’60 Minutes’ Does Hit Piece on Missouri’s Second Amendment Sanctuary Law

60 Minutes recently did a hit-piece on Missouri’s Second Amendment Preservation Act (SAPA), a sanctuary law created to protect Missourians’ right to keep and bear arms from federal gun grabbers.

Specifically, SAPA prohibits state officials from enforcing federal firearms laws, and outlaws any taxes and fees imposed on guns, ammunition, or firearm accessories “not common to all other goods and services and that might reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items.”

Gun registration, tracking, and confiscation schemes also fall under this prohibited category, as GunsAmerica previously reported.

SEE ALSO: House Democrats File Bill to Mandate Handgun Licensing and Registration

Fines are steep for violators, and that’s where the rubber meets the road for the disgruntled LEOs interviewed in the 60 Minutes feature.

The SAPA levies a $50,000 civil penalty on any law enforcement agency that employs a person who gives “material aid and support” to anyone who tries to enforce a federal gun control law the bill defines as an infringement on the Second Amendment.

SEE ALSO: Idaho Joins Growing List of Second Amendment Sanctuary States Following Biden’s Gun Orders

By design, the law is not intended to stop police from putting bad guys behind bars, as those in the 60 MInutes video allege, rather it’s about stopping “federal overreach and encroachment on Missourians’ Second Amendment rights,” as Missouri Gov. Mike Parson noted when he signed the legislation back in June.

In other words, SAPA is there to prevent policies like confiscatory prohibitions on black rifles or standard capacity magazines from being implemented. While it’s unlikely that Congress will succeed in reinstating a ban on “assault weapons” in the short term, who knows how things will shake out down the road.

And that’s why Missouri enacted SAPA (a dozen or so other states have similar laws on the books), to serve as an extra layer of defense against the Democrats’ anti-gun agenda.

Maybe it’s true that some kinks need to be worked out about how SAPA’s enforced with respect to the interplay between federal, state, and local law enforcement. The law shouldn’t have a chilling effect on earnest attempts by feds to lock up hardened criminals.

That said, the spirit of SAPA is sound, as the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

***Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE!***

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Big Al 45 November 12, 2021, 10:28 pm

    Anyone who has followed 60 Minutes knows they stopped being real Journalists long ago.
    Dan Rather ring a bell?

  • Dr Motown November 12, 2021, 5:28 pm

    Nothing in this story says anything about local police cooperating with the feds for ballistic investigations, database sharing, CSI work, etc. Sounds like some butthurt local prosecutors/police chiefs don’t understand the law.

  • Armed and Dangerous November 12, 2021, 9:55 am

    Mark N is correct. FFL’s MUST comply with federal law. To purchase a firearm from a gun dealer or any FFL dealer, you must fill out form 4473. Questions 21h and 21i directly address domestic violence and restraining orders. If you answer “yes” on either one of these you will be denied a firearm.
    Also those against SAPA are mostly people who are connected enough where their gun rights will not be hindered regardless of any law. This act does not inhibit local law enforcement from cooperating with the feds. It only prohibits local law enforcement from cooperating when it infringes on one’s second amendment rights. And that is in the constitution.

  • Phil November 12, 2021, 9:03 am

    Well, well, well. Why didn’t 60 Minutes do a piece on Sanctuary Cities during the Trump Administration concerning illegal immigrants? Many local authorities denied federal law officers including ICE the ability to apprehend illegals, many of whom were criminals.

  • Mark N. November 11, 2021, 1:23 am

    If the feds want to enforce federal laws, they can do it themselves without local assistance. But the FFLS have to comply with federal law, as it is a condition of their licensure.

    • Kane November 12, 2021, 10:05 am

      Yeah, the feds started the non-complience policy on immgration et cetera and now the lefties cry when it threatens their agenda.

Send this to a friend