New Missouri state law effectively ends local enforcement of federal gun laws
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 พ.ย. 2021
- A state law passed this past spring in Missouri makes local and state agencies susceptible to a $50,000 fine if they try to enforce federal gun laws. Norah O'Donnell reports.
"60 Minutes" is the most successful television broadcast in history. Offering hard-hitting investigative reports, interviews, feature segments and profiles of people in the news, the broadcast began in 1968 and is still a hit, over 50 seasons later, regularly making Nielsen's Top 10.
Subscribe to the “60 Minutes” TH-cam channel: bit.ly/1S7CLRu
Watch full episodes: cbsn.ws/1Qkjo1F
Get more “60 Minutes” from “60 Minutes: Overtime”: cbsn.ws/1KG3sdr
Follow “60 Minutes” on Instagram: bit.ly/23Xv8Ry
Like “60 Minutes” on Facebook: on. 1Xb1Dao
Follow “60 Minutes” on Twitter: bit.ly/1KxUsqX
Subscribe to our newsletter: cbsn.ws/1RqHw7T
Download the CBS News app: cbsn.ws/1Xb1WC8
Try Paramount+ free: bit.ly/2OiW1kZ
For video licensing inquiries, contact: licensing@veritone.com
Laws like this wouldn’t have to exist if the ATF didn’t become a political organization.
Beaurocratic agencys should not exist.
@@AndyAlaska375 they do tho... Clintons is wallmart/backtrades.. Bushs was war and gas.. Nixon was drugs.. Kennedy mob.. Kinda need a good backer or have some nice cash like king Trump lol
Anyone else wondering where the cocaine came from at 9:40 ? It doesn't grow here. Makes you wonder how he's getting it past the national guard... Makes you wonder if the U.S. gov helps create the crime in the first place, before acting like they're here to "protect us from ourselves".
Of course that's just "conspiracy theory". I'm sure there's a lot of African Americans who lived through the 80s and 90s that wouldn't support the idea that the gov could ever introduce cocaine onto American soil to subjugate an entire population. Right? Right?
And ... No, no, needless more words, perfect speech.
True
If the ATF hadn't been abusing their power, this law would never have passed.
If this reporter named laura McDonald were even handed in her reporting, then she would have to mention that the reason this law passed is because of the way the ATF has behaved. Don't count on this woman to be anything other than biased in her reporting .
@@paulpugh2480 ....Laura McDonald is just a Reporter reporting on the news for the show, she has to be unbiased one way or the other. She can not take a stance.
@@stephenmartini5890 Can't believe you copied that fake name . Geez you guys at least read the thumbnail. She might have a brother Ronald though lol.
Exactly
@@stephenmartini5890 Every propaganda network from Fox to MSDNC is so biased they are burning themselves to the ground and you are one of a hand full still watching their crap
This MUST be APPLIED to all 50 STATES!
The biggest loophole in domestic violence law is that the law enforcement officers are not held to that same standard.
I have read the law, it specifically protects the RIGHTS of law abiding citizens. With everything that is happening in this country, those RIGHTS need protection.
Agreed Brother.
It was meant to sabotage St Louis' police and essentially remove it's status as a Commune/Imperial City
*I think its great, especially sticking it to the ATF. Those two prosecutors are full of themselves.*
Rules for thee, but not for me. Read the constitution. If you don't agree try to change it or leave. Simple.
They see themselves as somehow higher and more worthy than the general public.
Old boomers prop their own ability to self defense and claim 2A but reject anyone else to have them BUT themselves. Classic.
@@Com-bc6jl Not true, at all.
I love how the prosecutors assert that the general public are too dumb to understand the law. Then says the local cops are too dumb to understand the law and will be confused. The people understand.
This is a great bill. Congratulations to the people of Missouri.
needs to happen in every state
Not just gun rights, all rights need to be upheld and respected by those we pay to protect them.
It's not just the second amendment being infringed. You're absolutely right. They're chipping away at all our freedoms. Little by little decade by decade. Now there are words like hate speech that chip away at the first amendment stuff like the Patriot act that goes against the 4th and 6th Amendment. Big government is doing it across the board and people need to open their eyes. But people don't realize it's the second amendment that protects the rest of our rights. Government didn't give us those rights. The Constitution didn't give us those rights. It just recognized we were born with those rights and it set up measures to protect us from government overreach
Cops are harming citizens so wtf?
@@garrettjohnson92 I agree, that's why a person's right to self defense with their 2nd amendment right is vital.
What needs to happen is that people like you recognize you're not legal experts and no country on Earth is going to do things exactly the way you fantasize about and you're just going to have to live with that or go to prison.
@@Cryptonymicus Great, thanks for the advice expert, or do I tell you what to get used to and how to live? No, I don't do Tyrant!
Freedom is dangerous! But I would rather have dangerous freedom than peaceful slavery. Good for the people of Missouri!
Or just police pulling u over with automatic weapons. That could happen too.
ya thats exactly what black ppl bin saying for vary long no u get it
@@jusjohnston1958 I have been telling my fellow Sudanese the same and they don't believe, insisting on overcoming a tyrannical government with
Peaceful protests, result = soldiers do what soldiers do and shoot civilians, a few shot every protest, every damn time!
Well stated
Well said.
The law enforcement personnel that oppose the law is because it makes them be honest in their dealing with people and not be deceitful or outright lie about a situation
''The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.!!! "
PUBLIC SERVANTS IN PUBLIC GOVERNMENT dont seem to understand this type of language🆘OATHBREAKERS
Cops *everywhere* should have to consider if their actions would be subject to litigation and liability.
The rest of us do.
Bingo!
Absolutely!
You could be on to something. Don’t forget the politicians and the mass media.
To fix rotten society, one thing that is worth more than the entire Constitution: enable civilians (subjects, that is) to press criminal charges...
@@__3800
More will be revealed.
I'm a Missourian and I support this 100%
I know you do! That is awesome!
these cops seem to be mad about having to fully understand gun laws and their jobs. am i missing something? it just seems like they want to remain ignorant so they can harass anyone they want.
good for Missouri im proud for them
Not everyone is a bad guy you should be able to protect yourself if someone is trying to do you harm.
"A man shoots at his girlfriend but there's nothing I can do." Are they saying they don't have a state law that says you can't attack someone with a gun? Please! These guys are just being whiny little babies.
That's what I thought, every state has laws against that.
I live in Missouri and they have rather strict laws on domestic issues. This video is propaganda trash
Man, you took the words right out of my mouth!
exactly. got a couple of anti gun patsies to say they cant enforce state laws. total media propaganda.
Yup. That girlfriend that goes to the cops several times they turn around and do nothing. Police need to be held accountable for their bad decisions
No one is saying ATF can’t do their do their job in that state.
Just anti-gun propaganda here
The reason prosecutors and sheriffs in this state hate it is because it is something that they can hold over your head for less criminal actions such as marijuana possession. Prosecutors have been using federal gun laws as an excuse to harden a sentence for minor crime and it's clear that they'd all hate to see this loophole get shut down.
Now they don’t have marijuana or federal restrictions to hold against you. Also some of the lowest taxes for alcohol and tobacco in the country too.
Local and state law enforcement can figure out how to keep law and order without the “assistance” of federal agencies that shouldn’t even exist.
“This law is unconstitutional” That’s exactly what we said when you TRIED to take OUR guns
Who was it that tried to take your guns, Goober? You know, Putin sure would.
“Taking our guns” is a generalist, blanket statement threat to instill fear and send people running to the gun stores for ammo and firearms…..and it works every time. PSYOPS 101. Taking all our guns……at close to half a BILLION in the US alone, is literally logistically impossible. We can’t even keep a couple thousand people from crossing the border…..and you actually believe the fed government will set aside every able bodied federal agent to come to your house? Any such bill would not pass a bi-partisan Congress….let alone the very real threat of hundreds of agents being killed and decades of insurrection. To my utter astonishment, NO CONGRESSMAN (or woman) rejected USSS protection to go to the steps of the Capitol and place a boot in the first person up the stairs chest. So you think they will pass a law that incites real violence? Ummmm….no. So this rant of “they are gonna take our toys”….is and will never be true. But if you (like our forefathers) place your trust in God…..nothing else matters.
Stand ready, help others, train like you fight. RLTW.
@@Quark.Lepton Red Flag laws that are totally unconstitutional GOOBER!!!!! Remember, when you point a finger three point right back at you 💯🙄
@@anthonybrown2426 WTF are you talking about sh’tforbrains? You freaks worship Putin and believed his little spy girl that Russians are allowed to own guns-you’re just really sick and amazingly dense. Delusional little never-served, cosplay freaks.
Who tried to take the guns and when did that happen?
I live in Missouri and i salute those who passed this law. This law is to protect people who own firearms from the Feds who want to take our weapons.
So that means even though I have a felony I have the right to borrow arms in the federal law can't do nothing about it
@@rononeal979 LMAO If a felon wants a gun their not to dam concerned about how they get it. Most felon's who possess a gun stole it or got it on the black market. I also happen to no people who have a felony that should be allowed to own a firearm's because what they got convicted for should not had been considered a felony. To many times cops, judges, attorney's will throw the book at someone just because they wanna make a name for them selfs or their up for relection. IMO just because you have a felony doesnt mean you should have all your rights striped from you it should be based on what the charge was about.
@@tazdog4528 I have a felony for driving while suspended,
@@tazdog4528 I'm concerned about how I get the gun can't speak for anyone else I'm speaking about me
@@rononeal979 That suks but i no you cant buy from a licesned dealer because of the back ground check. All i can say is if you see some one selling a gun see if you can get it from them. In MO you can sell guns from 1 person to another with out going thru all the BS.
Congratulations, Missourians! I wish my state would do this.
Damn right! Missouri is showing us how it should be done !
"Shall not be infringed" period, end of statement, game set match. Let's go Brandon
More police doesn't equal more safety, just higher taxes. Guns keep you safe, cops show up to put up yellow tape around the unarmed victim.
Let's go Brandon
Lmao pathetic let’s go Brandon huh just be a man a say f*ck Biden you do realize you are effectively censoring yourself idiot
@@sabrinam4343
It’s because of the blatant propaganda of the news agency that originally sparked the chant. It’s both saying FJB while pointing out that our media is bought and paid for.
(I do like how you censored your own phrase there… a little confused how that works. Calling someone out for censoring whilst censoring your own phrase… 🤔)
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Right there it is at the end of the statement with a period.
But what about the arms being necessary in a well regulated militia to secure a free state part? That’s in there too.
I guess we could call M-13 a well regulated militia who need the freedom to smuggle and sell drugs and people. So they should be armed.
A homicidal psychopathic 16 year old with a death wish needs his freedom to shoot up the school and as long as he has an accomplice they’re a militia, so it’s a protected activity.
Both of my examples are preposterous, and I realize that. But the laws that are intended to keep guns away from dangerous people are written by legislators and interpreted by the courts.
The constitution prohibits a blanket law to outlaw guns, but laws to protect people from violent armed criminals are completely appropriate….Unless you want a mandate that everyone carry a gun all the times for self defense.
The hysteria that “the government is coming for your guns” or “the democrats are coming for your guns” is pure propaganda. The Missouri legislature passed a bad law to drum up the fear. I’m not the least bit concerned about anyone taking my guns.
Biden saying he wants to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines is political theatre. What is an “assault weapon” or “high capacity” mag? Is he going to take M-16’s away from the police and military? Of course not. He can’t, but it makes a nice speech whenever there’s a mass casualty shooting.
Keeping guns away from crazy people is a good idea. The problem is who determines which people are too crazy to be armed. That’s the discussion that needs to occur. And if someone who should not be armed has a gun what do you do about it? The only thing that will prevent them from getting another gun after they’ve served their “punishment” is the death penalty. And we can’t legally execute crazy people, sooooo….there is no solution!
But anything that impedes law enforcement from investigating interstate and international gun shipping is not good. And the only agency that can operate in every state and with foreign governments is federal law enforcement.
Stopping cooperation will not solve anything.
CBS anchor: "A guy who shot at his ex GF's vehicle"
Everone: is that not a state felony crime itself.
Of course it is a felony and still will be prosecuted but police are saying they aren't getting support with the federal extra resources. It's a matter of resources that the federal government can provide and stronger sentencing guidelines.
@@christianwparker sentencing guidance? I believe states shown be making their own laws on that.
That's exactly what thought!
Very well said, the FBI is just as corrupt as the ATF
@@carolinausedmachinery Uh, no, resources. It may surprise you to learn that the federal government tends to have more money than local law enforcement agencies. Christian is exactly right. Weak sentencing guidelines makes the amount of resources you have completely irrelevant. If you have to prove, for example, that a person intended to commit a crime to indict them, it doesn't matter what resources you have. If that person testifies that "they didn't mean it" and you can't somehow disprove what they /thought/ and /felt,/ your charges are getting dropped. Just look what happened after the passage of the 1960 Voting Rights Act. The federal government was granted the authority to ensure that everybody had fair access to elections without disenfranchisement based on race (or at least disenfranchisement that didn't have to do with incarceration, which is a whole other can of worms), but to impose federal oversight over polling they first had to prove that there was intentional discrimination happening. And because that is practically impossible, the 1960 Voting Rights Act accomplished practically nothing. This situation has happened time and time again in the history of the United States, and this is no different. You need strict regulations to be able to enforce laws. The more vague and arbitrary your definitions are, the less effective your law will be.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be a retail outlet, not a government agency
Thank heavens. Our rights need to be protected and preserved.
Oh, we understand it...and we overwhelmingly APPROVED IT! If the Federal Government followed the RULES(the Constitution) these measures would not be NECESSARY!
The constitution is meant to be amended, until leftist showed up the vast amount of people in the US where seen as second class citizens because of the rules.
Why is it always cops that don't want u to have guns yet have a small armory in their trunk and body armor
@@Iandar1 Lol, Communism was barely a concept when the civil war started. Especially in the U.S.
@@codyhouston6287 because they got off on power
@@algaeninja6806 this is actually false like much of the elements of the enlightenment, communism originated in Ancient Greece. But leftisms influence also spreads to women’s suffrage, and civil rights including Martin Luther king Jr. and Malcolm X (both socialists) and the black panthers REST IN POWER FRED HAMPTON.
It's very simple: respect the 2nd amendment.
Or leave the country. There's always that option, too. If they don't like the constitution, they can leave. No one's forcing them to stay here.
👍🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
@@manictiger gtfoh everyone needs to be able to protect themselves. I'd rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6.
@@naderomiller8557
You're confused. I said those that don't respect the constitution can feel free to leave the country.
Amen!
There is no freedom without the ability to protect it at the personal level...
Excellent. Pass this in every state.
So these guys LOVE having their guns but don't love the idea of YOU having a gun without any red tape. Real Patriots here!
My thoughts exactly. Lol
What’s your complaint?
So there shouldn't be any "red tape" for buying a gun? Fair enough. No "red tape" for whether I can drive a car either. And no more drug laws.
Russians hard at work in these comments
@@adrian33161 Central Kentucky actually but thanks for being pretty clueless. Lol
"This law is going to benefit criminals"
Ok, so how about you close the revolving door on the jail. There shouldn't be any known criminals running loose to benefit from it.
No criminals violated their rights and do not deserve to have guns. They are not showing you the specific part regarding this case. This is a very bias opinion. Request a copy of SAPA and read and build your opinion.
@@willie4551 if a criminal is to violent to have a gun they shouldn't walk free
It begs the question.....If you even thought that a home owner or private person had a weapon on them ...would you rob or attack that person...probably not and if you were stupid enough to do it and died...OH WELL !
That,s EXACTLY why the Second Amendment was created by our founding fathers.
Let alone the need to protect your GOD GIVEN RIGHT of self defense from a foreign or domestic government destroying your life through tyranny as our federal government, IE; DEMONRATS is trying to do right now.
Gun laws were originally enacted to keep slaves from owning weapons that would ensure their freedom.
Now they are being used to STEAL and control your freedom and protect the local, state and federal governments from sometimes MUCH NEEDED REVOLUTION no matter what color you are.
Ok it's sad that you have to point this out.
I think any criminal who serves their sentence, no matter the crime, should have all their Constitutional rights back immediately once they become free. Ex-convicts should be able to protect themselves too. Taxing citizens to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights is unconstitutional & criminal. Anyone in prison for just possessing a gun illegally (must be only crime) should be freed immediately. Our justice system is broken, we’re not hard enough on certain crimes & criminals & too harsh on others. But nobody should lose their rights forever. You either believe in human rights absolutely or not. Also, bring back the 3 strike rule on certain crimes where sentencing can be magnified. I believe all gun laws are infringements & no free adult citizen should be charged for just possessing a gun. Using a gun to help commit a crime, throw the book at the criminal.
That’s awesome!!! Great job Missouri!!!
“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and consciousness stupidity.” MLK
" The right to keep and bear arms Shall not be infringed."
Thats a directive not a suggestion.
That's half a sentence. And that's not how English works. And right-wing god Antonin Scalia of SCOTUS said some time ago that the government has a legitimate interest and constitutional authority to regulate firearms. So clearly you are living in the wrong country. Try Somolia. The only law there is the law of the gun. You might like it.
“Well Regulated Militia “ - Touche’
1A, "shall make no law". 4A, "shall not be violated". The 2A and its wording is not even remotely unique in the Bill of Rights, or anywhere else. We accept you cannot threaten the life of the President ... you can't deliberately cause panic which injures and kills others ... there are exceptions to the warrant requirement such as plain view, exigent circumstances, etc. All of these things are limitations on rights, equally strongly worded. Rights are not absolute and without limitation, as that's more akin to anarchy. The 2A speaks to the militia, both organized and unorganized. Federal law defines specifically who is in and who is not in that militia. And Article I, Section VIII of the Constitution outlines Congress as the sole authority over training and discipline of said militia. Let's maybe not pretend that a purposely deceptive snippet from the 2A accurately reflects the Amendment in relation to your personal desires or views.
@@CliftonBritt in order to understand the constitution or the bill of rights you first have to understand how the definition of words have changed over time. In the 1770’s “well regulated” simply meant in good working order. But don’t take my word for it. Go look it up.
What about law enforcement?
The cops and DA’s hate this because the people have a right and ability to fight their tryanny. Look at what they tried to do to rittenhouse
you mean the murderer?? Kyle Rittenhouse belongs in jail lol
@@amberdorbolo4646 Someone didn't watch the trial.
Most cops love this law. There are very few instances where we can protect you. I wish every eligible person in this country did carry a gun. It would make those who would try to take their rights away, think twice.
@@codybailey855 Law enforcement is supposed to protect us.
They just want to be able to do their job.
Watch Our New Music Video about Second Amendment Rights here: th-cam.com/video/7lz4OnnmoEo/w-d-xo.html
Please LIKE, SHARE, COMMENT & SUBSCRIBE 🙏
I love my A.R. 15. I walk my dog with it often and there ain't nothing anybody can do about it.
I am a retired law-enforcement officer and have concealed carry in the state of Florida. I think this new law is great, leave it to the media to twist it with some soft belly prosecutor. And he says his seven year old OWNS guns?? 7 years old ?? I did not know a seven year old could buy a gun.
Not defending the guy with the 7yo, I don't like people who want arms infringements, but if a 7yo was given a gun then they are the owner of it. They don't have to buy one to own one. On top of that, parents should have the sole responsibility of when and where their children should have arms, not the government.
I dont think the second amendment has an age limit....but should we all be allowed to own an 88flak gun yes technically we are!
Citizens of America have Second Amendment rights because they live and breath - not because government officials have chosen to bestow them with such, as some sort of privilege.
Inalienable (now unalienable) Rights bestowed by GOD (not government) at birth, not granted by a government. Because if a government can grant rights, then they can take them away by a simple act of law... like almost all other nations of the world ( ie. Rights that are granted by a government decree means rights that can removed at any time by corrupt human beings for purposes they feel are just.)
Preach it!!
This is awesome 👌 👏 👍 😍
I will vote yes if this comes to Illinois
Crazy how they don't like "guessing" what's legal. They can just read the bill like anyone else and deal with the uncertainties like anyone else
I love Missouri, live here. They can say what they want, best state, best people, best freedom.
🥛
@Nphekt thanks bro! Much love from South Central Ozarks in Missouri!!!
Sounds like my kind of place!!!
So you can now buy and own short barrel rifles/shotguns and silencers without paying tax stamp or registering them?
Nobody likes Missouri... At least in earnest. Unless you really love red clay, then you might be telling the truth.
Pose this question. For years most state and local agencies around the country have been prohibited from enforcing federal immigration laws. You can’t have it both ways. All law enforcement desires is the clarity and the ability to effectively do their jobs. Federal involvement is always a double edged sword.
Yes, all these people describing scenarios from this law are effectively describing sanctuary laws for illegal immigrants. But they don't like state rights when it allows us the ability to preserve our guns.
No. You're not allowed to speak of logic.
Spot on!!!!
it's time for a new beginning, it looks as though this administration is doing a good job of pushing that, to the point of complete break down. so many Government agency's braking the law, so many citizens being abused by the Government that it's supposed to protect... the politicians are protecting themselves. A country that beats people, takes away their means of self defense, taxes, and I mean NO REPRESENTATION. A COUNTRY THAT CONTINUES TO SWINDLE THE COMMON CITIZEN. it's time, it's time that this country be swept away from the pages of LIFE. if you are angry by what I say, is it the truth or is it the blind eye you have taken, or is it the side you are on? are you on the peoples side? no this is not an add for communism, if so I would be signing with brandon. if you find yourself doing EVERYTHING YOUR PARTY WANTS YOU TO... you are not for the people. THE TYRANNY IS HERE, NOW!
This woman is going to do anything she can to perpetuate the narrative that people who own guns should give them up.
Any restriction on gun ownwership is in violation of the 2nd Amendment, including but not limited to felons that have completed their prison time and legal obligations not being able to purchase firearms.
Mentally ill also.
Arizona appellate courts have ruled that ARS 1-244 bars the retroactive application of changes to the prohibited possessor statute unless there is an express legislative declaration of retroactive intent. Although the statute has been amended numerous times during its history, no such retroactive declarations have ever been passed into law. Thus, the possession of deadly weapons by some individuals may be governed by older versions of the statute which are either more or less restrictive than the one currently in force. For example, persons found to constitute a danger to self or others or to be persistently or acutely disabled or gravely disabled prior to September 30, 2009 do not need to petition the courts for a restoration of rights, as statutes in effect prior to that date either did not prohibit their possession of deadly weapons or prohibited such possession only temporarily, during their term of court-ordered treatment.
We have a limited version of this in New Hampshire. We support it. Our Sheriffs mostly support it.
It’s a good thing and it needs to be in every state
It's like we all forgot what the word "infringe" means. I didn't know that making gun ownership more expensive or more restrictive was not considered an infringement. Any "restriction" is inherently an infringement, that's how synonyms work.
Like the nra taking guns at their own convention?
Should be tax free
The saving Grace is that there aren’t two sets of laws anymore..
THIS IS A HIT PIECE ! 60 MINUTES USED TO NOT SUCK
I completely agree but 60 minutes is basically a Democrat left mouthpiece now
No, they have always been CIA mocking bird puppets, you just never saw it in your own life before. They bold face lie about everything!
When did they not?
It’s funny cause this whole video talks about “banning federal gun laws” as if that means banning gun laws all together but never talks about the already existing state gun laws that are already mostly on par with federal gun laws.
I'm guessing you don't live in Missouri.
@@MouthfulOfZach What part of MO do you live in?
@@JEJAK5396 southwest
@@MouthfulOfZach What’s your view on the new laws?
@@JEJAK5396 I haven't read into them myself admittedly, but I do approve of the defiance against overreaching unconstitutional federal laws.
"I'm afraid that there gonna make it so hard to be a police officer in this country that nobody's gonna wanna do it"
Good. We have the second amendment.
It's funny cuz the people peddling this are pretty much the same people who want to defund the police
Can we get our tax dollars back? I need to buy a new gun.
I'd like to see what evidence suggests to you that private citizens with guns will make for effective law enforcement.
@@spasoldatin6258 there's stats that prove that increased gun ownership results in less overall violent crime.
@@RAWTEN Oh? Cool. Link them here.
So he’s worried that making LEO’s do their job the right way by following the laws is going to cause people to not want to do the job anymore. Makes perfect sense.
Every state must have this law!
Laws like this should be passed everywhere. There is no lawful reason, the Federal Government should be able to know my activities, what guns or other inanimate objects I own, or what I intend to do with them. Any law that violates our Constitutional Rights is unlawful and should not be enforced locally. Local law enforcement/ Prosecutors profiteer from Federal Grants, Civil Asset Forfeiture, and their continual abuse under the War on Drugs.
Victor Davis Hanson made a very valid point that Federal Government Departments don't have to, and shouldn't be in Washington D.C. The Department of Agriculture Headquarters should be in Fresno, or Texas, or Iowa, and other department in relevant locations around the country. Answering Quinten Lucas' concerns, the State of Missouri should close his purported "loophole" since it's not a Federal issue anyway.
Any and all Americans (even if they may be innocent erroneously convicted Felon victims of Government like I was), should be given a Three Strikes approach. Three violent felonies ends your 2nd Amendment Rights. The reason this is necessary is basic common sense. A Constitutional (Human) Right to Self Defense, is the single most important right we have (a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). A citizen is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the Government accuser.
And since Law Enforcement and Politicians (such as a County DA) are so corrupt, this sways the balance of protection toward the Citizen (which is the way it was designed to be). The problem is that the system has been turned on it's head, and power hungry authoritarian lawyers, have co-opted our Government and moved it far away from our Founding Constitutional Principles and Human Rights.
You couldn't have said this any better for people to understand.
Short story: this law forbids state troopers and local cops in Missouri from helping the feds in any way shape or form in the confiscation of guns and the enforcement of federal firearm laws (e.g. prosecuting gun traffickers). Just in case this part isn’t redundant, the FBI can still go and get these bad guys.
When Norah said federal gun laws are nonexistent to cops, she simply meant that they can’t press federal gun charges or refer to federal prosecutors for such charges. None of this nullifies any federal law, simply that state and local law enforcement can’t help the feds.
*This is fundamentally the exact same process as sanctuary cities for immigrants. You could call Missouri a sanctuary state for guns.
Immigrants or Illigals, big difference, and you analogy blows.
Seems fair to me.
Yeah that begs the question, if you think sanctuary cities are wrong, why on earth would you support this? Do two wrongs in your eyes make a right? Furthermore do you equate people and guns?
@@jisezer probably because being an illegal immigrant isn't a Constitutional right....
That's an interesting comparison. But, would you agree that ICE is primarily concerned with illegal immigrants, and not neccesarily with violent crime (at least, before Biden); while, this law does pertain to violent crime (I mean, specifically)? For example, illegal immigrants might contribute to the economy of a region and, therefore, you might see a reluctance, locally, to aid the federal government (at their own expense) to prosecute illegals; while, in this case, it seems to me that the state will pick up the tab for any aid previously rendered by the feds. It's not just a sancuary state for guns, but a sanctuary state for gun crime. And, clearly, any tax expenditures asociated with this bill will be paid directly by MO citizens, not shared with the whole US. Also, being a sancuary, as you put it, isn't it likely that gun violence will only increase, as a result, when criminals fleeing prosecution, cross the border (BORDER!) into MO?
I'm shaking my head and laughing at the GOP, not you. But this law is insane.
Millions in Missouri they found 10 people that don't like it
The ability of local law enforcement to work with federal authorities is absolutely secondary in importance to the right of the people to keep and bear arms!
I’m a Missourian who voted in favor of this law. It passed overwhelmingly. As with any new law, there is a period of adaptation. The minor alleged issues discussed in this segment are simple to address and, in the interim, we’re more than capable of protecting ourselves here. In Missouri, we refuse to accept federal overreach and the politicization of federal law enforcement agencies. Together, WE THE PEOPLE addressed the problem.
I'm a very happy member of the BLM movement. Do you really want to see everyone of us protesting in the streets with guns. I mean bearing arms is the 2nd amendment right. You really want to see us mount up the way we did before. Lets see if you keep up that same enthusiasm in a few months.
@@g590412 YES! Be safe and respectful of your firearm and those around you is what we ask.
@@g590412 Of course we do! The second amendment is for everyone! BLM, LBTQIA, everyone! Keep up the strong support of our 2nd Amendment!
@@g590412 LOL you didn't get the answer you thought you would now did you?
@@g590412 Protesting is a good thing. When it goes beyond peaceful, it's called a riot. Keep it at a peaceful protest and you'll find many people willing to stand for and protect your rights
Great job Missouri! Yes the general public will and does support this!
Just means that law enforcement' is going to have to do its homework" a little better before it starts the pounce on an individual! (Look before you leap)
This is the first piece of real Constitutional Law passed in almost 50 years. Good for them.
Sounds like a good law to me. We have a local law in our community that requires every citizen to own and be trained in the use of a firearm for personal & public protection. There are of course all of the exceptions included and it is not strictly enforced but has been very effective in keeping our crime rate very low for over a decade now.
@Hvac Master No holster needed here and always open carry anything(AR-15) in Utah USA since forever lol ;))) Oh and now recently Concealed Carry with no permits at all required lol & Go check out our home invasion or armed robbery or car jacking crime rates lol-lol...I feel you are usually better-off in a gun friendly state in my opinion.
Exactly! The stricter the gun laws the higher the gun crime. It’s not rocket science
Such a backwards culture...gun worship
Exercising a constitutional right should not require any kind of certification. Courses or government approval. That's why it's called a right.
@@djeio No one I know worships A gun but most own one or more. They think very highly of the
constitution.
Makes me want to move to Missouri, and pay my taxes to Missouri. I’m going to make a donation to the Missouri governor in favor of this law!
I did. I love it here.
Missouri has fantastic gun laws. Lived here since I was two. I’m in my twenties now. I Wont be leaving.
I live in a suburb of Kansas City and while we have a gun violence problem, it's usually one group shooting and killing each other. Same as Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, Atlanta and other big urban areas. The police don't care anyway. This won't hurt them at all in that regard. I love living in this state.
You'll notice that the moment citizens demand accountability from their public officials, many of them try to claim they're being victimized.
Those are the public officials that need to find a job in the private sector. The rest of us are accountable for our actions, it's high time LEOs and prosecutors are as well.
so let me get this straight ... immigration is a federal law, and when arizona tried to help enforce federal law it was sued by the obama administration for state/local enforcement doing the federal government's job. but now the federal government (under the same party rule) claims that it is unconstitutional for a state to abide by that same decision? in other words it is not the constitution that the democrats are concerned with, but forcing everyone to go along with whatever they decide should be done. sorry, it doesn't work that way. lets go brandon
Lets go Brandon FJB
I love Missouri! There’s no downside to a Missourian to this.
Except for local law enforcement that now has to work instead of sending it off to a Fed org. They don't want to do it.
Attorneys are upset that they will no longer have adequate debate in open court at the victim's expense.
Why are federal agencies investigating local crime anyway? Having a nationalized police force is totally inappropriate. Local crime should be handled by city and county law enforcement and prosecuted by the local DA.
The officers in Missouri opposed to this bill should blame the feds not the people whom elected representatives to act on their behalf which they obviously have done.
The rural police are on the people's side, guaranteed.
@@smokedbeefandcheese4144 I mean if the rich are who you want to view as the enemy, then sure.
Its almost like Newton's third law. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Federal overreach - states react.
I don't live in Missouri but I certainly applaud this. Federal overreach of our rights has gone on for far to long. States need to stand up for their citizens and allow them to live under the standards of the state they live in.
This is the distrust between the federal and state governement that has gotten us here.
This is called "Police reform" through constitutional rights.
No, it's called abusing the 2nd Ammendment which is what the GOP has been doing for decades now.
@@coolcat6303 name fits.
Get robbed at gunpoint, then come back to me. K thx bye.
😂 I take it you were a cop.
@@coolcat6303 explain
@@coolcat6303 LOL there is no way to abuse an Amendment which states basically no governmental organization, body or judiciary can prevent one from exercising their Rights to self defense. The Amendment is clear, even if it pisses the Feds or States off. Power trip somewhere else buddy.
Its the way forward, its part of a checks and balances system to help support Americans and their constitutional rights. Way to go Missouri!
We got to do this everywhere!
Don't you just love how the news channel only talked to the few officers that don't agree with the new law and never talked to the ones that do ...
We Missouri residents love this law
Just don't get caught with a bag of weed 🙄
This is so beautiful. Need this in every state
As a Missourian I support this law. This law protects the 2nd Amendment. "Expanding 2nd amendment rights?", The second amendment is clear. The supreme court is clear about the process of writing laws. The federal laws around the second amendment are infringing on our rights. If you don't support this and you are law enforcement, you are going against your sworn statement to protect the second amendment and you should resign. Swearing to protect the constitution and actively violating the second amendment knowing the supreme court has ordered that no laws without history and tradition around the time the second amendment was put into effect should be considered constitutional and are in fact by definition unconstitutional and illegal, is a violation of your oath. If you don't like that resign and go into the private sector, you'll get paid more anyway. By enforcing these unconstitutional laws and the definition provided by the highest court in the United States of America, The Supreme Court, you as a law enforcement officer commits an illegal act, violating the god given rights under the US Constitution; what you have sworn to protect. This act is illegal and Missouri does not support illegal acts of it's enforcement agencies.
West Virginia did the same thing. No state agency can participate in federal gun grabs.
Perhaps they should make domestic violence illegal and close that "loophole."
agreed, especially since a lot of the mass shooters have history of domestic violence
@@zeusmultirotor8479 ....that and history of metal illness with being abused themselves as a kid.
Domestic violence is a misdemeanor. It shouldn't be a vehicle to deny people their 2 amendment rights since it isn't a felony
@@Theprimaryfocus ....unfortunately with a degree in psychology we already know that domestic violence escalates into one or both partners dead.....these are the statistics, not some pie in the sky fairy tale of redemption and reconciliation wishful thinking.
@@keithlucas6260 the constitution is still the constitution
Our forefathers wanted to ensure our freedom. Great job Missouri 🇺🇸
Amen!
Frontier justice is the bomb
I'm a New Yorker. All rights restored, except my carrier rights. " can I carry Missouri while I vacation ther?"
We get why PROSECUTORS would want to have more ground to stand on. It’s easier for them to result in a successful conviction in court. This only outlines why we the people need to keep this momentum going and restore our freedoms.
This is amazing, I love this idea!!! it should be implemented everywhere else in the United States of America.🇺🇲
Good luck trying to pass this Law in Commifornia !!
@Jose Herrera California is on its own as well as N.Y and N.J ..21 states have constitutional carry..4 more are so close to getting it..it shows we don't need the governments permission.
Makes me proud to be a Missourian.
And as for "conservative lawmakers who love their guns," key word is "THEIR" not "your".
Sweeping legislation is always going to be characterized as "vague and poorly written", because it's a hard no for people that are used to getting their way on everything.
This needs to happen of all federal laws in the States. “Expand” second amendment rights? It doesn’t expand anything , it restricts the federal government and State from violating Constitution as they have been doing for over 100 years.
funny - the constitution, as part of a republic is what restricts the government. it's already their in writing.
ground zero - remove politicians that don't put the constitution first. probably means not voting democrat OR republican.
step one - ignore any rule the government gives about guns
step two - fully informed juries... nullify any case brought to trial
@@Witty..UserName do you have a website for Fully informed juries?
The federal government has always had a problem working together along with their counterpart the sheriff's of each state, those that want to break the 2nd Amendment will say anything, an make it sound good, but I say, shall not be infringed.
These two ''lawyers" don't understand that law.
Haven't noticed 60 Minutes objecting to no enforcement of laws at the border. Or California, or Minnesota or Washington state.
And you never will either
Dismantle the ATF, et. al.
Right after we dismantle the DEA. And then we can get rid of the Department of Agriculture and end farm welfare.
ATF an EPA While there add it
They should have it in every state in the country.does not help bad 😞 people with guns.shall not be infringed! What part do these tyrents not understand????
What do you not understand of shall not be infringed!