Missouri Snubs the Feds! – The Legal Brief

Welcome back to The Legal Brief, the show
where we CRUSH the various legal myths and misinformation surrounding various areas of
the gun world. I’m your host Adam Kraut and today we’re taking
a look at Missouri’s Second Amendment Preservation Act. Earlier this year, Missouri State Senator
Eric Burlison introduced SB 367, the Second Amendment Preservation Act. The bill begins with a nine point declaration
that recounts constitutional powers granted to the Federal Government, the Tenth Amendment,
and the power of the Missouri legislature. One of the declarations states “The people
of the several states have given Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign
nations, and among the several states”, but “regulating commerce” does not include the
power to limit citizens’ right to keep and bear arms in defense of their families, neighbors,
persons, or property, or to dictate as to what sort of arms and accessories law-abiding
Missourians may buy, sell, exchange, or otherwise possess within the borders of this state.” I bet you can tell where this is going. The bill starts by listing five federal acts,
laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, and regulations that
would be considered infringements. Those five things are 1) any taxes imposed
on firearms, accessories or ammunition which are expected to have a chilling effect on
the purchase or ownership by citizens, 2) any registering or tracking of firearms or
accessories that would be expected to have a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership,
3) any registering or tracking of the owners of any of those previously mentioned things,
4) any act forbidding the possession, ownership, or use of a firearm, accessory or ammunition
by a law-abiding citizen, and 5) any act ordering the confiscation of any firearm, accessory
or ammunition. The bill also states that “any federal acts,
laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, and regulations, regardless
if enacted before or after the provisions of [this bill], which infringe on the people’s
right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution
of the United States and Article I, Section 23 of the Constitution of Missouri 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.” In addition, the bill also prohibits any public
officer or employee of Missouri or any political subdivision of it to enforce any of the aforementioned
things. In other words, it’d be up to the feds. If a person, who is a federal agent, attempts
to do that, the bill would later bar them from employment as a law enforcement officer
in Missouri, should they attempt to work for the state or local government. And, the term “law-abiding citizen” shall
mean a person who is not otherwise precluded under state law from possessing a firearm
and shall not be construed to include anyone who is not legally present in the United States
or the state of Missouri. Put another way, as long as you are in the
country legally, and physically present in the state of MIssouri, if passed, this would
apply to you, regardless of whether you are a Missouri resident or not. As you might have started to catch on, the
bill’s purpose is to nullify any federal action on firearms within the state of Missouri. This is certainly not the first time an action
like this has been taken. Remember, Kansas passed the Second Amendment
Protection Act in 2013. The bill was similar in nature, essentially
nullifying federal gun control. However, that did not stop the successful
prosecution of two Kansas men, one who produced a silencer without any licenses, etc. and
the other who purchased it without going through the NFA process. That case, as you may have heard was Kettler
which the Supreme Court declined to hear. I’ve included a link in the description to
the 10th Circuit’s opinion upholding their convictions. Like we have discussed on this show previously,
even with a state passing a law, it does not mean that people are immune from prosecution. One need not look further than states which
have legalized the use of marijuana and the federal action that has been taken against
individuals who run afoul of federal law to get an idea as to what might happen. That’s it for this episode, if you have learned
anything from this show, help us out and hit that like button, and share it with your friends. Don’t forget to get subscribed and if you
enjoyed the video, consider supporting us via the links down in the video description. And as always, thanks for watching!

100 thoughts on “Missouri Snubs the Feds! – The Legal Brief

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *