Missouri takes another step...


Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Missouri takes another step...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-06-2014, 05:41 AM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Highpower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Upper Mississippi Valley
Posts: 1,547
Liked 355 Times on 200 Posts
Likes Given: 292

Thumbs up Missouri takes another step...

... in the right direction.

Quote:
The Missouri Right to Bear Arms, Amendment 5 was on the August 5, 2014 primary election ballot in Missouri as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved.

The measure established the unalienable right of citizens to keep and bear arms, ammunition and accessories associated with the normal functioning of such arms, for the purpose of defense of one’s person, family, home and property. Additionally, it removed the exception to the former constitutional right to bear arms that explicitly stated it could not be used to justify the wearing of concealed weapons.[1] The amendment allowed the state to limit the possession of arms by convicted felons and those adjudged as mentally ill. Previously, citizens had the right to bear arms in defense of home, person and property, but the right was not considered “unalienable.”
The terms "unalienable" and "strict scrutiny" in the proposed constitutional changes were both important changes from the point of view of the courts and provided the highest level of legal protection for gun rights in court cases. Inalienable rights are not transferable and impossible to take away.[2] Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review regarding the constitutionality of a law. In order for a law to pass strict scrutiny, it must be passed to further a compelling governmental interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal. This level of scrutiny must be applied to any laws regarding gun rights or control in the state going forward following Amendment 5's approved.[3]
Proponents of Amendment 5 supported requiring these higher standards of review on gun control laws. They also cited the need for the explicit protection of ammunition and firearm accessories. Opponents, however, were concerned that the amendment would make it harder to enact any regulation of guns and violent criminals. Some additionally argued that Amendment 5 was an attempt to circumvent federal law via nullification.
The amendment was sponsored in the Missouri General Assembly by State Senator Kurt Schaefer (R-19) as Senate Joint Resolution 36.[4] In May 2014, Gov. Jay Nixon (D) chose to place this measure, along with four others, on the August 5 primary election ballot, instead of the November 4 general election ballot.[5]
Election results


This ballot measure article has preliminary election results. Certified election results will be added as soon as they are made available by the state or county election office. The following totals are as of 95 percent of precincts reporting. Missouri Amendment 5 (2014)ResultVotesPercentage Yes 582,944 62.18% No354,554 37.82% Election results via: Missouri Secretary of State


__________________

Last edited by Highpower; 08-06-2014 at 05:45 AM.
Highpower is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 08-06-2014, 03:15 PM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Madison, AL
Posts: 64
Liked 56 Times on 30 Posts
Likes Given: 133

Default

Having not delved into any of the details yet, going just off the synopsis in the quote-box, this seems like a huge victory for MO gun owners. Strict scrutiny is the only intended inference that can be taken from the words, "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. SCOTUS should've established that level of scrutiny in Miller, Heller and McDonald, but they didn't.

Interestingly, I just got done making a post referencing a 1982 gun control ballot measure known as "Prop 15" out of CA that we defeated with the identical whole-number percentages reflected in MO's measure last night. The decimals varied, but it was basically 62% to 37%.

Anyway, congrats to MO gun owners. Maybe you can start a trend here. That's awesome! (remaining cautiously optimistic that there are no "Devils in the details" though.)

CzarChasm



__________________
Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to Police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.
CzarChasm is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2014, 04:33 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Molon Labe,Missouri
Posts: 509
Liked 74 Times on 62 Posts
Likes Given: 35

Default

It was good to see this pass with voter approval. Let's hope other States see this and enact amendments to their State Constitution.

__________________
Triumphman is offline  
CzarChasm Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2014, 05:14 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: tucson,arizona
Posts: 504
Liked 194 Times on 126 Posts
Likes Given: 58

Default

It passed quite nicely. Here is a lawyer's view of it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/06/missouri-state-constitutional-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms-strengthened-by-a-61-39-vote/

Edit: This looks like it went through the legislature a not long ago, but it was reported that the governor vetoed it. Now the citizens have spoken. Here is the prior post on this:

http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/new-protections-guns-missouri-108535/

__________________

Last edited by JWagner; 08-06-2014 at 05:19 PM.
JWagner is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2014, 05:42 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
artbrownsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 437
Liked 214 Times on 149 Posts
Likes Given: 365

Default

There ya go! Lawmakers listening to constituents, NOT big government.
quoted from JWagner
Edit: This looks like it went through the legislature a not long ago, but it was reported that the governor vetoed it. Now the citizens have spoken. Here is the prior post on this:

http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/new-protections-guns-missouri-108535/

__________________

You have to LIVE, DIE, and PAY TAXES, and pay for what you do between your LIVING and your DYING!

artbrownsr is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2014, 07:16 PM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Highpower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Upper Mississippi Valley
Posts: 1,547
Liked 355 Times on 200 Posts
Likes Given: 292

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JWagner View Post
Edit: This looks like it went through the legislature a not long ago, but it was reported that the governor vetoed it. Now the citizens have spoken. Here is the prior post on this:

http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/new-protections-guns-missouri-108535/
Not true about the veto.... but that was MY fault. I got it mixed up with another pro-gun bill that governor Nixon vetoed that day.
Quote:
  1. SB 656: Allows school districts to designate teachers to carry guns in schools, lowers the age requirement for a concealed carry permit and prohibits cities from barring individuals with a permit from openly carrying a weapon.
However that one will very likely be taken up again in the next session in September. It's extremely close to the votes needed to override the veto.
__________________
Highpower is offline  
CzarChasm Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2014, 07:30 PM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Highpower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Upper Mississippi Valley
Posts: 1,547
Liked 355 Times on 200 Posts
Likes Given: 292

Default

Governor Nixon chose to put amendment 5 on the August primary ballot instead of the general election in November. I think his plan backfired on him. I'm sure he was hoping for a low turn out at the polls (which he got) and getting his usual base to provide him numbers.

Fortunately gun owners in the state have finally woken up (for once) to the fact that if they stay home - they LOSE!



__________________
Highpower is offline  
CzarChasm Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Step by Step how to apply for Illinois Carry Concealed License CGS Illinois Gun Forum 9 01-05-2014 12:03 PM
Missouri Takes Action. 303tom Legal and Activism 20 05-12-2013 05:07 PM
AR building step by step guide trip286 AR-15 Discussion 0 01-03-2012 09:11 PM
Another step? pandamonium Politics, Religion and Controversy 3 03-30-2010 07:55 PM
Obama Takes First Step in Banning All Firearms! Bigcountry02 Politics, Religion and Controversy 19 11-13-2009 10:06 PM