• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wyoming Bill Would Nullify Obama Gun Control, Jail Feds.....

Lutherf said:
You like that idea? Try this on for size....I know that you are anti-gun and I have a gun that I never registered. One day I get stopped and the cops ask me where I got the gun so I give them your name....now you have to prove that you didn't sell me the gun or rot in jail. Hell, I'll probably be allowed to plea down to almost nothing by giving up a trafficker.
Click to expand...

Why would the cop be asking where you got the gun? Have you already committed a crime?

If so, your credibility would already be in question compared to mine.

Where did we exchange the gun? How much did I charge you?

Oh, and the serial number on the gun may identify the original dealer. (or at least it should)

You really didn't think this through
 
mr4anarchy said:
Why would the cop be asking where you got the gun? Have you already committed a crime?

If so, your credibility would already be in question compared to mine.

Where did we exchange the gun? How much did I charge you?

Oh, and the serial number on the gun may identify the original dealer. (or at least it should)

You really didn't think this through
Click to expand...

If the gun grabbers have their way then wouldn't it stand to reason that a cop could ask anyone with a gun where they got it? If not then what is the point of the law in the first place?

As far as where and how much....remember, you're my neighbor so it was obviously in your garage a few weeks ago and I gave you a couple of hundred bucks cash because you were concerned that a check would be traceable and you didn't want to get busted.

The serial number would allow the gun to be traced to an FFL who should have a 4473 on file for it but if I wasn't the original owner than name would be different than mine.
 
justabubba said:
didn't realize the population of wyoming was this dense

if something is actually found to be unConstitutional, then it cannot be enforced. no new legislation at the state level modifies that reality

the reich wing politicians are only stating the obvious in that regard

now, if the state officials want to impose their own interpertation regarding what should be found unConstitutional and then try before the state court a federal employee performing his fiduciary responsibilities, expect a show down. not unlike Eisenhower sending in the National Guard to enforce the federal non-discrimination laws in arkansas

for the younger crowd, the state officials lost
Click to expand...

Yeah, I read this and did a double-take, too. The people of Wyoming really can't be that dense, can they? The 2nd Amendment is a federally protected right under the Constitution. No matter what the state does, their laws will never trump federal law. Try to stop a federal official from doing his/her job.

Folk have to remember, the Supreme Court has already declared that the federal government (Congress) can set limits on gun control as long as those limits don't take away a person's 2nd Amendment rights. I seriously doubt the fed will ever try to take away anyone's gun(s) unless that individual has broken the law where removel of his firearm is warranted, i.e., felony (assault with a deadly weapon (gun), armed robbery, etc.). The only cause for the state of Wyoming to go forward with such a law is to insight insurrection against the government. The state really needs to be careful here that it doesn't open up a can of worms it can't close so easily.
 
BmanMcfly said:
That's because the federal government is supposed to hold the minimum standards for laws and the states can add to those standards how they see fit...

That was NOT intended to mean that the federal government is supreme over the states... If it was, than why even have states?? Why not just have a central federal government?
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying here, but here's the problem as I see it:

The Wyoming legislature is trying to do two separate things using one law: 1) impose stronger gun rights legislation at the state level (which may hold stiffer penalties than federal law which is fine); and, 2) deny federal officials from over-stepping said state-level gun rights legislation.

No matter what Wyoming does, their law can never trump federal law nor bar federal officials from conducting official federal business within their state. Why? Because federal officials in their capacity to uphold federal regulations as proposed by Congress and signed into law by the President can never be abridged by the separate states. Unless the residents of the State of Wyoming wish to bring about insurrection, they'd be smart to back far away from this.
 
madman said:
You conservatives and Libertarians need to look up what the constitution says:

You and your ilk politiians are just wasting time trying to make a point:

Federal preemption - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
According to the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, clause 2) of the United States Constitution,
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

There's also this from Article VI, clause 3, first sentence:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution...
Click to expand...

Like I said, residents of Wyoming needs to back far away from what their state GOP legislators are proposing.
 
I've posted before that States should pass pro-active gun rights legislation as then it is a states-rights issue.
 
MMC said:
I agree.....there are 30 Republican Controlled States. If all of them were to do this. That would put a dent in Obama and the Democrats Crawl. I like that part about they are Sovereign Government too.

One thing is for certain. The NRA has been making moves this whole time. Hopefully some of those Pols in D.C are taking Notice too.
Click to expand...


Also if states would do this in the state government and legislature, it would require their state officials to go on record one way or the other so that voters would know.
 
Objective Voice said:
There's also this from Article VI, clause 3, first sentence:

Like I said, residents of Wyoming needs to back far away from what their state GOP legislators are proposing.
Click to expand...

And if supporting the constitution means opposing the feds who violate it, so be it...
 
Diogenes said:
And if supporting the constitution means opposing the feds who violate it, so be it...
Click to expand...

This is why we have THREE branches of government, to ensure that all acts proposed by Congress and signed into law by the President are, in fact, deemed Constitutional by the Supreme Court. If you as a citizen of this great nation or any given state within the Union have a problem with any given law of the land, take your case up to the Supreme Court through the proper channels OR contact your State Representative, Congressman or Senator to change the law accordingly. Any other individual action by an individual or the state could very well be viewed as insurrection depending on the extremes or your actions.

In short, what the Wyoming legislature is attempting is foolish!
 
Objective Voice said:
This is why we have THREE branches of government, to ensure that all acts proposed by Congress and signed into law by the President are, in fact, deemed Constitutional by the Supreme Court. If you as a citizen of this great nation or any given state within the Union have a problem with any given law of the land, take your case up to the Supreme Court through the proper channels OR contact your State Representative, Congressman or Senator to change the law accordingly. Any other individual action by an individual or the state could very well be viewed as insurrection depending on the extremes or your actions.

In short, what the Wyoming legislature is attempting is foolish!
Click to expand...

They don't look so foolish now with other states doing so too.....other than someone thinking they do. But it sure didn't stop any legislation from going forward. Did it now?
 
Objective Voice said:
I get what you're saying here, but here's the problem as I see it:

The Wyoming legislature is trying to do two separate things using one law: 1) impose stronger gun rights legislation at the state level (which may hold stiffer penalties than federal law which is fine); and, 2) deny federal officials from over-stepping said state-level gun rights legislation.

No matter what Wyoming does, their law can never trump federal law nor bar federal officials from conducting official federal business within their state. Why? Because federal officials in their capacity to uphold federal regulations as proposed by Congress and signed into law by the President can never be abridged by the separate states. Unless the residents of the State of Wyoming wish to bring about insurrection, they'd be smart to back far away from this.
Click to expand...

Rxcept when it is passed via executive order rather than legislation--meaning it would trigger the Wyoming law and jailing federal officials would trigger automatic appeals with the feds being the ones jailed rather than Wyoming citizens. They are attempting to protect their citizenry from over reaching fed power grabs that are not legislative action. I would say they are doing the job the feds should be doing rather then the one that they are threatening to do.
 
MMC said:
They don't look so foolish now with other states doing so too.....other than someone thinking they do. But it sure didn't stop any legislation from going forward. Did it now?
Click to expand...

How many states are we talking about?

I'm just curious.
 
BmanMcfly said:
How many states are we talking about?

I'm just curious.
Click to expand...

Texas, SD, Indiana even has come up with different legislation.

A bill just introduced in Indiana known as the Firearm Freedom Act, for instance, would also protect the rights of gun owners to be free from federal regulations if the gun was produced and purchased in the state. Similar legislation has already been adopted in other states.....snip~
 
MMC said:
938TFl.jpg


As the Obama administration plots various assaults on gun rights by “executive order” and legislation, proposals described as “very extreme” even by some Democrats, state lawmakers in Wyoming have another idea. Republican legislators are rallying behind nullification legislation that would void unconstitutional infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, even providing prison time for any federal agents who may try to enforce Washington, D.C., gun control in the state. Lawmakers expect it to pass.

The new bill, H.B. 0104 or the “Firearms Protection Act,” would nullify any new federal infringements on the constitutionally protected gun rights of state residents — who enjoy some of the lowest crime rates while being among the most heavily armed people in America. Unconstitutional federal gun registration schemes, as well as restrictions on semi-automatic guns or standard-capacity magazines, would also be nullified under the legislation.

There are teeth in the proposed law too: Any federal official attempting to enforce unconstitutional statutes or decrees infringing on gun rights passed after January 1 of this year would be charged with a felony. If convicted, criminal officials would be punished by up to five years in state prison and a $5,000 fine. The legislation also authorizes the state attorney general to defend citizens of Wyoming if federal authorities seek prosecutions under unconstitutional gun control rules.


Wyoming Bill Would Nullify Obama Gun Control, Jail Feds

Alright Wyoming.
icon_super.gif
They say the Fed tries and takes their Rights.....it will be a crime. Already they have Police Chiefs and Sherriffs are already working on Strategies to protect gun rights in their jurisdiction. They are wasting no time with this State Legislation.
highfive.gif
Click to expand...

We have a Tenth Amendment for a reason.....
 
justabubba said:
didn't realize the population of wyoming was this dense



if something is actually found to be unConstitutional, then it cannot be enforced. no new legislation at the state level modifies that reality

the reich wing politicians are only stating the obvious in that regard

now, if the state officials want to impose their own interpertation regarding what should be found unConstitutional and then try before the state court a federal employee performing his fiduciary responsibilities, expect a show down. not unlike Eisenhower sending in the National Guard to enforce the federal non-discrimination laws in arkansas

for the younger crowd, the state officials lost
Click to expand...

No, dense is parroting some left wing drool because you were told to without any understanding to the context of an issue.

How about we place severe limititations on abortion....which is always fatal...you know, to save the children.....

Liberalism......you need a signed permision slip to go on a field trip, but not to get an abortion.

You guys are eventually going to crawl back into your slimey holes.
 
Wiggen said:
Really? Where was the racial slur?

And I repeat my question - when was the first lesson taught by the states to the Federal Government? 1861?

If Wyoming or any other Hillbilly Haven tries that again, I'll be first in line at the enlistment office even though I'm probably too old.

Now if they, or any other folks want to secede and form their own country, I'll help them pack.
Click to expand...

I'm part of this thread, so you called me a cracker.
 
American said:
I'm part of this thread, so you called me a cracker.
Click to expand...

I guess he call me one too.....But I sure hope he knows the difference between a Ritz and Townehouse. :2razz:
 
Northern Light said:
In order for the WY bill to have teeth it would have to be enforced by the People. If WY arrests Feds then the Feds will arrest WY politicians and officials. The People would then have to take action. How likely is that?
Click to expand...
IMO despite Wyoming's small population, it would have a pretty good turn out in defense of their new state law_

Being a very unpopular gun ban, I can even see large numbers of outside supporters showing up to back them_

Regardless, Obama's Justice Department would likely back off in order to avoid an unprecedented national disaster_
 
Empirica said:
IMO despite Wyoming's small population, it would have a pretty good turn out in defense of their new state law_

Being a very unpopular gun ban, I can even see large numbers of outside supporters showing up to back them_

Regardless, Obama's Justice Department would likely back off in order to avoid an unprecedented national disaster_
Click to expand...

what national disaster are your referring to?
 
j-mac said:
How about the disaster of Obama and libs purposely setting the stage for civil conflict knowingly?
Click to expand...

i didn't know about that natural disaster
would you please provide a link
a link please - no tin foil
 
justabubba said:
thank you. that was perfect!
Click to expand...


Unless there really are tigers.


DiFi's bill qualifies. I see it as unconstitutional, and I'm not the only one.
 
justabubba said:
i didn't know about that natural disaster
would you please provide a link
a link please - no tin foil
Click to expand...

It would be a national disaster for Federal agents to attempt to enforce an Executive order against state officials if it winds up with deaths on either side or citizens. Maybe you feel differently?

By the way its national, not natural.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom