Sense” gun control nuts. You’re a Liberal, and a Socialist/Democrat. Stop hiding behind the ” I’m a middle of the road voter.” You’re actually a sell-out Socialist/Democrat who could care less about 2nd Amendment rights! Thank you, Missouri Republicans, for protecting citizens rights.

      • I’m a liberal democrat socialist who doesn’t own a gun and I live in Missouri and I’m glad the legislature is supporting the 2nd amendment, and I think gun laws are idiotic. Now they need to do the same with federal marijuana law.

        • I’m Alt-Right and I agree with you, Shawn. You can be Rightwing and support marijuana legalization, and you can be left wing and support the 2nd.

    • What firearm killed those children? Some nut killed them using a gun which you may not think people should own but there is no law against semi automatic weapons. The weapon was bought legally by that woman not her son. Do you think my semi auto 12 gauge I don’t need? What a weapon looks like doesn’t make it dangerous except only to those who know nothing about guns.

    • You’re a frisbee enthusiast at best and most likely have never held a gun much less be a “gun enthusiast”!! Sit down and shut up if you can’t have enough gonads to be honest about being the scared little liberal that you are!

    • Many times people cry “What about the children?
      The greatest Samurai that ever lived, Shinmen Tikezo, also titled “Kensei” taught that; “A Samurai that kills with his sword is not a true warrior. A man MUST kill with his heart.”

      If you do not understand this, then there is no explaining killing to you.

    • I tire of hoplophobe sub-humans complaining endlessly about the existence of inanimate pieces of metal.

      Boo hoo, some kids got brained years ago, go cry about it faggot.

    • The next Democratic President is coming hard for guns if the states do anything or not. The hard left is seeing to that as we speak. The next Democrat holdings office will throw them some bones regardless. Gun Owners have been in a holding pattern way to long. It’s time to on the offensive.

      Does being a responsible gun owner include owning AR-15’s, or are those in irresponsible category?

      • Being a responsible gun owner isn’t about the type of gun that you own. I’m sure there are a plethora of responsible gun owners who could own a 240G without fear or concern of them going on a shooting rampage with it, it would just be a cool ass thing to have. But we don’t make them readily available for sale to the public, and require an arduous permitting process, because the weapon is too dangerous in the wrong hands.

        The “crazy left” has a problem with the AR-15 due to the ease with which it makes to attack large amounts of people in a short amount of time, in part due to its ease of availability because of its popularity. It is, from time after time of these shootings happening, the weapon of choice for doing so. It does not require extensive training to become familiar enough with to cause significant harm on a large scale, we know this because it’s fraternal twin was the weapon of choice for arming 18 year olds fresh out of high school, many of which had never held let alone fired a gun before, for over 40 years.

      • Yes
        Just because a person owns a AR15 does not mean they own it to mow down crowds of people. Those idiots who feel a AR15 or AK47 is bad because of the firearm are living the title they earn,,IDIOTS. Those weapons are no more dangerous than a BB gun unless the fingers holding it deliberately intend on causing harm to others. On another point, just because you own a gallon of gas in a gas can doesn’t mean you are going to commit arson, but you could. Stop infringing on the rights of legal gun owners because of your ignorant biased opinions.

    • You sir are a dangerous idiot who has not the slightest understanding of the 2 most important right protected by the highest law.

      • You are very right, sir but, I have to disagree with you on one point. It is not the 2nd most important right, it is THE most important right. With out it, there are no other rights.

    • And…you’re obvioulsy a boot licker and should give up your rights because other people break laws. You turning in your drivers license because drunk drivers kill as many people per year as guns, after factoring for suicide.

    • The left will be a**holes about everything if they get someone in the WH. You can’t sit around thinking of “What ifs”.

    • This is a case of the states asserting their authority that THEY established the national government to provide control as WE THE PEOPLE see fit and NOT as a ‘national’ government controlled by bribes and corruption from Wall Street globalists. May God bless Missouri.

      Hopefully, the states may assert pressure on Congress to audit specific accounts exclusively maintained by FRBNY which are used to embezzle money from the federal government for the benefit of Wall Street. Ref. https://thedailycoin.org/2018/08/16/a-look-at-the-federal-reserve-through-a-different-lens/.

    • No, it was an appropriate way to answer the leftist ideologues who believe they are the “right” right ones to deny federal law in making “sanctuary cities” and welcoming ILLEGAL aliens to this country. They want to apply the Constitution to non-citizens, which makes absolutely no logical argument.

    • You mock Christians (original!), bash 2A supporters, lie about your own support and expect to convince anyone.

      Absolutely ZERO minds will be changed by the feral left’s pearl clutching.

      All you people know how to do lately is lose anyway, nothing going your way. Sad!

    • Those devices did not shoot anyone in 262 seconds. Devices have never committed a Crime.
      A Criminal killed those people, Mr knee jerk!
      And there are laws against that kind of thing!

    • “Enthusiast”, am I a gun enthusiast..
      I conceal carryevery day it is a pain in the waist, pain in the back.

      No.. I am not.
      Keep your enthusiasm.. I doubt strongly I it will lead you to saving lives.

      Actually living with your weapon may.

    • did you not read the bill? it VOIDS any and all fed regs, past present and future. im curious if that includes the federal firearms act that covers automatic weapons.

    • A gun did not kill those kids, a PERSON did. You cannot hold all accountable for the act of 1. If you do , then you should probably lose your driving privileges if your neighbor goes out and kills someone with his car after he had a bit too much to drink. Get real. The gun alone cannot kill anything. A person has to pull that trigger….

    • Sandy Hook was the biggest scam ever pulled of by Soros !! There were NO bodies ever removed from that building ever and all involved were actors ! Even the roads leading in were roadblocked BEFORE it was supposed to have happened. Plus the number one reason it never happened ??? Sandy Hook had been closed since 1985 !!! So get the he’ll outta here with the Sandy Hook bullshit !!!! Pull your damn head outta the sand and wake up !! And quit being a parrot for CNN and the fake news !!!!

    • Your just a pussy and won’t take a stand, we are heading towards an all out civil war we need as many states as possible to come together and do this, stronger together. Man up time to put your big boy pants on.

    • Sandy Hook was a con job. False Flag. Didn’t happen. Just like Osama Bin Laden blowing up the Twin Towers. Didn’t happen that way. Deep State was responsible for all of it. Everyone that has been Red Pilled know that.

    • QUOTE: “I’m a responsible gun enthusiast.”

      Why, of COURSE you are! You can be anything you want to be on the internet!

    • Well, tinkerbell, when you get your party to grow up and act like adults these shootings won’t be happening at all. Every damned mass shooting was done by a demonrat supporter. The failure isn’t the gun, it’s the failure of the parents to raise a responsible adult even against the idiocy of liberals who’ve interferred, incompetently I might add, in said child rearing.

    • Please, your not a gun enthusiast. Your a fudd. Your not welcome with gun enthusiasts and frankly you shouldn’t act as if you are one. Admit what you are, a supporter of gun control until the only guns you can own are bolt rifles and when the government takes those too you will have no support from us.

    • Fuck the NRA indeed. They are a treasonous group beholden to Russia now. However, if the people of Missouri are behind this, that is their decision to make. It needs to go for a formal vote of the people though. I sincerely doubt this will go through. Maybe, after years of legal wrangling because you know this is going to end up in the courts. THE PEOPLE of Missouri are good people. They just went from being the “show me” state to the “show me your hands mother****er” state. But again fuck the NRA

      • If the NRA is so Pro 2nd Amendment, then why would they oppose this? This bill is a God send to all Freedom loving Americans! Everyone is afraid they will lose money. Figure the “fight is over” go home.

        • Read the Article. The NRA opposed the requirement to notify police within 72 hours if your gun is stolen. After that was taken out, the NRA removed its objection.

          • Excellent, BillyGaits! Just like Jordan Peterson & Ben Shapiro: Instead of emotional reaction, study the FACTS! The NRA opposed a bad clause, & when it was removed, the NRA supported the bill. You got it Exactly Right, Billy! bbear

        • Reading comprehension skills…..work on it. This is how wrong information can spread and people that don’t do their own research believe it and can lead to good legislation being voted down, a good candidate not being elected, etc etc etc…..

      • I have never read such an ignorant response to any comment on gun control. Do some reading before making stupid remarks on paper…as it were…

    • Yep, fuck em.

      Their tactics grow tiresome. They profit most when the Second Amendment is under attack, and that’s why they’re always working some backroom deal to help create some new infringement to get people to panic and throw money at them (latest case in point: bumpstocks).

      There shouldn’t NEED to be “special interest groups”, bribing politicians to uphold the Constitution, anyways. It’s part of their fucking oath of office. At least the other gun rights groups seem to make suing the govt over draconian laws their MAIN focus, unlike the NRA and what I said in the previous paragraph. If I ever join one, it sure as hell won’t be the NRA. FYI there’s 80,000,000 gun owners (that we know of) in the USA, but only 4-14 million NRA members (depending on the source you look at). So when someone says “fuck the NRA”, most gun owners just shrug. as you’re not really talking about them.

      Also, in the interest of fairness (even though I don’t like them), if you look at the amount of money the NRA gives politicians? It ranks down near the bottom, among all the other “lobbies” in America. It’s actually kind of a joke, since people act like they completely “own” all the politicians …but I wouldn’t expect anyone with such obvious bias, to actually do any real research.

      P.S. using your friends bolt-action .22 at a range one day, doesn’t make you a “gun enthusiast”.

      • You obviously don’t know everything about the NRA and all that it does by your statements. They are much much more than just what their lobbying arm is, you might want to go learn more about them and all they do and have done. Also, they are involved and have been part of a great many lawsuits, for instance, it was thanks to the help of the NRA that many lawsuits have been won in Illinois and one suit is ongoing as we speak against a city here. Illinois also finally got Concealed Carry not too many years ago thanks to the NRA’s help. Could the NRA do some things better or differently yes but they are still an important group to support and I believe that all of the 2nd Amendment rights groups and your state groups are important to support, we need all of their help. No one individual group can afford to fight alone or sue all of the unconstitutional laws being passed, each one has strengths and weaknesses and positives and negatives. Besides in California, GOA (Gun Owners Of America) does not help at any other state or city level and only help at Federal level.

      • Obviously you have never served in the military. Your ignorant response reveals the hate and predjudice that runs your mind and mouth. Try night school to get an education.

    • NRA only opposed it when it made it a crime NOT to report your gun as stolen within 72 hours. Once that was removed, they removed their opposition. That is how I have read it on several other sources and above anyway. I don’t agree with everything the NRA does, but we would be FAR worse of without them. This is how they won in England – they divided the shotgun shooters from the sport shooters and then the hunters. They had far less voice when fractured and they got steamrolled. Hate on the NRA all you want and voice your opinions – but lets not stop supporting them until their is a VALID alternative. There is a reason the politicians fear the NRA and why they are always trying to turn it’s member against it. We can change the NRA with our membership votes – but once it is gone – so is our voice in the government.

  3. To Igotallmyteeth. The only short sightedness that can be seen here is your fear pondering. Thinking a device being responsible for such travesty is not only laughable but also gives credit to those restrictive laws. This here is quite the issue a so called responsible gun owner. What a gaff. I am a gun owner period. A veteran of the Gulf, Iraq, and Afghanistan and I definitely approve the message sent by the legislature and the state of Missouri. More states should take notice and act in similar ways. Enforcing our bill of rights and in acting easy language spelling out that they are inalienable right. That no law restricting lawful owners from use or ownership should be tolerated!

  4. Shut up fudd, go back to your Kimber 1911 in a leather OWB holster and telling people anything that doesn’t start with a .4 isn’t for you

  5. Your a gun enthusiast ? Right. The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed. If you hate our constitution so much there are plenty of countries you could move to that have no freedom.

  6. Hmmm… If all federal restrictions, fees, stamps, etc on firearms and accessories are to be null and void in Missouri… Will this count for some good ole “universal hearing protection,” aka suppressors?

  7. The reason so many innocent people died is because there was no good guy with a gun at the door when the bad guy with a gun showed up, bad guys will always have a gun regardless of what laws say.

  8. “I’m a responsible gun enthusiast. But…”
    “But…”
    Why is it every “Responsible gun owner for gun control” NPC always thinks their .22 they shot when they were 12 makes them an expert in gun policy?

    • I’d guess it’s the same reasoning that some use to say “because you managed to get in to this country, with no legal authority, you are owed the protections of the Constitution, the vote, welfare, etc. This is all so you can turn this country into the $#!+hole you left.” I’m in favor of CCW requirements that have you carry certification of recent experience, though I’m certain the “illegals” will only counterfeit that. Criminals will always get weapons to hurt people. At least, your parents taught you that there is nothing to fear when a gun is in the same room. The snowflakes trying to describe their terror at seeing a “military style” weapon only show how much we need mandatory firearms training like the Swiss.

  9. While this is a good thing, it’s sad that a state has to take such measures in opposition to federal legislaters trying to erase our civil rights.

  10. Fantastic news!! That’s why I’ve said before how important local and statewide elections are. I feel that they are actually more important and national elections. 🇺🇸

  11. Knee-jerk reaction to NZ? I think not. If anything it’s the reaction to the MILLIONS killed by oppressive regimes in the last century alone! If you think our government will never come to that, then you haven’t been paying attention!

  12. Every line ends with “by law-abiding citizens”… which means the good guys with guns.
    I believe this is a move in the right direction. Criminals will get guns one way or another, so we have to assist those who want to protect themselves from those criminals.

  13. So does thus mean felons can own a gun again??? As well. Or just ppl who arent felons. I hate Missouri bht i love that they gove a fuck about the 2nd ammendment. Hints why i own 7 guns to protect my family an im not even 20 yet😂

  14. Here we have someone calling everyone a nut job that supports this bill. Hey dumbass, this was the point of the right to bear arms.

    Guess you would have everyone sit at a school like leading lams to a slaughter.

    • Convicted felons who have been released from prison have ALWAYS been able to have a gun if they wanted one. They may be prevented from buying one or more from a Federal Firearm Licensed gun dealer but the Black Market for Guns that Democrats created is available as close as the nearest major Democrat controlled city or the neighborhood drug dealer. Democrats don’t ask for ID to exercise a granted privilege, voting, the Black Market doesn’t as for ID to exercise a human right guaranteed by the Constitution that created the politicians’ cushy job and perks.

  15. So now can any resident of Missouri buy a silencer, short barreled rifle/shotgun or machine gun without getting the tax stamp? Interesting article. It will be declared null and void the day it is signed, by the first Federal judge who gets the lawsuit. State laws are ALWAYS overridden by Federal laws. Popcorn at the ready.

      • Still illegal, which is why its a cash only business right now. Banks won’t touch the money because there have been no federal legislation changes. And the DEA has been raiding people still, just without local LEO assistance.

      • Marijuana is still illegal nationwide, even in states that have legalized it. If the DEA decides to go after you, state laws won’t protect you.

        Just like how if this bill gets signed into law in Missouri, it won’t protect anybody from arrest by the ATF.

    • Did you read the article or you just talking out your butt. There is a federal law that says states don’t have to help the Feds do anything they don’t want. Does the words “sanctuary cities” mean anything to you or 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.”Sanctuary States”. If states could be forced to help the feds every mayor or governor would be in jail
      Now go look at yourself in the mirror and say I am a numb nuts

      • You’re leaving out the part where this bill makes it illegal for federal agents to enforce gun control laws in Missouri. That goes far beyond merely refusing to aid the feds in enforcing those laws.

        This bill also explicitly claims to nullify the federal gun laws, and to prohibit the feds from prosecuting anyone in Missouri for violating those laws. This has been established as beyond the power of the states since 1833.

    • Please don’t ask stupid questions ! Anyone with even half a brain knows the answers to those questions!!! No silencers , now sawed offs and NO machine guns (fully automatic is the correct term too) !!!

  16. Imagine if your legislature spent this much time and money (because the lawsuits challenging this up to SCOTUS where it will be declined to be heard will be expensive) on education, infrastructure, and health care (especially mental health) instead of fighting an imaginary war against gun control.

    Or, if you don’t care for them to spend that money on education, infrastructure, and health care, imagine how much lower your taxes would be without funding dead on arrival lawsuits.

    And the reason this will fail? You cannot blatantly pass a law rejecting federal authority, that’s baked into the constitution as much as 2A is. You can challenge federal laws and regulations on the basis that they violate the 2A, but you cannot declare federal jurisdiction to be invalid because there are laws on the books you don’t agree with.

    p.s. even if this pipe dream were to hold up, you would open the door to county and city governments passing legislation that they can reject state laws, and they would cite this law as precedent.

    • “imaginary war against gun cntrol”?!?!

      Wow. Your ignorance and arrogance are quite astonishing. Expecially with the evidence literally laid out before you.

  17. States have the right (and obligation) to oppose and override federal laws that they believe are not in the best interest of their citizens.Refer to States Rights in the Constitution. Violation of the Second Amendment by the federal government has gone unchallenged far too long. Law abiding citizens have the uninfringed right under the Second Amendment to the U.S.Constitution to own and bear firearms in order to protect themselves, their families and homes from anyone, including (and specifically stated), anarchial government. There is no limitation or exclusion stated in the Second Amendment.

    The proposed legislation would not change any existing Missouri law which limits or excludes gun ownership by felons. The Bill would only apply to nullification of any FEDERAL law that infringes uopn Second Amendment rights of LAW ABIDING CITIZENS.

    • States have a right to challenge them through the courts, they do not have the right to outright reject validity of a federal law or regulation just because they say so. If the case has merit, it will eventually be argued in front of the Supreme Court. Because the 2nd Amendment is in the FEDERAL constitution, and therefore applies to ALL citizens regardless of state of residence, the only authority legally capable of ruling that a federal law or regulation violates the 2nd Amendment, is the federal courts, up to and including the Supreme Court.

      Your legislators know this, and instead of asking your state’s Attorney General to file a lawsuit on behalf of your state, they are instead dicking around with state’s rights legislation to try and do an end run around the Constitution. The topic doesn’t matter to them, they chose a 2A issue because it is like a dog whistle to people like you who are willing to believe (out of fear, ignorance, or both) that the federal government is your enemy and out to strip you of rights provided by…wait for it…the existence of our federal government.

      • Sorry Mr. Laughing man. Rights are Rights. NOT permission from the Federal government. RIGHT to life. RIGHT of free speech. RIGHT to defend yourself. These are God given. A driver’s license is PERMISSION to operate a motor vehicle, it is not a RIGHT. A right is something inherent to a human. Not “permitted.” You have a right to breathe. To live. To defend yourself. The federal government doesn’t “give” me any rights. The constition is limitation for the federal government, NOT the people. Read it. It limits government. Not individuals.

        • The Constitution is a social contract, agreed to by the people and justifying the existence of the federal government to provide the framework and teeth for those rights. Its existence is what continues to provide for those rights, and defines them, because the whole is stronger than just the sum of our individuals. It also provides avenues for challenging the federal government in case of overreach, which is the courts, not the state governments just up and deciding it is, which is what the original thirteen states agreed to, as well as requirement for entry into the union by every state thereafter that by doing so they are ratifying the Constitution as well.

          You believe bump stocks should be legal? Take it to the courts. You believe full auto should be legal? Take it to the courts. You believe silencers should be legal? Take it to the courts. You believe you should be able to buy military inventory without special permit or restriction? Take it to the courts.

          This law sets a precedent for any tier of government to ignore the due process of laws imposed by the tier of government above it. Again, your legislators chose to make it about the 2A because its a dog whistle for people who believe the government is going to take their guns. And here you are, barking up a storm like dog at the mailman.

  18. Following on this, I would like to see FINALLY at the Federal level the National Reciprocity bill that McTurtle has been DISGRACEFULLY refusing to bring out of committee for nearly two years. Good job, Mizzou! (both my parents are from Mexico just north of Columbia).

  19. I won’t feel sorry once your schools are the next targets you guys get what you deserve Missouri when your children are the ones in caskets you won’t have to ask why this time.

      • I would guess that Cody doesn’t have or plan to have any children. The children in his imaginary “Gun Free” Utopia protected by “heroic” teachers armed with harsh words and moral indignation are the ones most likely to be helpless targets advertised by “No Guns Allowed” signs. But since he doesn’t have children at risk he will dance in the blood while claiming it was the evil gun that did it.

  20. This will be a HUGE milestone if the governor signs it into law, but will it also apply to all firearm import bans?

    #NorincoGang

    • I red both the house and senate bills and didn’t see anything hinting at any exceptions/exclusions for any specific federal regulations. So I would assume that the NFA as a whole is out the window!

      *thunderous applause*

  21. If other states don’t enact similar measures, Missouri could very well see an influx of citizens and gun-related industry from other states, similar to events that transpired in Colorado after it legalized marijuana.

    If I were a machinist and/or a gunsmith – even if it were just a hobby – I’d seriously think about moving to Missouri if these bills are signed into law. Multi-state firearm companies and retailers are going to tread carefully around this issue the same way banks have been careful about financing majihuana-related businesses in legalized stated.

    It’s a prime opportunity for home-grown mom’n’pop businesses in Missouri to start cranking out supressors and other accessories since anything built in, and bought by, people in Missouri will not be tracked, taxed, or registered by the ATF or any other federal agency.

  22. @ Cooper Davis: as the bill is written, it appears to negate federal firearm bans, but the bans will likely remain in effect for most intents and purposes because Missouri is land locked. There’s no way to get the banned guns across state lines without entering the nation (and crossing a significant portion of it) where the bans are still in effect.

    If Arkansas and either Texas or Louisiana passed very similar bills, you might see federally banned weapons in Missouri at reasonable prices, but if only Missouri has the law, any federally banned weapons sold in the state will be priced to reflect their rarity and the law breaking required to get them smuggled into the nation and the state.

  23. You just stated that a “device” murdered 20 first graders and 6 adults.
    And you call others “nut jobs” and claim to be a “gun enthusiast.”

    Thanks for the comedy routine.

  24. Great job Missouri! Now if we can get other States, like Georgia, we can sleep a little better at night. The Democrats did everything they could to steal our last Governors race, Abrams, socialist agenda was a gun grab, not to include her “black panther, thugs! This action would go over like a turd in a punch bowl causing more unrest, which we do not want or need.

  25. When will they start the process of voting i want gun rights as soon as possible but inst it unconstitutional to charge federal agents?

    • Yes. Any attempt to actively block federal agents from enforcing federal law in Missouri would constitute insurrection. Which the federal government would be within its authority to respond to with military force.

      • @Cal Bring it the fuck on! If we have to start the boogaloo over this at least we’ll have a state government with an organized military force behind us!

      • Cal, you have that backward. The Insurrection Act protects the federal government from anything that would affect the deployment of troops in a state to deal with unlawfulness. In this case, the state has authority over the federal government because of the tenth amendment and the commandeering doctrine. Look up Murphy vs NCAA for precedence.

        • I’m not talking about federal commandeering of state agencies. A state is of course fully free to refuse cooperation with federal law enforcement if they so choose. The issue is that this bill calls for the arrest and criminal prosecution of federal agents if they enforce federal gun laws in Missouri. States are not allowed to do that.

    • On the contrary, most of us are actually civilized human beings that will try to find peaceful resolutions to conflicts. We just want Big Brother off our ass

  26. Besides, people kill people. Guns have never walked out and killed anyone. You’re just asking for criminals to own guns and sane people not to be able to defend themselves. Idiots

    • MFP Commentary:
      Something stinks to high heaven here.  We passed such an amendment about 5 years ago.  What I last heard was that MO courts were in the process of trampling this properly passed amendment. What is to stop them from doing this again?
      ~MFP

  27. The fact is the state of Missouri has the right to protect it’s citizens from Federal overreach. It will not be taken over by the Communistic left and their gun grabbing. We stand tall and proud and mostly well armed. If you would like to see this country which is a Republic not a Democracy succeed you should be happy that a state is standing up for the constitution on which the “Republic” was founded.

  28. “But will it hold up in a federal court?”
    Who cares what the Federal courts rule.
    Missouri is and always has been a sovereign nation.
    Missouri looking to the federal courts in this matter would be as nuts as Communist China looking to
    US federal courts to settle an internal matter in their country…..

  29. As a Missourian, I can attest that this is a great state to live in. We enjoy many freedoms aside from unparalleled freedom to bear firearms. (Many people are still unaware that we can carry open or concealed with no permits, a huge recent gain for Missouri.) The cost of living is fairly low, jobs are plentiful, and it’s a wholesome state to live in, provided you stay out of the major cities. I love the freedoms that come from living in Missouri. I own 2 acres and can build any damn thing I want on my land with no permits. It costs a fraction of what it costs to drive in other states. You can still hear Christian music on public radio. people are over-the-top friendly and genuinely interested in your well-being. Missourians are patriotic to the nth degree.

  30. Small quibble: no Federal law violates the Second Amendment. There’s this court thingy that would strike down any law that did, including rewriting the Amendment to better suit the firearms lobby.

    • That’s just incorrect . 1st the courts would have to hear the case serval laws scotus has never ruled on 2nd and more importantly the the courts are made of people all people are bias and if the constitution could only be intuprited correctly then the dems wouldn’t be trying to court pack and roe vs wade would be set in stone. 3rd the few guns laws they have ruled on wildly contradict each other not suprising since the 2a IS an unlimited right . Infringe – to limit. Compare nunn vs georgia and miller vs us for a perfect example. 4th while trump is a living hyperbole he was on to something with his Obama judges tweet . Judges rule politically look at dred Scott for proof of that .

  31. Except that the term “law abiding” might be too vague… and I don’t recall the Founders putting any such terms on the right to bear arms. If I get a traffic violation, am I no longer “law abiding”? What if I fail to pay my taxes on time? What if I jaywalked? What if someone accuses me of causing a domestic disturbance that they themselves caused? Do you see how the term ‘law abiding’ could be used to prohibit guns to those who have not committed violent crimes, or who have been wrongfully accused of doing so?

  32. Gun control laws are unconstitutional. Period. If anyone, state or federal or local, passes a law designed to restrain the citizens from owning, using or transferring guns, accessories or ammunition, their law is unconstitutional and therefore illegal.

    “… the right of the people to bear arms shall not be INFRINGED”

  33. Wow. This will be interesting. I wonder what state laws they have on gun control. I am a gun enthusiast, but i would be okay with requiring crew-served weapons and explosive devices in a secure armory even if it is a home with some level of security. What do you guys think?

  34. To; IGotAllMyTeeth. you sound like you put in your heart felt response although it is very incorrect on fact. If you care to read the reports on the Sandy Hook tragedy, NO Semi Automatic Rifle was used at any time, All decedents were killed by a 9mm handgun.

  35. What I just read will have no negative effect on law abiding citizenry and frees up more resources to deal with criminals. That is great. And statistics over the past 20+ years show that the more guns in the hands of responsible gun owners HAS reduced violent crime. Only problem I see is property values may rise with a sudden influx of people wanting to exercise their 2nd amendment rights.

  36. This Bill just re-enforces what is already spelled out in the US Constitution.

    Art. I Section 8.4 – Congress has the power to control immigration and naturalization.

    2nd Amendment – Bearing Arms; A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State; the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    10th Amendment – Reserved Powers; The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    So, Congress has the power to regulate immigration and naturalization, as stated in the Constitution.

    However, in the Constitution, The Feds and State Government are specifically forbidden from infringing on the Right to keep and Bear arms. Also the 10th Amendment makes it clear that any regulation of rights not enumerated are left to the State or the People.

  37. Take your AR-15 and blow your head off. You’ll just add to the stats and nobody will care. Yell “2nd amendment” while you’re at it.

    • Yes they can do that. The states are the ones with the power. The Federal Government is intended to be a means to manage foreign affairs. It was never designed to manage issues within states. These are United States… Meaning each state was to have its own sovereignty, and the federal government is what projects the power of the states combined, mediates issues between states, and provides for the defense of the states. If the country was just to be one country, there would have been no need for multiple states, except as prefectures to ease government managing more local authority. Each state is, was and should be its own sovereign state.

  38. Show me, my foot! MISSOURI, has stepped up and shown the way!!!!! Now Florida, Texas and the rest need to belly up to the bar and help the trail blazers!

  39. Guns don’t murder people,you idiots. People murder people! Guns don’t pull their own triggers. People do. Don’t be stupid.

  40. No man has any right to change our God Given Rights to bear arms or any God Given Rights. Way to go Missouri. Get rid of the ATF another bunch of useless scumbags.

  41. As a fellow Missourian, Pro Constitution, Pro States Rights…I agree with this bill wholeheartedly in principle…But I don’t know…Something just doesn’t smell right…I sense a “honey trap” in the making…OK, I’ll take my tin foil hat off now…

  42. OK sounds good on first reading,,,,but! What teeth? Unless harsh penalties for violating that which is forbidden are specified, it is just like the 2nd amendment . As soon as the “enforcers” realize that they can get away with spitting on that “damn scrap of paper” they go right back to trampling our “rights”. It is fine to say “thou shalt not”but unless you add “or you will be drawn and quartered at dawn” they will just ignore the “law” because to them, it is null and void as if it was never written.

  43. We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment.
    Find one government in all of history that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.
    Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
    Oppressive Governments are ALWAYS banning the People’S RIGHTS to arms.
    The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.
    The only reason for the Second Amendment is to clearly spell-out the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of INDIVIDUALS to keep & bear ARMS.
    The only reason for the BILL(list) of RIGHTS was to codify INDIVIDUALS’ GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
    Has there ever been a government that was not chock full of it’s “rights” up to and including declaring itself to be the Lord God Almighty?! (Rome, Egypt, Israel,etc)
    Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches? Try shutting up any Politician. But THEY would LOVE to shut YOU up, hence the FIRST Amendment.
    Anyone who tells you the 2nd Amendment applies to the Army or State Militia, is telling you they think you are STUPID.
    There has NEVER been a government that felt it had to codify it’s army’s/soldier’s “RIGHT” to “Keep and BEAR ARMS” because there has NEVER been a government that refused to allow It’s own soldiers to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!
    The Second Amendment was written for the People, like the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights. This was confirmed by the SCOTUS in the DC vs Heller decision, where they stated that the “People” in the Second Amendment were the same “People” that are mentioned in the First and Fourth Amendment.
    The 2nd Amendment clearly codifies the “right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms”, and certainly not “the Militia”.
    Why would “the Militia”, a type of army manned by citizen-soldiers as opposed to full-time “regulars”, need a constitutional amendment to guarantee they have the right “to keep and bear arms”?
    Is there any specific statement anywhere in the Constitution that the army Congress is empowered to raise has the “right to keep and bear arms”? Of course not. …………. That is assumed.

    the 2nd amendment,, specifies that the RIGHT to bear arms is the right of the people,, NOT the militia,,,, it is the people who will make up the militia,, but the right is not the right of a “well regulated militia” it is the right of the people, We the people were BORN WITH INALIENABLE RIGHTS, meaning they come from GOD.

    Your Rights do not come from the Constitution. Your Rights come from Our Creator, and the Constitution was written to SUPERVISE, REGULATE, and CONTROL government actors. As it relates to firearms, the Heller “decision” was completely unnecessary, and likely a smokescreen to make it APPEAR that the USG retained some rights to regulate some firearms. Check out the relevant part of US v. Cruikshank:
    “[The Right to Keep and Bear Arms] is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed;… This is one of the amendments that has no other effect
    than to restrict the powers of the national government,…”.
    U.S. v. Cruikshank Et Al. 92 U.S. 542 (1875).
    Res adjudicata – “the thing has already been decided.”
    The 9th and 10th Amendments help make it ABUNDANTLY clear to even the DENSEST of intellects that we truly have NO “Constitutional rights.” What we have(at the risk of being redundant) is Constitutionally-SECURED rights, but these rights are ONLY as secure as:
    a) the honor and integrity of those taking the oath, and
    b) the ability of the People to COMPEL obedience on pain of perjury charges and removal from office.

    https://resistancetononsense.wordpress.com/2018/06/29/our-preexisting-irrevolkable-right-of-self-defense/

    The intention of the Founders and Framers was to keep our God-given rights secure by REQUIRING those who seek office to take the oath as an immutable predicate to taking office, meaning it is binding on THEM – not on US.

    Of course, most of the power brokers wish to keep us ignorant of our Rights and our Power. If possible, i highly recommend Thomas Paine’s “The Rights of Man,” which should help to educate Americans and illustrate to them the difference between Natural Rights, and what the 14th (never properly ratified, btw) wishes to change that to: “privileges and immunities.”

    It is implicit in the nature of all kinds of armies —- be they militia or regulars, volunteer, conscripted, or mercenary — to be armed.
    They are all “armed forces”.
    They all “bear arms”.
    They all carry guns.
    That is what they do.
    It certainly no more requires an amendment to the Constitution to state that “the Militia” has the RKBA , than a specific statement that the army Congress is empowered to raise may be manned by armed troops.

    Governments don’t have to document their “right” to bear arms, that is what governments ARE, they are naked force, George Washington said as much. Saying governments have a right to guns is like saying cars have a right to have wheels…

    “The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals … it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government … it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s protection against the government.” Ayn Rand

  44. Richard what nobody is mentioning congress is trying to get rid of the constitution nobody’s bothered to mention about communism and the constitution has no part and communism or socialism so of the constitution no longer is exist what good is the vote

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here