Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old December 9th, 2009 #1
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,005
Rick Ronsavelle
Default States Fighting the Feds: Gun Laws

Will Missouri Nullify Federal Gun Laws?

07. Dec, 2009

by Michael Boldin

"Missouri State Representative Cynthia Davis has introduced the “Firearms Freedom Act” (HB1230) – prefiled for the 2010 legislative session. The bill “Asserts the right of the State of Missouri to regulate the intrastate use and acquisition of certain firearms pursuant to the reserved powers of the state over intrastate commerce and the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.”

While the bill’s title focuses solely federal gun regulations, it has far more to do with the 10th Amendment’s mandate that powers not delegated to the federal government are “reserved to the states, respectively, or to the people.” It states:

Amendment X of the Constitution of the United States guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the Constitution and reserves to the state and people of Missouri certain powers as they were understood at the time that Missouri was admitted to statehood. The guarantee of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Missouri and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Missouri and the United State

Amendment II of the Constitution of the United States reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Missouri was admitted to statehood, and the guarantee of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Missouri and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Missouri and the United States

Some supporters of the legislation say that a successful application of such a state-law would set a strong precedent and open the door for states to take their own positions on a wide range of activities that they see as not being authorized to the Federal Government by the Constitution.

Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. (Click here to see the full list)

There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding these laws, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter:

The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to ‘all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees’ in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature. ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that ‘Federal law supersedes the Act’, and thus the ATF considers it meaningless.

Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders’ vision of constitutional government:

“Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter.”

“This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t suit them.”

Advocates of these efforts say it doesn’t matter if the federal government disagrees, or even threatens states over funding, as they did recently with Oklahoma. Gary Marbut, author of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, and founder of FirearmsFreedomAct.com took this position in a recent interview with the Tenth Amendment Center:

“We’re not depending on permission from federal judges to be able to effectuate our state-made guns bills. And, we’re working on other strategies to wrest essential and effective power from the federal government and put it where it belongs.“

The principle behind such legislation is nullification, which has a long history in the American tradition. When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

All across the country, activists and state-legislators are pressing for similar legislation, to nullify specific federal laws within their states.

A proposed Constitutional Amendment to effectively ban national health care will go to a vote in Arizona in 2010. Thirteen states now have some form of medical marijuana laws – in direct contravention to federal laws which state that the plant is illegal in all circumstances. And, massive state nullification of the 2005 Real ID Act has rendered the law virtually null and void.

While some advocates concede that a federal court battle has a slim chance of success, they point to the successful nullification of the Real ID Act as a blueprint to resist various federal laws that they see as outside the scope of the Constitution.

Some say that each successful state-level resistance to federal programs will only embolden others to try the same – resulting in an eventual shift of power from the federal government to the States and the People themselves."

Copyright © 2009 by TenthAmendmentCenter.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
 
Old December 9th, 2009 #2
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,683
Rounder
Default

Most likely, this pro-gun bill was written for the sole purpose of fooling white Missourians into believing that some of their state representatives really are on their side.

Pablum to pacify the lemmings and put them back to sleep, while traitors in Jefferson City continue business as usual - - - robbing tax payers blind or "plucking the most feathers out of the geese with the least amount of squacks".

VNN'ers will recall Missouri denying me ballot access in 2006 when I filed to run for U.S. Congress, and not one single state representative uttered a peep in protest, forcing me to run as a write-in candidate.
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire




 
Old December 9th, 2009 #3
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,328
MikeTodd
Default

It is my inpression that MO has been over the years one of the more stringent states in terms of anti-gun laws.
Would that be a fair statement or not?
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old January 4th, 2010 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 40,624
Blog Entries: 25
Alex Linder
Default

Resist DC: NH Legislators Look to Nullify Federal Gun Laws

01. Jan, 2010 Comments (35)

by Michael Boldin

NH Legislators again raise the bar for the 10th Amendment Movement – felony charges proposed for federal agents violating gun rights in New Hampshire

live-free-or-die-nhPre-filed for the 2010 legislative session in New Hampshire, House Bill 1285 (HB1285) seeks to “exempt firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition manufactured in New Hampshire from federal law and regulation.”

Introduced by State Rep. Dan Itse, the bill currently has 5 other co-sponsors, including 10-4 pledge signer, Carol Vita. (h/t NHLiberty.org)

While the bill’s title focuses on federal gun regulations, it has far more to do with the 10th Amendment’s limit on the power of the federal government. It states, in part:

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution for the United States guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the State and people of New Hampshire certain powers as they were understood at the time that New Hampshire ratified the Bill of Rights, particularly the Tenth Amendment in 1790. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the State and people of New Hampshire and the several States comprising the United States as of the time that the compact was agreed upon and adopted by New Hampshire and the several States comprising the United States.

The regulation of inter-state commerce was delegated by the People of the Several States to the federal government in the US Constitution. Since the regulation of intra-state commerce was not delegated to the federal government, this authority, as codified in law by the 10th Amendment, remains with the State governments or the People themselves.

HB1285 includes this principle in its text:

a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in New Hampshire and that remains within the state of New Hampshire is not subject to federal law or taxation, or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce.

The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in New Hampshire from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into New Hampshire 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 New Hampshire.

Unlike many other states that are considering Firearms Freedom Acts (FFA), the New Hampshire legislation includes official sanctions on any state or federal official violating the law, if adopted.

State Agents:

Any public servant of the State of New Hampshire as defined in RSA 640:2 that enforces or attempts to enforce a act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in New Hampshire and that remains within the State of New Hampshire shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor.

Federal Agents:

Any official, agent, or employee of the government of the United States, or employee of a corporation providing services to the government of the United States that enforces or attempts to enforce a act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in New Hampshire and that remains within the State of New Hampshire shall be guilty of a class B felony. (emphasis added)

NULLIFICATION

Some supporters of the legislation say that a successful application of such a state-law would set a strong precedent and open the door for states to take their own positions on a wide range of activities that they see as not being authorized to the Federal Government by the Constitution.

The principle behind such legislation is nullification, which has a long history in the American tradition. When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

All across the country, activists and state-legislators are pressing for similar legislation, to nullify specific federal laws within their states.

A proposed Constitutional Amendment to effectively ban national health care will go to a vote in Arizona in 2010. Thirteen states now have some form of medical marijuana laws – in direct contravention to federal laws which state that the plant is illegal in all circumstances. And, massive state nullification of the 2005 Real ID Act has rendered the law nearly void.

INTERPOSITION

In the Virginia Resolution of 1798, James Madison wrote of the principle of interposition:

That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

Here Madison asserts what is implied in nullification laws – that state governments not only have the right to resist unconstitutional federal acts, but that, in order to protect liberty, they are “duty bound to interpose” or stand between the federal government and the people of the state.

Felony charges for violations of citizens’ rights such as proposed in HB1285 are certainly an effort to interpose between state residents and an overreaching federal government. Time will tell if the State Apparatus will follow through with such needed actions should the bill pass.

CLICK HERE – to view the Tenth Amendment Center’s Firearms Freedom Act Tracking Page or visit FirearmsFreedomAct.com

Michael Boldin is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/...eral-gun-laws/
 
Old September 12th, 2010 #6
Xuxalina Rihhia
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: FUCK YOU!
Posts: 1,477
jewsign

If we suddenly grow stones and decide to turn in our ammo and guns one supersonic bullet at a time, then we will have gotten our collective heads out of our asses. A good fed, cop or FEMAthug in such a horrible time as Katrina, Rita or any future time is a dead one. I read that the Cajuns actually bagged some FEMA thugs who foolishly fired at them. I guess there were some who would not give up their guns no matter what. If we learn this lesson, we might survive! 14/88.
 
Old June 25th, 2011 #7
whiteman
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disarming is suicide

Does Bamboola Bama thinks that Great White Nation of America will bow down to his monkey "orders" and let negroes and incas attack and massacre Civilised People?Those animals are definitely mad and need to be cured and now
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:54 PM.
Page generated in 0.10105 seconds.