A simple question: If states can nullify federal laws regarding immigration, why can't states nullify federal laws regarding firearms? Or nullify EPA regulations? Nullify the Dept of Education? Looks like the "progressives" may actually be supporters of small government after all.
some states have issued edicts or passed laws stating that firearms made and then found in the state are presumed not to have moved in interstate commerce. Most constitutional scholars realize that the commerce clause nonsense is essentially a dishonest power grab by the federal government and I'd love to have a supreme court case evaluate the unbridled fraud perpetrated by the FDR court in Wickard v Filburn
States do not nullify immigration laws. They just don't actively support them. ICE can come in at any time and support federal laws. And yes states could choose not to support federal gun laws and the ATF could come in anyway
Actually, I'd say the states CAN do that. In 1997 Sheriff Richard Mack took a case all the way to the United States Supreme Court. Wikipedia says this regarding the case: "Rejecting the Governments argument, the Court held that the Tenth Amendment categorically forbids the Federal Government from commanding state officials directly.[6] As such, the Brady Act’s mandate on the Sheriffs to perform background checks was unconstitutional." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States Ironically, the same people that brought us that decision are now dissatisfied with it because it is the precedent sanctuary cities use to stay in operation. Protecting the Liberty of those you don't like is a challenge. But, we can protect our own Rights which - to me is more important than imposing on other local jurisdictions.
But the ATF would be able to come in and make arrests. The FBI could come in now and arrest owners of marijuana stores. They just choose not to.
They can't afford to start mass arrests on pot stores or intrastate sale of guns made within the state without state and local support. Now is the time for states to flex their muscles while DC doesn't have the desire to be forceful against states/individual rights. That's exactly what the left did with the gay marriage agenda. Liberal states passed gay marriage and a willing Fed used the courts to force that law on the rest of the states. Conservative states need to do the same thing with gun rights while Washington is inclined to agree with them. The courts should be ready for this within the next year or so. I'd love to see a state legalize that suppressors made and used within a state are not weapons, but hearing protection and are not subject to federal laws. It's time to take some teeth out of the Feds rule over state law.
They are welcome to try. There just is not a big movement for this. Most people don't care and it would cost votes. I doubt they would even risk it
They don't even do that now for felonies involving attempted gun purchases. It's a felony to lie on the Form 4473, and those prohibited persons who do so are denied permission to purchase a gun and subject to arrest. In 2010 there were 76,142 NICS denials referred by the FBI to the ATF. The ATF referred only 4,732 to the field for further investigation. That's only 6.2% of those felons and other prohibited persons that were even investigated. Of that 4,732, only 62 cases were sent forward for prosecution. 13 resulted in convictions. 6,037,394 background checks in 2010. 76,142 NICS denials referred to ATF from the FBI. 13 convictions. That's with a legal document with the name, address and signature of the criminal implicating him or her in the crime. They also recovered firearms in 1,164 cases of possession by a prohibited person. Charges were only filed in 13 of those cases. That's with an actual prohibited person in possession. Yeah, we need more laws.
What's your point? We accept the deaths of 425,000 Americans each year due to smoking. Your chances are five times greater of dying from second hand smoke than being killed by a firearm. So, how come you aren't raising Hell, wanting to outlaw cigarettes? How come it's more palatable to die from a cigarette than from a firearm? More people die due to DUI accidents. WHO is wanting to ban alcohol? Can you show me YOUR thread wherein you called for waiting periods, background checks or bans on the sales of alcohol? What made DUI a more acceptable way to take the great celestial dirtnap? People get killed by using cell phones and driving. How many young lives could you have saved by outlawing a device that forces you to be a typist while not in an office? I trust you addressed that too. Or, as usual, do we have to read your simple minded drivel that if we didn't have guns, people wouldn't die?
No one smokes around me. No one. I have complete control over that. Would you like to ban alcohol or cell phones? Go for it. I don't want to ban guns. Why are you such a banner? LOL
Me the banner? I'm for Liberty. Liberty has a cost. I oppose gun gun control. Fact is, years ago, every time the government started talking about banning anything gun related, I'd buy the stuff - even things I didn't need. Lots of other people did the same. Bans will only affect your Right to Privacy. You can't turn the clock back on technology nor the fact that the prepping era created millions of hoarders. They will have that stuff available for the rest of my lifetime.
The thing that you can't seem to grasp is: I agree with everything you just said in that post except opposing gun control
You might want to crack open a book on basic Constitutional law one day and educate yourself about the Supremacy Clause.
You might want to read the Constitution and see where the 2nd and 10th Amendments AMMENDED the Constitution and the Supremacy Clause.
So ? Did you notice mostly Thugs and Gangstas and Hood Rats are getting killed and doing the killing ?
In the 48 states that have County Sheriffs, the Sheriff has authority over the Feds in his/her jurisdiction. They can (and have) kicked Federal Law Enforcement out when Fed law is not congruent with State law. https://americanvision.org/8689/tenth-amendment/
You are apparently wrong. "The [US Federal District] court confirms and asserts that “the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official.” " This being the result of a suit against the BATFE specifically. https://politicalvelcraft.org/2011/...by-the-constitution-or-face-immediate-arrest/
Read the statement by the chief judge of Wyoming. They have eo ask permission of the sheriff but in reality no sheriff can stop a federal agent from enforcing federal law. The Feds have jurisdiction everywhere