[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6100231,"mediaKeyId","2813712-fb1cb141d497b38ce54b08fe28016002","parentId",2813712,"title","Missouri committee holds public hearing on bills to allow in‑state manufacture and sale of firearm suppressors","audioSeconds",860,"startMs",2168000,"endMs",3028000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813712-fb1cb141d497b38ce54b08fe28016002&start=2168&end=3028","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813712-fb1cb141d497b38ce54b08fe28016002/thumbnail_2168000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6100231/Missouri/Missouri-committee-holds-public-hearing-on-bills-to-allow-instate-manufacture-and-sale-of-firearm-suppressors","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100231-b93bd2c29dbfc8746c1255230a1e184d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775559129&Signature=Q8R8NNoM81FhjxwxrmS7AyoXYCZDnnERq9cmxQzcPqnwxsdryoOctTu--UkFY4uSBkwKwz0d-uVngj4iOD48y5ynsTLAeplEDUDDHdixeuyLUA95iyW3oIPFvR1uUzbpkb-Bd19P39kM4OitQkDonXjzIOxHtHQmFhjKnbgxdqih-xXsFvFTSVbGcWw8X2acskzX8Dl6HVuNrIT~JSLoeqWQMrNF59Hu2HouuQfDEp02jjO5SFJmxkgNrisBx5nO4wC2IQzq1bS2cnvclhiF9YzUHaAkqJ7gBPGdWuhQqWY8-X568cDY1o1vO-Ab535hetf9zIpNp46EkNRruUEcRw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Missouri Legislature","date","2025-03-25T00:00:00Z","article","State Representative Mike Caso and State Representative Ben Baker told the Missouri House Committee on General Laws on Tuesday that House Bill 548 (and companion HB 898) would legalize the manufacture and sale of firearm suppressors inside Missouri so long as the devices are made with Missouri materials and remain in the state.

\"This is dealing with firearm suppressors. This will legalize firearm suppressors within the state of Missouri,\" Representative Mike Caso said in the committee hearing. He and Baker described suppressors as an accessory that reduces, but does not eliminate, gunshot noise and noted current federal regulation under the National Firearms Act requires a roughly $200 tax stamp and an ATF background process to obtain one.

Supporters told the committee suppressors reduce the risk of hearing damage in hunting and instructional settings. \"They make it a little bit safer for the ears,\" Baker said, describing practical uses such as teaching children to shoot and hunting, and saying the requirement for a federal tax stamp and long waiting periods suppresses in‑state manufacturing and sales.

Both sponsors framed the bills as narrowly focused on intrastate commerce: manufacture in Missouri, using Missouri materials, and sale staying within Missouri. The bills also include a mechanism for a Missouri resident to file a written notice of intent with the state attorney general, prompting the attorney general to seek a declaratory judgment in federal court to resolve whether intrastate suppressors fall outside the scope of federal commerce‑clause regulation.

Committee members pressed sponsors on constitutional and procedural questions. Representative Engel asked whether suppressors are effectively banned at the federal level; Baker answered that suppressors are listed among NFA items and subject to the ATF tax and registration regime. Representative Dean and others repeatedly raised the likely prospect of federal litigation and the potential cost to the state if the law is challenged. Representative Dean said he is concerned about the expense: \"I don't expect this bill to be any different, especially, with the way that things are going, with our income tax cuts that we're doing, revenues dropping. It just I cannot make sense of something ... that we know is going to go to court.\"

Legal background came up repeatedly in committee discussion. Sponsors referenced Wickard v. Filburn and other commerce‑clause jurisprudence to argue that intrastate manufacture for intrastate sale is a defensible line to draw; Baker said he has spoken to legal advisers who believe careful drafting could avoid the standing problems that led a Texas suit to be dismissed in the Fifth Circuit. Committee members noted that the Fifth Circuit dismissal there turned on standing and the way the petition was worded.

In public testimony, Arnie C. ACDinos, identifying himself as \"state public advocate,\" and other witnesses supported the bills and urged the committee to move them forward despite the likelihood of litigation. A witness who identified herself as Susan Myers cited ATF tracing numbers and a small percentage of suppressors tied to crime scenes, and referenced medical associations that support noise‑reduction devices to prevent hearing loss.

The committee did not vote on the bills; the hearing ended after oral testimony. Committee leadership said executive‑session work on related substitute language remains ongoing and that only public hearings were scheduled for that day.

Ending: The committee's discussion focused on technical drafting to try to limit the bills to intrastate manufacture and use, and on how the bills' declaratory‑judgment language would be implemented. Sponsors said they expect litigation; opponents and some members warned of state litigation costs. The bills will return to committee for further drafting before any vote.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","General Laws Tuesday, Mar 25, 2025 5:19 PM - 7:02 PM","oneSentenceSummary","State Representative Mike Caso and State Representative Ben Baker told the Missouri House Committee on General Laws on Tuesday that House Bill 548 (and companion HB 898) would legalize the manufacture and sale of firearm suppressors inside Missouri so long as the devices are made with Missouri materials and remain in the state.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MO, Missouri","taxId",77693,"location","Missouri","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100222,"Committee hears measure to prohibit employers from firing workers for locked firearms kept in vehicles",4202,4208000,5479,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813712-fb1cb141d497b38ce54b08fe28016002&start=4208&end=5","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813712-fb1cb141d497b38ce54b08fe28016002/thumbnail_4208000.jpg","/articles/6100222/Missouri/Committee-hears-measure-to-prohibit-employers-from-firing-workers-for-locked-firearms-kept-in-vehicles","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100222-aea71b59a619b16efd451493170f1e16/orig.mp4?Expires=1775559129&Signature=LqC49R4ygk1mkaw1Xz0U5fuWiMC~-CXTfKiTmiHCg8IQ483eSjV0q1xCOJrxHaeHagUsNhPsVgsf5RpSRB2sk793L5eyrH2PA5heLtL~IoRdlP3k4jwpsHUsD1I83SCLfu~qTlnmITZNFlkbsbo0eHq1ASvt-Z4lLGMEIhvbb95F7OLEnhQv04p2JRygfjHzxHsV3F2bJdS6Y4l-LWRiWBXiCotLKROCF-RnEAhGyTRmnh23Ax6~HiKDmUndxTvm7wVFo~Nua2bf0apxNtlDYo6Nz3xf5zMQ4VsHn5dTA5gYNZIg-R6Zc1DzSa6-B5sbqAFUPhsPCE0Hok624scNCA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Hardy Billington introduced House Bill 39 to the Missouri House Committee on General Laws, saying the bill would prohibit employers from discharging an employee solely because the employee has a firearm stored in a locked vehicle on employer property while arriving at or leaving from work or while conducting work‑related activities.

\"This bill is about responsible law‑abiding people ... set the minimum while without fear of losing livelihood,\" Billington said in the committee hearing. He and supporters described scenarios in which employees felt vulnerable when required to park offsite or otherwise be unable to keep a locked firearm with them during travel to and from work.

Committee members pressed the sponsor on scope and unintended consequences. Representative Engel asked whether the bill would override employers' property rights, noting many employers set policies, and whether the measure would allow firearms in employee vehicles at places such as daycares, hospitals or schools. Billington said the bill is intended to cover locked firearms in vehicles and to exclude felons; he did not identify statutory exceptions for sensitive employer types in the language on the table.

Several committee members raised questions about civil‑liability language in the bill. The draft states an employer \"shall not be civilly liable\" for injuries or damages resulting from the use of firearms stored in compliance with the section; members asked how that immunity would apply and whether it was appropriate to preempt standard civil remedies. Representative Dean queried how the measure would interact with at‑will employment and whether employees could simply seek other work rather than rely on statutory protection.

Witnesses who testified in favor included advocates and the state public advocate. Susan Myers, who said she volunteers with Women for Gun Rights, argued women are a growing demographic of firearm owners and that some women are being disarmed while off the clock by employer policies that restrict firearms on parking premises. Arnie C. ACDinos said the bill does not apply to felons and argued that vehicle storage of firearms is treated differently in other states such as Illinois.

No vote was taken; committee members suggested drafting clarifications on scope (for example, whether the rule applies during company‑sponsored events, in parking areas used by visitors, or while employees are not on the clock) and on the proposed civil‑liability language. Sponsors and staff said they would consider amendments.

Ending: The hearing highlighted tensions between employer property‑management rights and worker safety concerns. Members asked for clearer statutory definitions and for precise liability language; the bill remains in committee while staff and the sponsor consider revisions.

","House Bill 39 would bar employers from firing employees solely because a locked, concealed firearm is stored in the employee's vehicle on employer property while the employee is arriving to or leaving from work, sponsor Hardy Billington told the Missouri House General Laws Committee.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100226,"Committee hears bill to let concealed‑carry permit holders carry across HOA common areas",2242,2008000,4250000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813712-fb1cb141d497b38ce54b08fe28016002&start=2008&end=4250","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813712-fb1cb141d497b38ce54b08fe28016002/thumbnail_2008000.jpg","/articles/6100226/Missouri/Committee-hears-bill-to-let-concealedcarry-permit-holders-carry-across-HOA-common-areas","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100226-7ab8c18a416371ab0c2b8456bc34efee/orig.mp4?Expires=1775559129&Signature=ARC07osYKSRepGsHJAGlQH0HsSq88JbAeIgZ8NrdVfx7SmaoOeBWRvAEpZnzTRuRJlI4MGsk4NMTHH6Tjqld-uSzHo1TonMGF86sEySKYrKhnpvXd9AH9BAoKDtIfhEpgeI7E0elQFjUFGaLzs1iRCjaaMttsxD2dEQvF3eBDXV9vHqME2XrnENrfXI4KQ3~GqA--Kx3kYPClw1gxt-3hKxuY2Hd99JnKt4jBFpf-xnoaMCGsBwtpkfY8Aj09WVbnBb7SVRXs2KglFhp6f3SVeWPAvde-nHQZqtEfYrgPQTsBRZKKcQpldFy-zzW3~z~4yrBrRPyUX4fR2zLeUk0Xg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","State Representative Bridal Sites told the House General Laws Committee that House Bill 1415 would prevent homeowners associations, condominium master associations and other common‑interest communities from using private rules to stop individuals with valid concealed‑carry permits from carrying firearms while traversing limited common elements, parking lots and ingress/egress routes.

\"We should not allow private boards and committees to take away the right to carry on sidewalks, in parking lots, and access hallways to private property and limited common areas that are for the enjoyment of the homeowner,\" Representative Bridal Sites said in opening remarks, describing a constituent who is a licensed firearms instructor who says association rules prevented him from carrying from his unit to his vehicle.

Committee members questioned the bill's breadth and its interaction with contract rights and HOA governance. Representative Engel noted that residents typically agree to HOA rules as part of their housing contract and that associations can, under contract law, deactivate access to shared amenities for rule violations. Engel urged narrowing the bill to avoid unintended consequences for large, membership‑run associations.

Several members asked whether the bill would allow permit holders to carry in high‑use common areas such as pools, tennis courts, clubhouses or trails. Representative Sites said the bill was intended to allow \"natural egress,\" for example, carrying from a home to a car or along a sidewalk, and that the statutory text requires a valid concealed‑carry permit. Representative Tietzson and Representative Dean suggested middle‑ground language that would preserve concealed carry for transportation while prohibiting carry that is openly displayed or left unattended in recreational settings.

Members and witnesses offered competing views during public testimony. Arnie C. ACDinos, identifying himself as state public advocate, testified in support and said HOA restrictions on deeded access are improper. Multiple witnesses who identified themselves as supporters urged passage; one committee member read concerns that the presence of concealed weapons in crowded common areas could alarm other residents and complicate emergency response.

No vote was taken. Representatives said they would consider narrower drafting options, including language that would require permitted carriers to keep weapons concealed while moving between private residences and vehicles and to prohibit display or leaving a firearm unattended in recreational areas.

Ending: Sponsors said the bill is intended as a narrow protection for licensees carrying between private residences and vehicles; committee members asked for clearer limits around recreational facilities and shared amenities. The bill remains in committee while sponsors and staff consider drafting amendments.

","House Bill 1415 would forbid homeowners associations from prohibiting concealed‑carry permit holders from carrying firearms while moving through limited common elements, parking areas or ingress/egress routes; lawmakers debated property‑rights limits, safety concerns and narrow tailoring during testimony and public comment.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Missouri committee holds public hearing on bills to allow in‑state manufacture and sale of firearm suppressors

Committee hears measure to prohibit employers from firing workers for locked firearms kept in vehicles

Committee hears bill to let concealed‑carry permit holders carry across HOA common areas