If sanctuary states can do it for illegal aliens, why can't other states do it for firearms?
http://thesentinel.net/politics/miss...in-23-10-vote/
If signed into law, it would appear as though NFA items wouldn't require a tax stamp in Missouri.
This all sounds really encouraging, but wan't there a recent story about some other state the passed "firearm sanctuary" legislation, and then a guy decided to make silencers within that state and got busted by the feds?
http://thesentinel.net/politics/miss...in-23-10-vote/
“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.â€
For added measure, SB367’s authors went into great detail on what federal laws will be “considered null and void and of no effect.â€
(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;
For added measure, SB367’s authors went into great detail on what federal laws will be “considered null and void and of no effect.â€
(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;
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.
Comment