...;0)
Posted on 09/23/2009 7:28:59 PM PDT by HogsBreath
NASHVILLE - The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has told Tennessee gun dealers to disregard a state statute that exempts firearms made and sold inside Tennessee from federal gun laws and registration.
The ATF says the federal laws still apply regardless of the state's move.
The Tennessee legislature considered and approved several bills this year to reduce restrictions on firearms, including one bill that its sponsors labeled the "Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act." It passed overwhelmingly, the House 87-1 and the Senate 22-7, despite warnings by some lawmakers that it could subject Tennessee citizens to federal prosecution and imprisonment.
(Excerpt) Read more at commercialappeal.com ...
State law generally controls the use,taxation and licensing of personal property.
If the ATF wants federal supremacy in fire arms use that involves no interstate component, then they will have to show an over riding interest in domination of state law.
Tenessee obviously will not be laying down on this one.
The framers at some point probably took a break and went into the countryside, smoked some cigars, downed some brew, compared war wounds, and shot at some fowl-before going back and building a nation.
You know, guy stuff.
Amen!
2nd amendment specifically says “Congress shall make no law...” so even if they did write and pass a law, that law would be specifically and demonstrably unconstitutional.
We can’t afford that; Soldier.
...;0)
Congress uses the Commerce Clause to accomplish this sort of mischief, and SCOTUS has been derelict in its duty to stop it.
To give such a branch of the federal government such power to infringe the protected rights of the people ignores both the 2nd and the 10th limitations on the entire federal government.
Yep. The New Deal Commerce Clause has been poison to many of our natural rights.
cant have it both ways...
I heard a guy from Montana on a sportsmen radio show (the type that runs on the radio on a Saturday morning at 6am), and some group there is trying to pass a law that will allow it’s citizens to buy a firearm that is manufactured in Montana so as to allow the purchaser to buy it without a Federal background check, as long as the gun stays in Montana (it will be so marked).
He also used as an example that at Ruby Ridge, the FBI sniper that shot Randy Weaver(?) was arrested by the local sheriff, and charged with murder, but he somehow got out of it.
“Oh you can keep and bear them alright, you just can’t buy or sell them”
Federal Law oversees State Law whether we like it or not
Only in areas that the federal government is given Constitutional authority.
The sniper shot and killed Randy Weaver’s wife.
May be overreaching? Their very existence is overreaching. Prohibition ended 80 years ago.
2nd amendment specifically says “Congress shall make no law...” so even if they did write and pass a law, that law would be specifically and demonstrably unconstitutional.
Any law repugnant to the constitution is null and void. That was a supreme court decision way back the name of which escapes me now. Kinda neat isn’t it!
>The commerce clause was meant to keep states from imposing trade barriers with regards to each other. The word “regulate” meant “to keep regular”.
That is a fact, but good luck getting a judge besides Thomas to rule that way. Even Benito Scalia sold us out when push came to shove, in Raich vs Leviathan:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2342250/posts?page=30#30
Barnett cuts Scalia a new one; a beautiful sight to behold, but unfortunately the closest thing to justice that Raich was afforded by the collaborationist lawyer mafia, err, I mean "Courts."
What about Justice Scalia? He did not join the majority opinion, resting his decision on the Necessary and Proper Clause, which he had previously described in Printz v. U.S. as "the last, best hope of those who defend ultra vires congressional action."
In his concurring opinion in Raich, Justice Scalia appears to put his commitment to majoritarianism over his commitment to originalism. Yet this decision does run counter to his oft-expressed insistence that the people should act to protect their un-enumerated rights in state political processes rather than in federal court. Here this is exactly what the citizens of California and ten other states have done, but Justice Scalia's new stance on the Necessary and Proper Clause leaves citizens little, if any, room to protect their liberty from federal encroachment in the future. It has always seemed significant that he never joined Justice Thomas's originalist concurrences in Lopez and Morrison. Nor does he explain why Justice Thomas's originalist dissent in Raich is historically inaccurate, which would be incumbent on him as an "originalist justice" to do. Instead, Justice Scalia now joins in expanding the reach of the Commerce Clause power beyond even that which the Court had endorsed in Wickard v. Filburn. In oral argument he admitted, "I always used to laugh at Wickard." Now it's Judge Stephen Reinhardt and the Ninth Circuit's turn to laugh.
Gonzales v. Raich has had the salutary effect of showing that federalism is not just for conservatives. Many liberals are distressed about Justice Stevens's opinion. With a Republican Congress they have come to see the virtue of state experimentation. The case also succeeded in raising the national visibility of the medical-cannabis cause. Maybe now Congress will act where it has refused to act in the past.
But Gonzales v. Raich has placed the future of the New Federalism in doubt, which makes future appointments to the Supreme Court all the more important. Will the president name someone who, like Justice Thomas, is truly committed to federalism? Or will his nominee be a fair-weather federalist, as Justice Scalia has turned out to be when the chips were down?
The Feds bribe the local lickspittle Vichy turncoats with a share of the loot.
Let’s ask the Romans how that plan usually turns out for the employers of mercenary thugs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.