By nearly a 2-to-1 margin, Missouri voters yesterday strengthened their state’s right to keep and bear arms constitutional provision with Amendment 5, which passed with 61 percent approval, while 39 percent voted against the measure, according to KOLR 10 News.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported this morning that the anti-gun Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America issued a statement late last night as the votes were tallied. The Michael Bloomberg-funded organization said, “Today Missouri voters approved a gun lobby-backed proposal that could gravely undermine public safety.”
Gun prohibitionists intent on preventing the amendment from being passed, warned that it could “impede enforcement of reasonable firearms restrictions,” the Post-Dispatch story noted. But such rhetoric has been ineffective in the past when anti-gunners opposed concealed carry reform laws in several states, and such predictions have proven to be wrong with the test of time.
Importantly, the Missouri amendment states that the right is unalienable. “Any restriction on these rights shall be subject to strict scrutiny and the state of Missouri shall be obligated to uphold these rights and shall under no circumstances decline to protect against their infringement,” the amendment says. The amendment is explained here.
That language puts the right to keep and bear arms on a pretty high pedestal, beyond the reach of many, if not most gun control laws. Its passage may open the door to legal challenges, but it may also close the door to extremist gun control measures pushed by anti-gun state lawmakers.
Adoption of the amendment raises questions about widening divisions in the United States. Anti-gunners are pushing gun control measures in Washington and Nevada, and Massachusetts lawmakers just adopted new gun regulations that essentially give police chiefs the discretion to determine who can exercise his or her Second Amendment rights by granting or withholding gun licenses.
In Colorado, last year saw passage of restrictive gun laws, even in the face of law enforcement opposition. Voters in two districts recalled their state senators, and a third anti-gun senator chose to resign rather than be recalled, thus allowing her party to retain thin legislative control. However, the offensive gun laws remain in place, and until those laws are repealed, it amounts to a loss for gun owners.
Tilting the political landscape are anti-gun elites, in particular billionaire Michael Bloomberg. His money, and that of other wealthy gun prohibitionists, puts grassroots working class gun rights activists at a distinct financial disadvantage.