Missouri Governor Forced to Veto Republican Bill Which Would Have Nullified Federal Gun Laws

Missouri House Speaker Tim Jones (R-Eureka)

Missouri House Speaker Tim Jones (R-Eureka)

I don’t pretend to be a Constitutional scholar, but I do know a little bit about it.  One thing I know is that there’s a “supremacy clause” which, for the most part, sets the precedent that federal laws will supersede conflicting state and local laws.

Republicans in Missouri are apparently not aware of this as they forced the Governor of Missouri, a Democrat, to veto a bill that would have made it a crime for federal agents to enforce any federal laws seen as “infringing on the American right to bear arms.”

Also contained in this bill was a provision that made it illegal for any journalist to publish pictures or names of gun owners.

So, where to begin.

I guess I could start with this feeble attempt by Missouri Republicans to prove how little they truly understand about our Constitution.  Heck, it almost borders on treason, doesn’t it?  Passing laws that would essentially allow state and local authorities to arrest federal agents for enforcing federal laws?  You know, federal laws — those laws that are “the law of the land.”

Or we can look at the First Amendment violations of freedom of the press.  It’s amazing that Republicans would attempt to pass some ridiculous law that seeks to “protect Second Amendment rights” while violating the First Amendment.

Then again, hypocrisy and contradicting themselves are staples of the Republican party.

Threatening the press for publishing the names of gun owners — seriously?  The idiocy behind trying to make that into law really doesn’t need any elaboration.

As the governor pointed out during his remarks, this could technically make it illegal for reporters to post pictures of the citizens of Missouri during the openings of various hunting seasons.

The bill would have also given teachers and other school administrators permission to carry guns in school as “school protectors.”  This is funny considering Republicans all across the country have done all they could to cut funding for education, reduce the pay given to teachers and limit their benefits — yet now they want them to be not only teachers, but makeshift security guards as well.  Furthermore, the bill would have lowered the age for carrying a concealed handgun with a permit from 21 to 19.

So, Missouri Republicans think 19 year olds are too irresponsible to buy beer, but they’re responsible enough to carry a concealed handgun?  Drinking beer apparently requires more responsibility than a loaded gun.  Gotcha.

The absurdity of Republicans seems never ending.  It really seems like the only two amendments these people care about are the Second Amendment and the Tenth Amendment.  The Second Amendment of course being the right which feeds their unhealthy obsession with guns, and the Tenth Amendment, the “states rights” amendment, which bigots and racists have often used to justify their unconstitutional state laws.

The Tenth Amendment was the argument used by the small minded to attempt to protect slavery, continue segregation, keep women from voting, support poll taxes, oppose the civil rights act and continue to deny homosexuals the right to get married.

Millions of people need jobs, millions more are homeless and people go hungry all over this country every day — yet Republicans are more worried about ridiculous gun laws and restricting abortion rights than they are anything else.

Imagine the millions of dollars Republican legislators all across this country have spent in 2013 alone trying to pass, or passing, these ridiculous laws.

Luckily, Missouri has a Democratic governor, otherwise this silly law might have been signed.  Then we would’ve had to waste even more taxpayer money sending it to court to be struck down as unconstitutional.  But we should all know by now that if there’s one thing Republicans are great at, it’s wasting taxpayer money by continuing to pursue frivolous and symbolic legislation.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Dissenter13a

    AC: “I don’t pretend to be a Constitutional scholar, but I do know a little bit about it.”

    From what I’ve read here so far, I would presume to debate even that.

    AC: “Millions of people need jobs, millions more are homeless and people go hungry all over this country every day — yet Republicans are more worried about ridiculous gun laws and restricting abortion rights than they are anything else.”

    A fair point, but what’s good for the goose is also good for the gander. Why, when so many of our own citizens need decent jobs, are you “progressives” fixated on letting 11 million (probably closer to 20) illegals in, when the CBO advises us that it will do virtually nothing to stop future illegal immigration?

    Why do you hate the working man, Allen?

    We saw this a century ago, in the First Gilded Age. Illegal Italians flooded our borders–“WOP” was short for “without papers”–and brought the Mafia with them. They drove down salaries, just as the illegals are today, which benefited the landed gentry at worker expense.

    Why should we repeat that mistake, Allen?

    • Wes Falls

      Nothing you just wrote debates how much or how little he knows of the

      Constitution. That act, in itself, negates your entire argument (not
      that you actually made one). Presume to debate was literally what you
      did, which is ironic. Also ironic, is that your handle, Dissenter,
      describes contradiction. And since you contradicted yourself
      immediately, I find that pretty funny. You also cranked about four
      logical fallacies out, too. And you don’t understand the meaning of
      that proverb, either. I guess we should be proud of you for even just
      learning how to type. Your delusions probably keep you very busy. I
      love the idea of you seeing Italian people and thinking, “never again.”

      • Dissenter13a

        Objection, assuming facts not in evidence. It’s not the first post by Clifton that I have commented on. And yes, there have been spectacular displays of constitutional ignorance on his part.

        How did I contradict myself? And what logical fallacies are you drooling about? A tide of immigration lowers wages across the board, benefiting capital at the expense of labor. This is simply historical fact.

        I rather doubt that you have the chops to discern what is or is not a logical fallacy. And certainly, if “that three-letter word, J-O-B-S” (thank you, the Biden Gaffe Machine!) is the focus, the left’s focus on immigration is equally irrelevant.

        Let us just say that when Wes falls, he falls hard.

    • Labgramma

      Those Italians were NOT illegal. They went through immigration to get into the USA. Where do you think they got that WOP stamp? WOP meant they did not have passports.

    • graywizard

      WOP was short for “White Other than Protestant ” (Catholic).It originated between 1910 and 1915 in the United States. One famous false etymology is that it stands for “without papers” or “without passport” (abbreviated WOP). Look it up.

  • Dissenter13a

    AC: “The absurdity of Republicans seems never ending. It really seems like the only two amendments these people care about are the Second Amendment and the Tenth Amendment. The Second Amendment of course being the right which feeds their unhealthy obsession with guns, and the Tenth Amendment, the “states rights” amendment, which bigots and racists have often used to justify their unconstitutional state laws.

    The Tenth Amendment was the argument used by the small minded to attempt to protect slavery, continue segregation, keep women from voting, support poll taxes, oppose the civil rights act and continue to deny homosexuals the right to get married.”

    The “highest and best use” of a Glock with a 32-round clip is to mow down a tyrannical public official. The Framers accepted this eternal truth, which has been given expression by Cicero and Xenophon and was the legal basis for the American Revolution. Why can’t you “progressives” admit that the same thing always happens when people without guns confront people with guns?

    As for the Tenth, their position is driven by a more subtle form of argument than your mindless caricature. I don’t necessarily agree with it–as I see it, the Tenth involves the reservation of rights, including the right to contract which mandates same-sex marriage and the right to privacy governing the right to an abortion–but I do understand it. The Constitution is a suzerainty agreement, wherein vassal states cede some of their rights to the suzerain in exchange for the benefits of confederation. The question is one of how much the States actually ceded in enacting the Civil War Amendments, and it is a debate reasonable constitutional scholars can responsibly engage in.

    The Missouri law creates certain built-in constitutional challenges, which is what appears to be intended. You don’t have standing to sue unless you can create the conflict. This was done consciously, and is respectable as a political and litigation strategy.

  • george washington

    Wow.. is this journalism or propaganda? I thought journalists were supposed to report down the middle? Luckily I have a brain and can read through the bull shit and disect it.. you want to talk about hypocrisy, obama running in 2007 goes against everything that president obama has been about in 2013.. theres a video of him debating himself on youtube…
    This article is trash. And your point of view is treason… state laws are the only thing protecting us from an all out tyranny.. take a look around, your mesiah obama is being used as a puppet to continue bush’s agenda.. hes literally doing everything that bush was… gitmo, bailouts of corporations and banks, false flag attacks, hes given weapons to the drug cartel in mexico (operation fast and furious) . Hes also aiding the muslim brotherhood that just got thrown out of Egypt so that means he owes the american tax prayer 1.6 billion dollars… hes also funding and weaponizing the syrian rebels (al qaeda) the same dudes our troops were fighting on iraq ate now being given our weapons so that they can attack the people of Syria so that the United States can go on there and pretend to save them. .. yet he wants our weapons? ??

    • Dissenter13a

      George, with all respect, I don’t think you’re helping. However, “ah feel yore pain” with respect to Barry, the Wall Street Water-Boy welching on every representation he made to us.

      Clifton makes no more pretense of being a “journalist” than Annthrax, the Coultergeist. This is pure agit-prop, and you have to accept it for what it is: a starting point for discussion.

      State laws are often a source of tyranny, which is why we needed the Civil War Amendments. I agree that we’re seeing Bush’s fourth term, and that there is no material difference between the kleptocrats on the right and their counterparts on the left.

    • As dissenter said, the author is not a journalist, but no, journalists are not supposed to report “down the middle”, they are suppoesd to report “objectively”, meaning, “just the facts”. When the right wing as gone as far off the rails as they have these days, you can’t both report the facts and be in the middle.

    • K_Ann

      Simple answer – propaganda

  • Jerry

    Dissenter; what you don’t seem to realize is that these same illegal immigrants are already here and already driving down wages for all of us. Mostly Republican employers bring them here and work them for less pay than what they’d have to pay to have them here legally and would rather have them than paying American workers legitimately who would be paying taxes, btw, to our treasury department which would help with deficits and the national debt. Estimates of what the U.S. would collect in taxes alone is reason enough to give them a “path to citizenship”, and if you read the ways for them to achieve citizenship, then you will know it isn’t just amnesty, but will be earned. Also, it is allowing foreign students being educated here for jobs that do pay very well currently, but that we don’t have enough Americans qualified to do them to be able to stay here and WORK after graduation instead of being required to return to their countries and taking their skills with them somewhere else. That may not seem like much to you, but it is huge in light of how much technology is changing everything these days, but yet we are behind the rest of the world in having qualified people to do those jobs that are shaping the world now. As for the gun laws, if you favor them, you understand them; if you don’t, there is no argument you will even listen to, much less try to understand. It is, however, nice to see at least one governor in the country stand up to the ridiculous agenda that Republican State Houses have undertook to undermine federal legislation and laws. Whether you agree with the laws, or not, going against them in this faction is wasting your state’s money and could be viewed as treason by some. I suspect that if they were Democratic controlled states and were passing laws that prohibited ALL guns in their state, or forced abortions on anyone under 21, for example, that you and all Republicans across the country would be up in arms and crying treason about that. For those of us who lean, or are Democrats, these laws are just as crazy to us as those would be for you.

  • K_Ann

    Ah Mr. Clifton is truly an emissary of hate and ignorance; and his mindless little lapdogs lick it up like cream. The problem is – people at other sites post these articles as “facts” – this country is heading down a scary path.

  • Charles Vincent

    One thing I know is that there’s a “supremacy clause” which, for the most part, sets the precedent that federal laws will supersede conflicting state and local laws.
    This isn’t entirely true.
    “The Supremacy Clause only applies if Congress is acting in pursuit of its constitutionally authorized powers. Federal laws are valid and are supreme, so long as those laws were adopted in pursuance of—that is, consistent with—the Constitution.”