Anyone know what's going on with this new bill in Missouri (SB 367) i believe?
- Thread starter jasewhitehead08
- Start date
"McDaniel Militia Act"
Absolutely Based.
75% off of a Noveske/LMT (fuck Daniel Defense antigun donating cucks)
Imagine having legislators that arent hand wringers hell bent on destroying your rights and sovereignty "for the children/poor migrants/muh fee fees"
Some Source online said:
Absolutely Based.
75% off of a Noveske/LMT (fuck Daniel Defense antigun donating cucks)
Imagine having legislators that arent hand wringers hell bent on destroying your rights and sovereignty "for the children/poor migrants/muh fee fees"
Holy crap! We need some people like that, with spines, here in Florida legislature.
You think this is gonna stick? and how long before we start seeing other states follow suit if any?
Essentially members of our legislature want make all of us members of the militia so there is no legal wiggle room for libs to take our rights away.
Missouri has some shitty roads. But we ain’t no damned leftists.
Missouri has some shitty roads. But we ain’t no damned leftists.
It will be interesting will be seeing the crime rate numbers drop in the next two years.
SB 367 - This act creates the "Second Amendment Preservation Act", and lists various declarations of the Missouri General Assembly regarding the United States Constitution and the scope of the federal government's authority. In addition, the act declares that federal supremacy does not apply to federal laws that restrict or prohibit the manufacture, ownership, and use of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition within the state because such laws exceed the scope of the federal government's authority. Laws necessary for the regulation of the land and the United States Armed Forces are excluded from the types of federal firearms laws that exceed federal authority.
This act declares as invalid all federal laws that infringe on the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution. Some laws declared invalid under this act include certain taxes, certain registration and tracking laws, certain prohibitions on the possession, ownership, use, or transfer of a specific type of firearm, and confiscation orders.
The act declares that it is the duty of the courts and law enforcement agencies to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
Under this act, no public officer or state or local employee has the authority to enforce firearms laws declared invalid by the act.
Any public officer or state or local employee who tries to enforce the firearms declared invalid by the act or any person who acts under the color of law to deprive a Missouri citizen of rights or privileges ensured by the federal and state constitutions shall be liable for redress. In such an action attorney's fees and costs may be awarded, and official or qualified immunity shall not be available to the defendant as a defense. Such officer or employee may also be prohibited from serving as a law enforcement officer for the state or political subdivision.
This act contains a severability clause.
This act is similar to HB 786 (2019), HB 1760 (2018), and similar to provisions in HB 1439 (2014).
CHARLEY MERRIWEATHER
So far, this law has been proposed, but hasn't made it to a vote yet. It will be interesting to see if it can first make it onto the floor for a vote, then to see if it passes, and finally whether the governor will sign the bill into law. While the mere proposal of this law is encouraging, it is a very long way from being a law.
This act declares as invalid all federal laws that infringe on the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution. Some laws declared invalid under this act include certain taxes, certain registration and tracking laws, certain prohibitions on the possession, ownership, use, or transfer of a specific type of firearm, and confiscation orders.
The act declares that it is the duty of the courts and law enforcement agencies to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
Under this act, no public officer or state or local employee has the authority to enforce firearms laws declared invalid by the act.
Any public officer or state or local employee who tries to enforce the firearms declared invalid by the act or any person who acts under the color of law to deprive a Missouri citizen of rights or privileges ensured by the federal and state constitutions shall be liable for redress. In such an action attorney's fees and costs may be awarded, and official or qualified immunity shall not be available to the defendant as a defense. Such officer or employee may also be prohibited from serving as a law enforcement officer for the state or political subdivision.
This act contains a severability clause.
This act is similar to HB 786 (2019), HB 1760 (2018), and similar to provisions in HB 1439 (2014).
CHARLEY MERRIWEATHER
So far, this law has been proposed, but hasn't made it to a vote yet. It will be interesting to see if it can first make it onto the floor for a vote, then to see if it passes, and finally whether the governor will sign the bill into law. While the mere proposal of this law is encouraging, it is a very long way from being a law.
There should be no official or qualified imunity for any government official or any other citizen.
Last edited:
In what regard? to decide how a citizen protects his self? I.E. Utilizes his 2nd amendment rights?
Hi,
Update this thread when the Governor signs off (Governor in 2014 Vetoed it) on it AND someone manufacturers publicly a new Auto MG and new Suppressor for over the counter sales without going through Federal Laws.
So is MO going to implement its' own Firearms License Division because any FFL holder "following" MO law would still be subject to legal actions because they sign and acknowledge they will follow Federal Laws in regards to Firearms.
IIRC Montana passed this type of law several years ago yet NO Company has manufactured anything going against Federal Firearm Laws.
Sincerely,
Theis
Update this thread when the Governor signs off (Governor in 2014 Vetoed it) on it AND someone manufacturers publicly a new Auto MG and new Suppressor for over the counter sales without going through Federal Laws.
So is MO going to implement its' own Firearms License Division because any FFL holder "following" MO law would still be subject to legal actions because they sign and acknowledge they will follow Federal Laws in regards to Firearms.
IIRC Montana passed this type of law several years ago yet NO Company has manufactured anything going against Federal Firearm Laws.
Sincerely,
Theis
That's kinda what i was getting at. It doesn't really change much unless you want to "rig" something up in your garage and even then someone with a Marshal badge could still probably get their way. Makes me curious as to how this could gain momentum if all "red states" were to follow suit.
In all honesty, it’s just a statement to let everyone know we ain’t gonna put roll over and let the goof balls get a foothold.
At least until the blues start their planned migration to MO to change the cities to blue. See Texas.
I’ll direct them to settle in North St. Louis. In 24 hours they’ll be armed and calling in arty.
I'm hoping Oklahoma takes such a firm stance. We are doing pretty well, can't complain at least. But always work to be done.
Say hi to my liberal brother when you get there.
Im no liberal friend.
The cabelas in KC has an entire rack of GAP team rifles on the wall in the gun vault.
why do you use a gun vault, how do you get access when you need them?
The best way for that to happen is to allow Illinois to annex St. Louis.
Screw that, the sane people in IL are trying to get chitcago separated. We don’t want stlouis!
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about! The anti's, they're busy throwing as much shit at the wall, hoping, KNOWING that one day, one will stick, just gotta keep it up.
Well, for every one of their POS bills they try to get to stick, we should have two or three. Eventually one will stick. Only I think the bills written by pro firearms owners will be worded in a way they actually do stick and are held up by the Constitution. Just gotta keep 'em coming. Fight fire with fire.
Sitting here bitching to each other about it ain't getting anything done. We need to be more active. I'll defend my rights down to the last bullet and speck of powder, but I'd much rather see it happen peacefully and with our nation intact, more or less.
Can I double like this?
Similar threads
