TTAG'S DEALS OF THE DAY
Our top picks... but these deals don't last long!
Hellfire Muzzle Brake Universal Adapters - 5/8-32 Hellfire Universal Adapter
Buy from Brownells
$22.49$40.0044% off
Buy Now
AC-Unity M17 9X19mm Glock17 17rd Magazine, Black
Buy from Palmetto State Armory
$5.99$13.9957% off
Buy Now
Action Target Arcade Classic Target 100 Pack 23in x 35in
Buy from Optics Planet
$71.99$164.0056% off
Buy Now
Allen Torrey Handgun Case, 10", Coyote w/ Coyote Stitching - 3613
Buy from Palmetto State Armory
$6.99$16.9959% off
Buy Now
AC-Unity AK-47 7.62x39mm Quad Stack 60-Round Magazine
Buy from Battlehawk Armory
$39.99$79.9950% off
Buy Now
Accusharp 729C Gut Hook 3.75 Gut Hook Plain Stainless Steel/Orange Rubber Handle Fixed
Buy from Battlehawk Armory
$8.60$14.9943% off
Buy Now
Ar-15 Bad-Ass Full-Auto Safety Selector Ambidextrous - Ar-15 Full Auto Professional Safety Selector Ambidextrous
Buy from Brownells
$29.99$57.0047% off
Buy Now
wow, tracking down 20,000 names in a database – is that all it takes to cure homicide? Why didn’t I think of that.
Btw, they failed to mention that the police who come to your house to take your guns don’t have a warrant. Turns out, they can’t get one based on this database. The people they take guns from are, in essence, voluntarily cooperating. I am pretty sure those are not the people the AG’s office are looking for, so my bet is that this makes nary a dent in CA homicide statistics. Too bad those 20,000 don’t have an outstanding arrest warrant or something. That might be progress.
The eternal cry of the tyrant who wants to win over the love of his victims: I’m doing this for your own good; trust me.
Dear would-be tyrant, read what Machiavelli said about your kind trying to be loved.
“Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”
― Robert A. Heinlein
I never get tired of reading that quote.
2nd and 10th amendment showdown, this should get interesting.
I’m a Kansan and I say bring it Holder.
Right there with you!
I am in North Carolina and I say the same. Kansas is part of the US and should abide by those laws.
No one is required to abide by illegitimate laws.
+ 1000 squared.
if he wants to litigate against kansas……..can we prosecute him for manslaughter?
Go for it. The attempts to prosecute him for arms trafficking have failed.
he didn`t kill anyone. The ones firing the guns are responsible or don`t you believe in personal responsibility?
Huh, where have you been, the gun is responsible not the individual who pulled the trigger
Marijuana is illegal at the federal level regardless of what laws that a state passes, yet I have heard of no such letters being sent in the wake of “medicinal” legislation. Its easier to get a medical mary jane card in MI than it is to get our shall issue CPL, heck a coworker of mine has it for his bad knee. Double standard I suppose?
Growers and providers of cannabis under various State laws did indeed receive letters on the legality. Basically the same letter was sent out, but it regarded mainly the DEA and cannabis.
They also made sure to mention the BATFE and how anyone possessing or using cannabis would be breaking the law as it pertains to firearms as well.
The federal laws directly contradict the US Constitution so cannot be legally enforced.
Those laws have not been thrown out by the Supreme Court and they were lawfully passed. It maybe your opinion that they shouldn`t be constitutional, but that doesn`t mean they actually are.
Every citizen has the right and the duty to judge if a law is constitutional.
To J…. It would have just gone to court, now it’s become a polarizing stance and people will rise to oppose it. He gained nothing with this letter other than to inflame opinion even further…. I’m really beginning to think a bunch of first graders are running this country.
You will have no argument from me on that point…albeit dangerous first graders. I guess my point is the same as everyone else’s; wondering what the response will be from these states. Legally, they probably don’t have a leg to stand on other than to declare their state legislature and laws as superior to the Fed.
I had a History professor who once said that the Civil War was the final battle of the Revolutionary War, to which I added; and we lost.
I agree that the Founders deemed the State interest as superseding that of the Fed (until post Civil War), but other than fighting a futile litigation in Federal court, they really only have one other option if they intend to hold ground. Then it will be up to the Federal government to decide to back down or use force.
not sure they graduated from commie kindergarten. …….
First graders are more intelligent and more mature than the children running this country.
Its on like Donkey Kong!
And so it begins…
This will be the outcome for some:
A man sits deep in thought
of the freedoms he has lost
Today’s paper lays on a chair
as he wipes his rifle in despair
How can they do this to me
I’m a G.I. who fought for liberty
The rumble of trucks comes down the street
Then he hears the stomping of the booted feet
Dressed in gear that he once wore
They will have to kick in his door
He will NOT open when they ask
he takes a breath amongst his last
He takes a stand as he looks at the paper
decision made to meet his maker
The door flies open, they yell “Put it down”
as the old soldier hears his last sound
His eyes close, he retains his grip
As he begins his final trip……
I hope the politicians have thought long and hard about the can of worms they are about to open. For there likely will be G.I.’s like those I describe above.
Source on that poem?
The NRA and others keep saying that they don`t want new laws, just the current laws fully enforced. So the AG was correct, Kansas cannot stop Federal officials lawfully carrying out their law enforcement activities.
This is grandstanding, this principle could easily extend (slippery slope argument) to the FBI cannot come an investigate offences at x, y or z because Kansas politicians are supported by other lobby groups.
Mike, we heard you the first 100 times. Give it a rest dude.
Dear Kansas,
It is Unconstitutional that your state will not allow us to enforce Unconstitutional laws.
Sincerely,
Known Gun Trafficker
How’s that for the Reader’s Digest version?
LOL that is %150 accurate. Short, sweet and to the point!
So if you are at all a god fearing man you might find something wrong with this in California…… Gay = Welcomed //// Guns = Bad and un-welcomed…..
One more reason California should snap off into the ocean.
Does he have bodyguards with guns? Does he live in a private community?
If so he should be the first one to give up the guns!
I’m a proud citizen of Kansas and will be at the signing ceremony on the 8th of may. may be I can ask gov brownback about this
Maybe I’ve forgotten my high school civics classes, but isn’t the AG’s office actually a part of the Executive Branch? If they are charged with the enforcement of laws, then the separation of our governmental branches would prevent the AG from establishing the constitutionality of those laws, correct?
So now, Holder has neutered SCOTUS and he gets to enforce AND determine what is constitutional? The same turd that determined that POTUS can wage war on American citizens on American soil without due process? The same steaming pile of excrement that authorized the sale of weapons to the mexican drug cartels and then hid behind the “National Security” cloak offered by POTUS after a US agent was killed by those same weapons?
I say F*ck him and feed him fish heads……………………….
rubbish. The laws on the books are constitutional until or unless the Supreme Court decides otherwise. Therefore he is enforcing those laws. Just like laws like DOMA etc should be enforced until they are found unconstitutional (if they are). It is standard practice for laws to be enforced, then if they are later found unconstitutional then enforcement obviously stops. So just calm down OK. No-one is taking your gun.
You missed the point………….the AG doesn’t get to determine if a law is or is not constitutional, that ability lies ultimately with SCOTUS.
The AG may ASSUME that it is constitutional and enforce it until determined otherwise.
You may go now………..
So you accept the laws are constitutional until found otherwise by the SC. So as such the AG was well within his legal right to enforce the laws. Seems a fair assumption.
You may go now!
You seem to have spent quite a deal of time here addressing people’s comments…do the concerns of others bother you?
Or (to quote a meme from months ago) are you the guy that is up late at the computer at night with his significant other shouting “come to bed, it’s 2 am”, and responding with “I can’t! Someone disagrees with me on the internet”?
Hmmm. Lots of new gun laws, many of which have felony penalties. And the felony penalty disqualifies that person from any future firearm ownership. So if an otherwise law abiding citizen of NY puts 8 rounds in a 10 round magazine they become an instant felon. Therefore, all of their guns are subject to confiscation.
They are indeed, coming for guns. It’s just happening in slow progressive moves to test the waters.
Actually, current laws are ASSUMED constitutional until tested before SCOTUS, usually by someone who broke said laws. This means that in enforcement effect current law is constitutional until tested, but there is a difference between assumed and actual constitutionality -if a law is found unconstitutional, it was always unconstitutional despite earlier assumptions otherwise; baring Amendments changing things.
As for nobody coming to take guns: not yet. But most of the control proponents I’ve known, or studied in my policy classes, will say that’s the end-goal between bouts of legislation being up for vote. If legislation’s up for vote, then suddenly it’s not.
You, sir, are a fool. Just because a law is adjudicated as “Constitutional” by the Supreme Court does not make it so.
See the Miller decision, when the Supreme Court decided a sawed off shotgun was not a military weapon.
And you also have a very interesting view of the supremacy clause.
The right to self defense is a natural or God given right, not subject to adjudication. What part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand?
The idea behind Federalism and the Tenth Amendment was to serve as a check on an out of control federal government.
However, as a someone already noted, evidently, you have no problem with the feds enforcing laws that are blatantly unconstitutional. I guess you’re comfortable with idea of another Waco or Ruby Ridge.
Tell you what, I’ll put on a black robe, become a judge on the Supreme Court and adjudicate that the sky is green. I’ll get 4 other justices to agree with me.
And I guess you’ll go along, because, hey, the Supreme Court said so.
Yeah. Well free people take issue with enforcement of laws that are clearly not constitutional regardless of judicial review. I’m not going to submit to tyranny waiting for some court to get around to giving me my rights back.
Folks, wake up and smell the coffee.
Federal law trumps State laws. That is a fact and is in the constitution. You can say whatever you want on the topic, but this is settled fact, backed by the Supreme Court many times. It was also settled during that little dispute between certain states and the Federal government in 1861-65.
Riiiight. That’s why CA Marijuana smokers must fear for their lives. Their habits are illegal for the Feds and legal for the state. Wake up and smell the selective enforcement.
Unfortunately, there are no common sense gun control laws. Look at Chicago and Wash, DC. The strictest gun control laws in the country and they have the greatest gun crime rates in the nation. Both cities are examples of what will happen nationwide. Criminals already have their stock piles of guns and they don’t obey the laws.
When are you gun grabbers going to pass a law that requires all persons of criminal persuasion to turn in their guns within 24 hours.
Way are you NOT concentrating on the criminals instead of concentrating on law abiding citizens.
How many more children have to die before you get serious about going after the **criminals with guns** and those with mental health problems?
The map just provides an area that all should avoid…should they not already be doing so…excluding that area leaves Chicago with a relatively low crime rate…
The last time that the federal government tried to dictate how Kansas would view Constitutional concerns and the enforcement of laws within its borders, it became a guerilla war known as Bleeding Kansas –and the prelude to the much larger national conflict in 1861.
And you think the same may happen here?
Obviously you seem to have forgotten how that little dispute turned out (and who won). Federal law trumps all others in the United States of America. Don’t like this little inconvenient fact? Live somewhere else.
Note – this is not a reply to Mike but to G.R. Mead
So if Federal law declared that anyone using the username ChRiSiS must be tortured for five years and then executed, you’d be totally OK with that?
I doubt that.
Unconstitutional Federal laws are no laws at all. More and more states are standing up to the arrogance of the Federal government.
You say they are unconstitutional, but with all due respect that doesn`t matter. What matters is that the lawful authority that adjudicates on whether something is constitutional or not, the Supreme Court, has spoken. On these matters the current laws are constitutional, you might not like it, but it is a fact.
There are two options, the SC reconsiders when a new challenge comes up or you change the laws via the Congress. These are the two constitutional and well established American ways of doing things.
Wow. The acceptance of federal authority continues apace. You may think differently when the Federal law screws you over, or passes another blatantly unconstitutional law. Example: if a very restrictive federal AWB was passed which required confiscation. Or just Obamacare. Here’s 23 new taxes and a mandatory government program whether you want it or not.
How about if a Federal agent searches through your cell phone because you are within 100 miles of the border? That is an obvious violation of the 4th Amendment. I’ll tell a Federal Agent to pound sand if they want my cell phone without a search warrant. I may make the news, but so be it. If you want to hand over your personal property without a warrant or due cause, then you simply do not understand the Constitution.
Well if an action was unconstitutional, or a law passed that was then it gets taken through the legal system to the Supreme Court. that is the way it has been done for decades, that is the constitutional way.
It is no way to run a country to just say well I don`t agree with X so I will ignore it. Otherwise what is to stop everyone doing that on their pet issue (valid or not is irrelevant). That would lead to anarchy.
I understand why you don`t like it and I can agree with you. My point is about the process that has to be followed in a law abiding nation.
Mike,
Nice work outlining the framework which we are all aware of. Yet saying a law is constitutional does not make it so – as in the illegal search of a cell phone. We seem to be facing a federal government that is increasingly willing to violate our rights.
Otherwise you can just wait until SCOTUS rules and be a useful little lemming.
The amount of federal laws that are on the books, but that have not been adjudicated as constitutional are many. Furthermore, the amount of federal enforcement actions (under the auspices of this or that law) that have no been adjudicated are legion. So, yes, while federal law trumps state law, we live in a world where numerous laws and law enforcement actions are operational but effectively legally indeterminate. It is only recently that states have turned more aggressive in forcing the conflict into the open and likely into courts. This is because under Obama we are experiencing a federal government that is arrogating to itself nearly any and every authority regardless. Immigration, Healthcare, Energy, Guns – the Lightworker Admin is warring against the states at every turn.
Maybe I’m just reading too much into this, but this letter’s language seems more along the lines of personal offense taken than one concerning dueling regulatory issues. There’s a lot of ego involved…more than Constitutional concerns…istm.
I think you are reading too much into this. It seems normal language that has been used for other states when they have passed laws that do not pass Federal Constitutional muster.
It’s a classic argument that has been repeated over thousands of years. My johnson is bigger than yours!
aren’t there Constitutional guarantees about seizing private property without due process? The burden continues to grow.
Yes, but those due process considerations have already been met. This bill merely provides money to seize guns from people who have become prohibited from ownership under some other statute, e.g. DV convictions, violent misdemeanors and felonies, persons against whom civil restraining order have been entered, and certain persons permanently disbarred from ownership of firearms because of mental illness or disease.
If Kansas wants to go to war with the evil federal government, then I’m in. It’s worth it.
I’d have never believed this hadn’t I actually seen it with mine own two eyes. Incredible. And so, so arrogant.
Molon Labe, liberal b!tches.
Arrogant to up hold the duly passed and constitutional laws of the US?
I don`t care if you have a gun or not, but just because you don`t like something doesn`t mean you are right and the others are wrong.
Let me try to reason with the unreasonable. King Georges laws were “duly passed and constitutional ‘. How’d that work out for him?
Our Declaration of Independence begins, “When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…”
That’s what Kansas is saying, that’s what we who agree with her are saying. Don’t make it necessary. You keep quoting all these court decisions like history is immutable, and it ain’t. So and so was settled a long time ago. Well, these are unsettling times. Things can change.
Slavery, Jim Crow, Prohibition. All these things were settled law at one point. Till they weren’t. It took varying forms of unrest before we arrived at a new paradigm.
But you just sit there with that smug look on your face and keep telling us that we must continue kissing Big Daddys ass, because it is “settled law”. Try not to be too shocked if the world continues to evolve around you.
I’m watching the disarming of the northern states with glee. Ahemm…. my bad. THIS IS TERRIBLE….
To: Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General
From: Governor Sam Brownback
“Nuts”
Ernest, are you writing from Jericho, Kansas?
Bastogne
Love this state… And proud to be contributing to increased firearms ownership here.
The Kansas law appers to be Seditious Conspiracy under 18 USC § 2384:
“If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. ”
Before you start flaming me, I agree with Kansas and would like to see all federal gun laws nullified. I’m just stating what the law is.
You will be flamed because some do not want to deal with facts. The law is the law until it is changed. If you don`t like it then work to change it – that is the American way.
There is a long standing American tradition of changing the law by breaking it. It worked w/ the prohibition of alcohol. It worked for the abolition of slavery; it worked for the civil rights movement.
Natural Law a.k.a. God’s Law trumps Scotus, Potus, or any other otus. This is the spirit that founded this nation. Indeed, the same arguments given here against Kansas were given against American Independence. Our Founding Fathers essentially told the crown to suck it. If one must choose I, like many others, would rather be on the side of Right then on the right side of any supposed law.
David. It’s also working with illegal immigration.
Like you do yourself?
Frankly in my opinion I don’t consider laws that are useless, stupid, arbitrary, that violates the rights of man and women, and that is essentially unjust and tyrannical to be laws at all. If mindless obey a law simply because “it’s the law” without questioning it then you deserve those laws for yourself.
“The law is the law until it is changed.”
Ah Yes, but in the workings of human activity throughout history, the law gets changed a variety of ways. One way is through people voting in an elected chamber. That method is actually – historically speaking – quite rare. Usually the law gets changed when enough people with enough force simply change it, either by ignoring it or “dealing” with the individuals who represent the current law. We’ve been pretty lucky, historically speaking, here in the US to keep the law from changing in violent ways. But are we so special that we will buck human history forever?
Ahh the constitution! the founding fathers said to follow it and reference it when it’s convenient and helpful to the cause of the government. sincerely, AG
Big brother (gov) must be watching I just tried to edit my comments and it was marked as spam and would do the editing.
Just a curious thought and perhaps someone can elaborate or clarify.
Would the govenor of the state of Kansas be able to raise a state militia? If so would that exempt all state citizens from controls placed on the 2a from the feds?
If there is a “standing” militia raised by the state, you now insert the “militia” piece back into the 2a and closing the “interpretation” door. Would that give the state true preemption over federal law?
So you admit the militia part is important? I thought recent views from the gun lobby was to play down or ignore the militia part.
No, that’s not the recent view of the gun lobby, that’s the view of SCOTUS.
Personally the militia part is unimportant and has been interpreted that way.
My point/theory if you will, is that a state has sovereignty and I believe does mantain a right to raise a militia.
If that is the case, then for the purpose of this discussion, the law enacted by the state would be unnecessary and Holder wouldnt be able to flex federal law to trump state law. Would it not?
Again this is theory…clarification is appreciated.
Mike, try to remember the “militia” was “We the people” and it remains so as recently verified by SCOTUS. Get off the NRA dissing, you are ill-informed.
We point to the acts of criminals and crazy people as the true source of harm done using firearms, and demand (reasonably, I believe) that these groups not be conflated with law-abiding gun owners for the political purpose of restricting the latter’s rights. We therefore must accept that we are essentially saying these groups should not have guns. Heck, I’ll say it: criminals and the dangerously mentally ill should not have guns. It follows that when a person who already owns guns proves themselves by criminal acts or serious mental illness to have crossed over that boundary, that they should not be allowed to continue owning their guns. So the confiscation of which the article speaks is not the problematic part.
What is problematic is how lax they’ve apparently been in enforcing these laws, and how little they’re willing to do in order to do better. Lacking the funding and manpower to collect the firearms from criminals and crazy people known to own guns, they’ve allowed a huge backlog to build up. Finally, they propose to increase funding for these purposes, but they’re apparently not willing to spend one more red cent that does not come directly out of a legitimate gun owner’s pocket. Apparently the anti-gun people don’t care enough about enforcing the law to spend any of their hard-earned money on the problem, either that or they’re more interested in punishing law-abiding gun owners than they are in actually solving the problem. Probably both.
I really wouldn’t have a problem with this confiscation process if the determination of criminality and degree of craziness was fairly and accurately executed. But I know it’s not, so screw ’em.
Cal Guns reported they (the Cal State Legislature and Gov Brown) took the $24 Million FROM the Background Check/Tracking Fund to use elsewhere in our Debt Drowned State. This post sounds like they are taking it to apply to the Background Check/Tracking System (which is woefully inadequately maintained per Cal Guns). There are so many infringements on our 2A rights in the works in California right now that it hardly matters since the Dems control the State Government and can/will do what they want.
I have no idea who’s right or wrong in this debate, but as a guy who lives in a state (NY) that licks Obama’s butt I love seeing KS stand up to these turds. Bravo even it is only symbolic.
Holder is a scumbag commie but all the Hispanics and African Americans love commies. We better head this garbage off st the pass and start battling immigration reform. Or we will be stuck with these bastards forever
“but all the Hispanics and African Americans love commies”
Here we go…again. This argument is about Holder, Kansas, and the constitution. How in the @&## did we manage to get race in this argument? Not “all” Hispanics and African Americans support this gun grab, or love commies as you put it. Some of us love sport shooting, hunting, reloading, training etc. I myself am a gun fan through and through. The gun community has been plagued by this (anti-black/hispanic) attitude for a long time-it’s the wrong battle-it will come back to haunt you if you really care that much about guns and the gun community as a whole.
That’s right, here we go again and again and again… how do you think these assholes got elected you dope. Keep hiding and they will keep sticking it to you, politically correct I’d the problem idiot. And to that matter I right whatever I please… shove it jelly fish.
Look-you are right-you can post whatever you want. resort to name calling whatever makes you feel better. I am just as passionate about my guns as you are. Me as a “dope” also understands that the same corporations that supported Obama, supported Romney as well. As a “dope” I understand that Citigroup, Chase, and Goldman Sachs play both sides. Name calling makes you feel better? Hey go for it. You wanna believe all of us support this administration (love commies as you say) hey go for it. I for one, will continue to engage in the “real” fight for our second amendment. And you know what name I will call you? Passionate. That makes you the same as me-and I know you hate it. But guess what we are in the same fight whether you like it or not. I am a strong-conservative-business owner-gun owner-man of color…it’s gonna take a lot more than words or name calling by anyone in the gun community to bring me down.
And do not interfere in our lucrative arms trade overseas….
so kansas can’t prosecute gun trafficking anymore it seems.
Good question. And the answer is yes and no. The CT families view themselves as a powerful force to be reckoned with that no politician can turn down a meeting with; but, one with national aspirations just did. Chris Christie’s staff met with the families and I think this signals that the steam is coming off the bloody shirt locomotive. Hey, I’m a parent and I feel terrible for them. Moreover, I’m not sure that I would act differently if I were in their shoes but is it just me or is their “professional victim” status becoming a bit unseemly? I mean flying from state to state to lobby lawmakers; really??
The no part of the answer is that to the true believers out there will never get enough of this, it is the ultimate kool aid to them and they will keep drinking and drinking no matter how many new laws are passed. Hell, if they could wear the bloody shirt they would.
Yeah. But, what else are they going to do? They won’t give up, and appealing to emotion is the best (only) game they’ve got. They’ll just keep going until they wear down resistance. If resistance fails to wears down, they’ll just keep praying for another tragedy. Sick isn’t it?
Is it wrong to hope that there’s a point after which the misguided lobbying of the bloody shirt brigade loses its ability to influence the public? Are we reaching that point?
I have.
Yeah, we’re getting there. The trouble is, there’s no shortage of stupid people who want to hurt other people, so there will be no shortage of victims for these vultures to soak up for their cause. The best way to fight that, figuratively, literally, and in the court of public opinion? Stay tooled up and ready to fight. The next time a would-be spree shooter meets his end, let’s makes sure it’s from an armed citizen.
The problem with that is we already know where the next one will be. A gun free zone, most likely in a slave state.
Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!
People who try to make Kansas do things it doesn’t want to obviously didn’t read their history….
Didn’t John Brown start in Kansas and work his way to Harper’s Ferry, WV? While he wasn’t terribly successful, it was a beginning. Many lives were lost but eventually the tyranny of slavery was ended. Is history repeating itself?
As much as I think the guy has overstepped his boundaries in the past with stances on surveillance, wiretapping, and targeting of overseas american citizen/terrorists, I think he is doing the right thing here, according to the structure of our government.
I don’t understand the knee-jerk blustering in this comment section today.
Now let’s change the wording to: “checks the homes of convicted drug users to ensure they no longer use drugs.” (for the children, it’s a common sense way to close a loophole in the law).
How long would it take for the ACLU to defend the Bill of Rights if that were the casue. But, you know, guns are icky.
Im curious if a state can have a militia other than the national guard(one that can’t be federalized without consent) that Mack suggested above. If it could what would the federal response be?
It already does if it so chooses to acknowledge it as follows:
TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311
§ 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia
So, per Section 311, “all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and…under 45 years of age” constitutes “the unorganized militia…who are not members of the National Guard”
Part of the problem that Chicago has is with the access of firearms. It’s not with banning them, it’s how they are transported through Chicago: trains. The dirtbags are cracking open trains in the yards and are swiping all the firearms that are being shipped by the manufacturers. You want gun control in Chicago/C(r)ook Co, politicians? How about you stop taking guns away from the people who legally have and use them and require these trains to be properly protected so the product isn’t being jacked. That’s gun control that would work for everyone.
Hmmm… if they’re going after known gang bangers and such, fine, but “mentally ill” is SO damned nebulous…
Maybe if congress could at least close the loophole on background checks, these public displays might end.
Just saying….
“And a state may not criminalize…”
Try; “Furthermore, a state may not criminalize…” Is Holder’s paralegal on vacation?
I will be there on Friday and Saturday – will keep a lookout for the TTAG gang.
Bloody Shirt Waving occurs because, sadly, it works on many people. Until it doesn’t, it won’t stop.
What’s the problem with having the option of password protecting your own scope? Do you have a problem with gun safes or trigger locks? Conceptually, there’s no difference.
agree
Hey RF, I’m pretty pro-2A, but you’ve got to admit that this technology could be abused. I certainly hope that is not the case, but there it is. I think password protecting the tracking feature is a good idea – more or less.
But I’m open to suggestions and intelligent criticism, and I must admit that I don’t completely understand that application(s) of this new tech.
So could any plain Jane scope, precision shhot isn’t that hard.
The local news in Connecticut is doing a series on the Sandy Hook first responders and the emotional toll it took on them. Many are still out of work due to PTSD. That being said, I wonder how many of those LEO’s who are on leave have had their firearm taken away? After all, it’s only “common sense” to disarm those suffering from mentally illness.
The argument about how easy it is to just swap mags just leads to laws like the one proposed in California banning removable mag rifles.
I guess I just don’t see the big deal. It’s not even a lock on the firearm itself, just the computer-aided targeting scope.
Even if it were a lock on the firearm itself, I don’t see a cause for fuss. It’s no different than putting it in a gun safe or something for storage.
The only thing I’m against are stuff like the biolocks or RFID locks that cannot be manually disengaged, because a mechanism that is supposed to automatically enable/disable the firing mechanism on the fly is a major liability.
Boom headshot! Will be the password for 3 out of 5 if these rifles.
Obviously a lot of comments made by people that have no idea of the particulars of SB102. There are some good points made in this blog. http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/05/eric-holder-threatens-kansas-in-letter-on-gun-control-nullification-law/
For those that are willing to read SB102; http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14/measures/documents/ccr_2013_sb102_h_2244.pdf
Something in my gut tells me this is bad, especially if you can’t disable the password.
I usually scribble the passwords to my rifles on the rifle. You know, in case I forget.
They lost my sympathy the moment they tried to use their loss to disarm people. And like Cindy Shehan, when she’s no longer politically useful to the progressives, they will drop them and you’ll never see their faces on the news again.
Whatever the argument a mature and honest society can handle it.
But this is not such a society.
If a scope had the ability to geolocate itself and all that other fancy stuff (target recognition perhaps), a mature and honest society might see that a password lockout scope with additional safeguards would be a good idea.
But we have a majority of ignoramuses who vote, led by “leaders” and a compliant media who seek every little nook and cranny out as any avenue towards total disarmament that they can lay their hands on. So even if they can’t get their “turn them on now or else” proclamation, making life difficult is still some means of satisfaction to them.
So it’s correct to see the concept of a password protected scope, see an iPhone, and think “oh oh”.
Then comes the day when you are desperately trying to wipe the blood and dirt off your palm because the sensors in your pistol grip won’t recognize your hand while somebody is trying to kill you.
The latte-slurping effete brigade won’t care one bit about your demise and we’ll still have a system where a drunk can fall off a ladder and make millions from a lawsuit but failed smart gun tech will be gov subsidized and immune from litigation. It can happen as surely as felons and foreigners can’t vote nor have guns yet we only have background checks for guns. Certainly a pattern here.
And so, because we have people constantly looking “for any and all” avenues of disarmament, restriction, and “making it harder”, we have to resist any and all changes to the technology in that direction and any laws they dream up.
I’ll have a biometric lock on my firearm when “they” force it into my cold, dead hand.
That said, this is not the same thing as it neither disables the firearm nor reduces its efficacy in a defensive situation.
And watch what you say about lattés; not everyone who likes a decent cup o’ strong Italian “giù” is one o’ “them,” and I’ll take both your arms with one.
Narf.
The Supremacy Clause is simply inapplicable to a law that is unconstitutional or outside of the Feds’ enumerated powers. SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter of what is and is not unconstitutional, but it’s ridiculous to say that SCOTUS is the only arbiter. Any court of general jurisdiction has the power to declare a law unconstitutional, as does a state legislature. In fact, a legislative body has an obligation to reject an unconstitutional law.
The legislature’s conclusion will stand unless overruled by a court of competent authority. That’s the way the system works. A state does not have to stand around with its collective thumb up @ss while the feds trample the Constitution. It can act against that law. If the state is wrong, it will be corrected by a court.
Apparently it’s ok for the Feds not to enforce Federal law, or for “sanctuary cities” like San Francisco not to enforce Federal Laws, but when it comes to laws the Feds like then states can’t do it. I am so sick of the double standard.
Limit the Feds to their Constitutionally granted power and leave the rest to the States.
Are we getting to the point of weariness about victims of violent crime? No.
The parents of Sandy Hook have a special moral standing (explain what I mean, here: http://guardamerican.com/index.php/blog/35-politics/537-sandy-hook-a-special-moral-standing).
What’s more, they are being directly assisted and navigated through Wash. D.C.
Trust me: This is far from over.
Here here! Glad to have this guy fighting the good fight here in NC.
The media will never stop. Why? Don’t know. Where do they get their $ for there programs? Don’t know. Nobody watches show like Piers Morgan, yet he remains.
I love it when the SAF wins: They win the principle, they get paid, and the a$$hat legislators have to be seen signing the check. It’s like a bonanza…And they can pile the money into the next battle. The gift that keeps on giving.
1
I’ll bet a million dollars that she voted for Obama.
I know some gun owners that did… They didnt know him (mostly people not from Illinois) and truly believed him when he said he wasnt going to take your guns away.
You dont get votes in Ohio talking about gun bans.
So what?
A lot of us outside Illinois had no idea how he’d turn out.
I voted for him myself in ’08, for a couple reasons. I figured the first non-white president would set a useful precedent, that he actually had a chance and was better than the opposition.
I couldn’t see giving the number two slot to a piece of number two who “thought” that Africa is a country, who couldn’t name the three countries in North America (us, us on decaf and the taco place) or recall for the camera anything salient about any of the first ten Ammendments. One ancient heartbeat (in a guy running for W’s third term, no less) missed, and POOF! Bad things. Very bad things.
A lot of us are about multiple issues, sir, and few of us saw ths level of anti-rights continuing, let alone being extended.
Anyway, it is what it is. He ain’t all bad, and it looks like his anti-2A agenda, while wrongheaded and dangerous, is also DOA.
Cheers.
It depends on whether the password is mandatory or not, and how secure the password is required to be. If it is purely optional I don’t see it as a problem. Otherwise it would be a nuisance.
bravo (this makes 2 today. keep’em coming)
It’s interesting to see the evolution of a gun owner that was originally scared. We can all learn from this and she can probably teach us how to teach others that feel the same way. Welcome!
I also find it interesting how ignorant, rude, and aggressive people can be towards others (total strangers) even in the GUN OWNERS community. The beauty of the United States, is that we have FREEDOM that people would die for, and have. We do not have to be clones of one another to appreciate that underneath, we are all human, and want the same basic things.
We have all heard that guns make a polite society, obviously this is highly inaccurate, as guns are inanimate. PEOPLE decide to be polite, kind, loving, empathetic, etc or not.
What do you choose?
Just as we want the gun grabbers to house-train their own, we can do better, too.
Everyone on TTAG is engaged and prolly helpful in the cause. But there’s work to be done: http://guardamerican.com/index.php/blog/147-negligent-discharges/618-ky-5-year-old-shoots-2-year-old
One reason the A.W.B. failed so bad was 1st the world supply of already made magazines was high , and second a few USA changes would allow most firearms, and as always the bad guys never obey the laws , (the black market) met supply and demand, China got banned for supplying Full-auto Ak’s to USA Drug gangs etc…
Actually, it’s brilliant.
Nobody can buy ammunition for their guns, so in comes Armcor offering a huge supply of their own proprietary ammunition. Unable to use anything else, people will be forced to buy their RIA guns that use the .22 TCM.
/end conspiratorial rant.
Ok, in all seriousness, maybe that’s just because that’s what they have the materials for to manufacture already and assume people will be buying the .223 and .45?
Progressive?
the land of the free and the home of the brave
to
the land of the controlled and the home of the timid.
If this is the case, as seems to be we are doomed. Don’t know about ya’ll, but to me this does not seem like progress.
Hey! I didn’t get a pahrump outta that guy!
“Just don’t forget that teaching how to safely handle firearms is a lot more important survival skill than algebra.”
FYI, Eddie Eagle does NOT teach safe handling. EE teaches kids that, if they see a gun,
“They should:
STOP!
DON’T TOUCH.
LEAVE THE AREA.
TELL AN ADULT.”
Until proven other wise I am calling false flag. All these things are happening at just the right time to push the gungrabber/anti freedom agenda. Once Okay its a coincidence, twice its fishy three and four times well thats what we call a pattern.
From what I can gather so far the story is:
1. A lone man walked into the airport and fired two shots into the air with a rifle.
2. An armed Homeland Security Special Agent was immediately on top of it, confronted him with force and threat of death.
3. The man shot himself with a pistol just as the Special Agent shot at him.
Idle speculation? The guy may have been there to shoot as many people as he could before his time was up in typical nutcase fashion, and since there was an armed presence AT THE SCENE to confront him INSTANTLY, time was up before he could start Phase 1 and therefore initiated Phase 2 of the “massacre/suicide” algorithm.
Why is it always an AR? There are more AK here in America then AR yet everyone has an AR. I get that its popular, I love mine, but when we’ve got 3/1 AK to AR ratio you’d think someone would have an AK for once.
I’ve asked, on several sites, how the proposed pieces of legislation would have affected the Sandy Hook incident. Number of replies: Zero.
Huh.
While we all feel for Ericas loss.
I have to wonder, if even she had bothered to read the bill in its entirety??
Anyone no matter how anti they are and then could still vote for this bill as written.
Is in a word: NUTTZ.
Yup, myself and a couple more will be there. Plan on making the rounds at various meet-ups to see folks.
Hmmm… a core market for Scary Black Guns.
Right now I could use my forehead instead of a shoulder to backstop my Mosin, but one day that’ll change.
I know a few folks I can steer his way…
Hey, it went so well for her that she wishes that on everybody same as the brady bitch. I know love/caring when I see/hear it & that ain’t it, Randy
Y’know, when my nephew kicked it he used a rope instead of the 1911 by the door.
Hmmm…
Wuv… twue wuv..
This rifle looks like a cat.