In case you haven’t heard, Missouri lawmakers are trying to enact legislation that would make possession of a so-called assault weapon or high capacity magazine illegal.
FIRST REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE BILL NO. 545
97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVES
RORY ELLINGER (Sponsor) 573-751-4265 (office) — 314-640-0095 (cell),
and
JILL SCHUPP 573-751-9762 (office) — 314-517-6505 (cell),
MCNEIL AND WALTON GRAY (Co-sponsors).
0776L.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk
AN ACT
To amend chapter 571, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the manufacture,
import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of any assault weapon or large capacity
magazine, with a penalty provision.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 571, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be
2 known as section 571.023, to read as follows:
571.023. 1. As used in this section the following terms shall mean:
2 (1) “Assault weapon”, any:
3 (a) Semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and
4 has one or more of the following:
5 a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;
6 b. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the
7 nontrigger hand;
8 c. A folding or telescoping stock; or
9 d. A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the
10 barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being
11 burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel;
12 (b) Semi-automatic pistol, or any semi-automatic, centerfire or rimfire rifle with
13 a fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition;
14 (c) Semi-automatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and
15 has one or more of the following:
HB 545 2
16 a. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the
17 nontrigger hand;
18 b. A folding, telescoping or thumbhole stock;
19 c. A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the
20 barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being
21 burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel; or
22 d. The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol
23 grip;
24 (d) Semi-automatic shotgun that has one or more of the following:
25 a. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;
26 b. Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the
27 nontrigger hand;
28 c. A folding or telescoping stock;
29 d. A fixed magazine capacity in excess of five rounds; or
30 e. An ability to accept a detachable magazine;
31 (e) Shotgun with a revolving cylinder; or
32 (f) Conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can
33 be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.
34
35 Assault weapon does not include any firearm that has been made permanently inoperable;
36 (2) “Detachable magazine”, an ammunition feeding device that can be loaded or
37 unloaded while detached from a firearm and readily inserted into a firearm and includes
38 a magazine that can be detached by merely depressing a button on the firearm either with
39 a finger or by use of a tool or bullet;
40 (3) “Fixed magazine”, an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently
41 attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without
42 disassembly of the firearm action;
43 (4) “Large capacity magazine”, any ammunition feeding device with the capacity
44 to accept more than ten rounds, but shall not be construed to include any of the following:
45 (a) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot
46 accommodate more than ten rounds;
47 (b) A twenty-two caliber tube ammunition feeding device; or
48 (c) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.
49 2. No person, corporation or other entity in the state of Missouri may manufacture,
50 import, possess, purchase, sell, or transfer any assault weapon or large capacity magazine.
51 3. This prohibition shall not apply to:
HB 545 3
52 (1) Any government officer, agent, or employee, member of the armed forces of the
53 United States, or peace officer, to the extent that such person is otherwise authorized to
54 acquire or possess an assault weapon or large capacity magazine, and does so while acting
55 within the scope of his or her duties;
56 (2) The manufacture of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition feeding
57 device by a firearms manufacturer for the purpose of sale to any branch of the armed
58 forces of the United States, or to a law enforcement agency in the state of Missouri for use
59 by that agency or its employees, provided the manufacturer is properly licensed under
60 federal and state laws; or
61 (3) The sale or transfer of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition feeding
62 device by a dealer that is properly licensed under federal, state, and local laws to any
63 branch of the armed forces of the United States, or to a law enforcement agency in the state
64 of Missouri for use by that agency or its employees for law enforcement purposes.
65 4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession
66 of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective
67 date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:
68 (1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of
69 Missouri;
70 (2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or
71 (3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law
72 enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.
73 5. Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an
74 assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony.
Tags: Missouri
Render it inoperable, move it out of the state or turn it in to the legal authorities, but don’t worry. No one is talking confiscation. Nothing to see here folks, move along.
I haven’t read other proposals in complete detail prior to this. Is Missouri upping the ante by demanding the weapon be rendered inoperable, expelled from the state or surrendered? Have others suggested the same or are existing weapons grandfathered into those particular state’s laws?
Well, clearly these legislators believe the public is entirely untrustworthy and too dangerous to permit their ownership of “assault rifles, pistols, and shotguns”, those should be left only to the police and military. And again, I ask, why? If all these weapons are banned, why would the police need such firearms? Won’t the “assault firearms” cease to be a problem with this law?
More of the “nobody says you can’t shoot a gun, nobody says you can’t have a gun…just not that one, or that one, or that one over there…that one, and DEFINITELY not that one!”
This is WAAAAAYY down the slippery slope! A law focused on weapons used in such a TINY minority of crimes as to render this law almost entirely inconsequential with regards to shooting statistics. Next, and it WILL come, will be a focus on handguns of any type, and for those they have better statistics to show their extensive use in gun violence. They will, of course, ignore any associated problems surrounding those stats, and just present simplistic numbers without context. And then pistols are gone too.
And then, after all firearms are restricted to hunting clubs and shooting ranges, they will wonder why so many people are STILL being victimized by armed criminals! It couldn’t be because of the gun grabbers actions, they did everything with pure intent and love for humanity! It must be Republicans…and George Bush.
If you live in Missouri and this law passes, just say “Show Me…the way outta here”!
They might as well mandated the ownership of unicorns. The proposal of this is simply an empty gesture, a waste of the paper it was written on. There is strong bipartisan support for guns in Missouri, along with a Republican super majority in the House. Nothing to worry to about, just a couple of Reps that will have something to regret come reelection.
I certainly hope you are right. I always thought Missouri was pro-gun.
This bill is authored/sponsored by 4 liberal representatives from the St Louis Metro area. It isn’t scheduled for hearing or on any House calendar.
Republicans hold a 105 to 55 advantage in the House and a 26 to 8 advantage in the Senate.
Once again we see the major metropolitan idiocy destroying the rights of others. Maybe we should fence them in and force them to secede. Just a thought. I know the only things our rural area gets from the large cities close to us is heroin, burglaries, B&E’s and home invasions.
The can go to Hell.
David Spicer
OATH KEEPER
The very fact that this is being proposed in Missouri is alarming. The politicians that created this better get toasted during election season.
I second what is said above; the Republicans have a super majority and any gun-banning bill will go exactly nowhere. St. Louis reps are doing this so that they can go home and lobby for votes with an “I tried” sticker on their chests. My own rep is a Democrat and has let me know in no uncertain terms that he and the vast majority of his colleagues have no stomach for limiting the rights of Missourians regarding firearms ownership. In fact, there is a bill in the House right now that would exempt MO from Federal gun bans. That bill is based off laws that Montana and Wyoming have on the books already.
Do they take their brains out and play with them and then forget to put them back in afterwards??????
Minnesota is right behind them.
I love my TEXAS!!!! 😉
GOT ROOM FOR A COP NEAR RETIREMENT??
I’m from MO, we still have our brains here… well except the Dems.
It won’t get any traction, I’m not worried.
Marty
Badger Ordnance
What Charlton Heston should have said in his NRA address “Get your hands off my guns you damn dirty Democrats!”
Holy shit, that got me laughing! You made my day Marty.
They are moving the Overton Window so far to the left that when they come back with a “compromise” the sheep will be
“See they’re being reasonable, they are trying to get to the middle ground, if only the right would join them”
They will once again win the public perception game and the sheep will follow in lock step.
We must stay in the fight, to the last man, to the last bullet.
What part of the proposal isn’t an infringement, again? It is issues like this that ALL of us ought to be fighting with reams of paper and electrons to the state’s representatives via emails and so on. It needs not to happen to begin with, because once something like this starts, others will fall – and though blatantly unconstitutional, it would take years to undo the legislative sodomy via the court system.
How many of our fellows would learn, under such a “law”, what the inside of county/state facilities look like when they’ve done *nothing* actually wrong? For even driving through the state with their weapon in the car with them, if pulled over for speeding/whatever?
My suggestion to all who reside in MO, if I may, is find out who proposed this, and begin a mega campaign to vote him or her out of office, along with any and everyone who votes for it. Just sayin’.