ThunderKiss1965
Platinum Member
My first comment mentioned law abiding citizens.Restrict a constitutional right.....according to who?States can not pass laws that restrict a Constitutional right.that might apply if not for the last 4 words in the 10th A and the specifics of the people in the 2nd A,,nothing in the 14th has to do with the 2nd A,,it also restricts the states from making gun laws,,,It would be nice if conservatives would at least READ the US Constitution before they pass laws that won't be upheld upon a court challenge, thereby wasting everyone's time in the process. Instead, it would be nice if they spent their time actually working to get things done for the people. But I guess that's too much to ask..
__________________________________________________________
Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state can’t ignore federal law, after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules.
In a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause outweighs the measure that Gov. Mike Parson signed into law Saturday. The new rules penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton said the law threatens to disrupt the working relationship between federal and local authorities, they said in the letter, noting that Missouri receives federal grants and technical assistance.
“The public safety of the people of the United States and citizens of Missouri is paramount,” Boynton wrote in the letter.
President Joe Biden has made gun control laws a priority of his administration, and the House has passed two bills requiring background checks on firearms sales and an expanded review for gun purchases, though they face a tough road in the Senate. But states, including Missouri, have increasingly worked to loosen gun laws, including abandoning requirements that people get training and pass background checks to carry concealed handguns.
Missouri’s law would subject law enforcement agencies with officers who knowingly enforce any federal laws to a fine of about $50,000 per violating officer.
Republican lawmakers who worked to pass the bill have said they were motivated by the potential of more restrictive gun laws in the Biden administration. But state Democrats have argued the law is unconstitutional and have predicted it would not pass a challenge in the courts.
The Justice Department argued in the letter that the state lacks the authority to shield any Missouri businesses or citizens from federal law or to prevent federal law enforcement officials from carrying out their duties.
Boynton said the bill “conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulation” and federal law would supersede the state’s new statute. He said federal agents and the U.S. attorney’s offices in the state would continue to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations. He asked that Parson and Eric Schmitt, the state’s attorney general, clarify the law and how it would work in a response by Friday.
Six states have passed legislation removing or weakening concealed-carry permit requirements this year, most recently Texas, where Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill Wednesday. About 20 states now allow people to carry concealed weapons without a license. At least three other states have passed legislation banning police from enforcing federal gun laws, a preemptive shot at any new measures passed by Democrats.
Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws
The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state can’t ignore federal law, after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules. In a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S...www.aol.com
This is incorrect.
If you read the Constitution, the 9th and 10th amendment clearly say that congress can only pass laws on areas where congress has been explicitly be authorized to do so by the Constitution.
And the only mention of firearms in the Constitution, is the 2nd amendment which apparently prohibits any and all federal firearm jurisdiction.
Not only can Missouri void federal gun laws, but anyone sworn to uphold the constitution has to.
The constitution clearly gave absolutely zero firearms jurisdiction to the federal government.
The law is quite clear, and the federal government is clearly in violation of the constitution, which is superior to Congress.
The 2nd amendment does not explicitly restrict the states from making gun laws.
The only means by which the states are restricted is through the incorporation process of the 2nd amendment, initiated by the 14th amendment.
And that then is up to the SCOTUS.
And obviously the SCOTUS has never remotely indicated that states could not pass firearm laws like restricting felons, requiring registration, or pretty much whatever states want to pass.
About the only thing states have been prevented was total bans on home firearms for defense.
and as the 10th clearly says,, the people,, and since the 2nd says the people,, neither the feds nor the states have any say as to arms,,
You misunderstand.
It was the 14th amendment that allowed the courts to attempt to define individual rights at all.
And "incorporation" is the process by which the SCOTUS used the Bill of Rights to help determine what individual rights should be.
Its called the "Penumbra Effect". Meaning that although we do not know what individual rights may be, we can tell something about them by the shadow they cast in the framing of the Bill of Rights.
It is the 14th amendment which allows anyone to challenge the constitutionality of any state law when it comes to individual rights.
The 2nd amendment says "right shall not be infringed" but that does not mean you can't have lot of state laws, but just that they can not infringe. For example, states could require all firearms to be registered, and that does not have to be an infringement.
dont let them control you and fight for your rights,,
Sure, I agree firearms are an individual right.
But it is just no so clear what state and local gun laws there can or should.
The only thing clear is there should be no federal gun laws at all.
But I would expect different gun laws in outback Alaska, vs crowded NYC.
And before the 14th amendment, they absolutely could and did.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Period that's it. Any law that limits that right is an infringement. There is no other way to interpret it. You want to play word games and shit because you have no real argument.And what, pray tell, is 'infringement' under the constitution? And according to who?Shall not be infringed you fucking loon. That's not my personal opinion or feelings . Its written out clear as day to anyone with more than half a brain cell.It doesn't really matter what you 'give a shit about'. Your personal opinion about constitutional violations have no relevance to the law.I don't give a shit what the SCOTUS or any level of government decides. The 2nd Amendment is clear. The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. There is no other way to interpret that.Shall not be infringed. Any law passed by the Federal, State and or local government that interferes with a law abiding citizens right to bare arms is unconstitutional and should be ignored.It would be nice if conservatives would at least READ the US Constitution before they pass laws that won't be upheld upon a court challenge, thereby wasting everyone's time in the process. Instead, it would be nice if they spent their time actually working to get things done for the people. But I guess that's too much to ask..
__________________________________________________________
Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state can’t ignore federal law, after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules.
In a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause outweighs the measure that Gov. Mike Parson signed into law Saturday. The new rules penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton said the law threatens to disrupt the working relationship between federal and local authorities, they said in the letter, noting that Missouri receives federal grants and technical assistance.
“The public safety of the people of the United States and citizens of Missouri is paramount,” Boynton wrote in the letter.
President Joe Biden has made gun control laws a priority of his administration, and the House has passed two bills requiring background checks on firearms sales and an expanded review for gun purchases, though they face a tough road in the Senate. But states, including Missouri, have increasingly worked to loosen gun laws, including abandoning requirements that people get training and pass background checks to carry concealed handguns.
Missouri’s law would subject law enforcement agencies with officers who knowingly enforce any federal laws to a fine of about $50,000 per violating officer.
Republican lawmakers who worked to pass the bill have said they were motivated by the potential of more restrictive gun laws in the Biden administration. But state Democrats have argued the law is unconstitutional and have predicted it would not pass a challenge in the courts.
The Justice Department argued in the letter that the state lacks the authority to shield any Missouri businesses or citizens from federal law or to prevent federal law enforcement officials from carrying out their duties.
Boynton said the bill “conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulation” and federal law would supersede the state’s new statute. He said federal agents and the U.S. attorney’s offices in the state would continue to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations. He asked that Parson and Eric Schmitt, the state’s attorney general, clarify the law and how it would work in a response by Friday.
Six states have passed legislation removing or weakening concealed-carry permit requirements this year, most recently Texas, where Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill Wednesday. About 20 states now allow people to carry concealed weapons without a license. At least three other states have passed legislation banning police from enforcing federal gun laws, a preemptive shot at any new measures passed by Democrats.
Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws
The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state can’t ignore federal law, after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules. In a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S...www.aol.com
Interferes with a law abiding citizens right to 'bare' arms (like sleeveless Ts?), according to who?
If we're talking the SCOTUS, then I agree with you. If laws are merely something you decide if you have to follow.......then not so much.
The authoritative judgment of the SCOTUS most definitely does.
So you're not making a legal argument. You're just giving us your feelings about the constitution. And your feelings don't define constitutional authority or constitutional violations.
Remember, your feelings aren't a legal argument. When you have anything relevant to say about the actual law, I'm all ears.
I see this and it's not quite correct. The Constitution also lays out the process that one may have their rights removed from them. The Constitution also grants the right of free association but if you are in prison, you no longer have that right.
The right to own a gun can be infringed but it has to be done through proper due process.