Posted on 03/12/2008 6:29:20 AM PDT by coloradan
Spitzer is apparently in violation of the Mann act, which prohibits transportation of women across state lines "for an immoral purpose." Apparently the justification of this law comes from the interstate commerce clause.
But when it comes to guns, federal laws are enacted to prohibit or require something for guns "which have ever traveled in or affect" interstate commerce, which is essentially all of them. (Unless you mine the iron, make the steel, and then make the gun all in one state, apparently.)
Most girls "have ever traveled in or affect" interstate commerce, but this isn't good enough for the Mann act, what is prohibited is the specific act of interstate transport for a specific purpose.
No such requirement arises for, e.g. proposed gun show regulations, background check requirements, and the ban of guns ("having traveled in or affecting interstate commerce") being within 1000 feet of a school zone, etc. If they've EVER traveled in interstate commerce, or if their mere existence could arguably affect said commerce, it's fair game for federal regulation, apparently.
That's funny.
It’s too bad Warren Zevon is gone. I think he could get a song out of this.
FDR's maybe. Not Madison's by a long shot.
Saw that and thought... BATF again?
Hard to get too excited about creating loopholes for criminals who use guns, though.
You’re surprised that theres a double standard with these two subjects?
Since the “crime” part of what you just posted is already given, no other “loopholes” matter - you already have what you need to convict. If murder, armed robbery, reckless endangerment, etc., remain illegal, you don’t need a federal law banning possession of guns to put people who do these things in jail.
“If murder, armed robbery, reckless endangerment, etc., remain illegal, you don’t need a federal law banning possession of guns to put people who do these things in jail.”
You need a federal law if your intent is to take power away from the states.
Some “original research” on FR, i.e. a vanity.
Possibly. But what if the only role the defendant played in the crime was that he transported the guns across state lines?
Usually, the transportation of the guns is simply used to increase the prison sentence. My view is that criminals get off way too easy anyway. Penalizing them for transporting guns is kind of a stupid remedy for that, but at least it’s something.
More like Theodore Roosevelt.
BATFW
Well, while obscurity is better than he deserves, at least it’s better for us than to have this moron in our face 24/7 and fearing him beocming the next Dem presidential candidate. Count your blessings, I guess.
heeheehee!
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.