Preemption is the process where a higher level of government revokes the regulatory ability of a lower level of government. While such an action may seem prohibitive to local lawmakers, firearm and ammunition preemption prevents the creation of a confusing patchwork of local laws and ensures that all firearms owners within a state are subject to the same laws, or lack thereof.
Preemption is the process where a higher level of government revokes the regulatory ability of a lower level of government. Such action may seem prohibitive for local lawmakers, but with topics such as firearms and ammunition, policy preemption is beneficial, keeping responsible gun owners from having to account for a confusing miscellany of local regulations.
Historically, firearms preemption has faced opposition in large metropolitan areas. Local officials cite the differences between rural and urban areas as the reason for needing to repeal firearms preemption, but this “repeal and replace” process only serves to limit the powers of the Second Amendment.  Perhaps the most important principle of preemption is its equal distribution of the law. Keeping firearm and ammunition regulations at the state level prevents discrepancies from locality to locality. This ensures that all gun owners have equal rights, regardless of location.
Points of Interest
- There are currently 43 states with firearm preemption laws.
- New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Hawaii have absolutely no laws imposing preemption.
The following language is found in successful firearm preemption legislation.
- State of Washington RCW § 9.41.290: “The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.”
- State of Florida Statutes Chapter 790.33: “Except as expressly provided by the State Constitution or general law, the Legislature hereby declares that it is occupying the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition, including the purchase, sale, transfer, taxation, manufacture, ownership, possession, storage, and transportation thereof, to the exclusion of all existing and future county, city, town, or municipal ordinances or any administrative regulations or rules adopted by local or state government relating thereto. Any such existing ordinances, rules, or regulations are hereby declared null and void.”
It is recommended that legislators explore and support firearm preemption legislation in their state to ensure the ability of responsible gun owners to carry and use these important sporting tools, so this ability is not infringed upon by burdensome local legislation. If states are able to pass legislation that clearly defines a firearm and firearm preemption, responsible gun owners will not be threatened by outdated or restrictive laws.
For more information regarding this issue, please contact Brent Miller at email@example.com.
Share this page
Your opinion counts
What do you think is the biggest obstacle that deters younger individuals from joining the hunting community?Vote Here
- Lack of access to hunting areas (18.02%)
- Lack of a mentor or instructor to take them (26.74%)
- Age limit restrictions on when they can purchase a license (1.16%)
- Lack of time or competing interests (16.28%)
- Technology (social media, phones, computers) (16.86%)
- Perceived negative public or peer-group opinions (20.93%)