Universal background checks

[Griz]

Couple of house bills trying to gain traction. Not sure if Mike Parsons would veto after stating he'd support stricter gun control.

Missouri Bills Criminalize Firearm Safety - Sportsmen's Alliance

Two identical bills that require universal background checks completed by federally licensed dealers for all firearm transfers have been introduced in the

www.sportsmensalliance.org

 

[Ghost1958]

Not remotely enforceable if it passes.

 

[OC for ME]

Non starter...there are so few liberals in the legislature that these types of proposals, filed every year, never even make it on a committee calendar.

 

[Va_Nemo]

But a good way to start getting some organization and political activity going on there.

Nemo

 

[OC for ME]

True.

 

[kcgunfan]

I think these bills are intended to rile up the anti-gunners, but they pretty much backfire every year, and get the pro folks lined up against them. So, not only do they never make it on the calendar, it does them negative good will. So, they can keep on filing them forever for all I care.

Non starter...there are so few liberals in the legislature that these types of proposals, filed every year, never even make it on a committee calendar.

 

[OC for ME]

 

[KBCraig]

It's worth remembering how anti-gun the Missouri legislature and governors were, long after other states joined the "shall-issue" crew.

Just like Virginia, things can flip with a single election.

 

[color of law]

It's worth remembering how anti-gun the Missouri legislature and governors were, long after other states joined the "shall-issue" crew.

Just like Virginia, things can flip with a single election.

And these communists will keep violating gun owners rights because gun owners will not fight back. Paying lip service in protest is not fighting back.

United State Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137, 177. (1803) stated: “Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and, consequently, the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void;”

The United State Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491 (1966) the Supreme Court stated that “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them;”

In 2008 the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 592, 171 L.Ed 2d 637, 128 S.Ct. 2783, reiterated: “Our opinion is, that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right, originally belonging to our forefathers.”

 

[Griz]

Non starter...there are so few liberals in the legislature that these types of proposals, filed every year, never even make it on a committee calendar.

I agree, but it doesn't hurt to remind them we are still here, and watching.

 

[CJ4wd]

And these communists will keep violating gun owners rights because gun owners will not fight back.
Paying lip service in protest is not fighting back.

Agreed ! We need to keep exposing their lies and duplicity every chance we get. File FOIA requests and drown them in paperwork. Take the information we get to their "interaction" (like Bloomnut and Everytown et. al.) and show their collaberation for what it is - treason and subversion.