Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 50-1204 (2026)

Personal firearms, accessories or ammunition manufactured in Kansas; exempt, interstate commerce

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

50-1204. Personal firearms, accessories or ammunition manufactured in Kansas; exempt, interstate commerce. (a) A personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately and owned in Kansas and that remains within the borders of Kansas is not subject to any federal law, treaty, federal regulation, or federal executive action, including any federal firearm or ammunition registration program, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately and owned in the state of Kansas.

(b) Component parts are not firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition, and their importation into Kansas and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition manufactured and owned in Kansas does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that such component parts are not firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition.

(c) Firearms accessories that are imported into Kansas from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Kansas.

History: L. 2013, ch. 100, § 4; April 25.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. The government did not actively mislead defendant because Kansas officials and representatives only have the authority to declare Kansas laws and not the authority to construe, interpret or enforce federal laws, such as 26 U.S.C. § 5861, so the affirmative defense of entrapment by estoppel is not supported. U.S. v. Cox, 187 F. Supp. 3d 1282, 1286-87 (D. Kan. 2016).

2. The Kansas second amendment protection act does not render the national firearms act unconstitutional. U.S. v. Cox, 235 F. Supp. 3d 1221, 1224 (D. Kan. 2017).


Previous | Next

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2015–2018 · leading case: United States v. Cox, 906 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Cox, 906 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2018). · cites it 3× “" Kan. Stat. Ann. § 50-1204 (a). In 2014, these two laws intersected when the government prosecuted two Kansas men, Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler, for violating the NFA by manufacturing (in Kansas), transferring (in Kansas), and possessing (in Kansas) several unregistered…”
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence v. Brownback, 110 F. Supp. 3d 1086 (D. Kan. 2015). · cites it 2× “This case is dismissed in its entirety without *1103 prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
United States v. Cox, 187 F. Supp. 3d 1282 (D. Kan. 2016). · cites it 6× “” See K.S.A. § 50-1204. Kettler argues that 26 U.”
United States v. Cox, 235 F. Supp. 3d 1221 (D. Kan. 2017). · cites it 2× “” The defendants argue that Kansas’s adoption of the Second Amendment Protection Act (SAPA), K.S.A. § 50-1204, somehow rendered the National Firearms Act unconstitutional.”
— K.S.A. § 50-1204(a) — 1 case
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence v. Brownback, 110 F. Supp. 3d 1086 (D. Kan. 2015). “This case is dismissed in its entirety without *1103 prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.