• 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!

West Virginia aims to be 'sanctuary state' ... for gun rights

Bum

Bum

I survived. Suck it, Schrodinger.
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
17,079
Reaction score
16,476
Location
In a box.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Former President James Madison – Father of the U.S. Constitution – would be proud.

A West Virginia lawmaker has introduced a bill to the state House that would outlaw enforcement of current and future gun-control laws that violate the U.S. or state constitutions.


1 state aims to be ‘sanctuary state’ … for gun rights


This should prove interesting.....
 
Polar Bum said:
Former President James Madison – Father of the U.S. Constitution – would be proud.

A West Virginia lawmaker has introduced a bill to the state House that would outlaw enforcement of current and future gun-control laws that violate the U.S. or state constitutions.


1 state aims to be ‘sanctuary state’ … for gun rights


This should prove interesting.....
Click to expand...

Well its going to be a sanctuary state for actually protecting something that is currently legal.. so that's a first at least.
 
SCOTUS needs to get their head out of their ass and stop the government practice of harboring fugitives.
 
Damn, are they that desperate to keep people from leaving?
 
WV is projected to lose a CD after the next census ...
 
If it prohibits state and local government from enforcing federal laws the state doesn’t support then I fully support it, regardless of what the federal laws are. But just like with immigration, if the state is going to prohibit federal law enforcement officers from enforcing federal laws then that will be problematic.
 
My lord...did I call it or what? Well..not exactly. But this scenario was certainly proposed by me in a previous thread.

For the record, I would REALLY prefer that they not do this. States are supposed to have reciprocity in their laws. If we really are going to start down this road its going to end up not good.

On the other hand I'm really curious as to what the outcome of all this will be. And by "all this" I'm talking about this, sanctuary states for illegal aliens, and whatever else is going to crop up due to these things. Lets hope its not a worst case scenario.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
If it prohibits state and local government from enforcing federal laws the state doesn’t support then I fully support it, regardless of what the federal laws are. But just like with immigration, if the state is going to prohibit federal law enforcement officers from enforcing federal laws then that will be problematic.
Click to expand...
Finally, someone gets it! :thumbs:
 
Kal'Stang said:
My lord...did I call it or what? Well..not exactly. But this scenario was certainly proposed by me in a previous thread.

For the record, I would REALLY prefer that they not do this. States are supposed to have reciprocity in their laws. If we really are going to start down this road its going to end up not good.

On the other hand I'm really curious as to what the outcome of all this will be. And by "all this" I'm talking about this, sanctuary states for illegal aliens, and whatever else is going to crop up due to these things. Lets hope its not a worst case scenario.
Click to expand...

I don’t think “reciprocity” is the word you are looking for. That would mean that the feds also enforce state and local laws. They don’t.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
I don’t think “reciprocity” is the word you are looking for. That would mean that the feds also enforce state and local laws. They don’t.
Click to expand...

No, reciprocity is what I mean. Reciprocity also applies in things like extradition.
 
Chomsky said:
Finally, someone gets it! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Thanks, but I am just trying to stay consistent. I try and formulate my positions so that they don’t change regardless of which law you insert into it or which political party favors it.
 
Polar Bum said:
Former President James Madison – Father of the U.S. Constitution – would be proud.

A West Virginia lawmaker has introduced a bill to the state House that would outlaw enforcement of current and future gun-control laws that violate the U.S. or state constitutions.


1 state aims to be ‘sanctuary state’ … for gun rights


This should prove interesting.....
Click to expand...



I don't understand.

The state courts are supposed to block enforcement of statutes that violate state or federal law. The federal courts too, but there's a big mess around comity, case & controversy, etc, when they deal with enforcement of state statutes violating federal law.

What new thing is this law supposed to add?
 
Mr Person said:
I don't understand.

The state courts are supposed to block enforcement of statutes that violate state or federal law. The federal courts too, but there's a big mess around comity, case & controversy, etc, when they deal with enforcement of state statutes violating federal law.

What new thing is this law supposed to add?
Click to expand...

People still don't feel safe about their gun rights.
 
Soopairik said:
People still don't feel safe about their gun rights.
Click to expand...

When it comes to Rights...ANY Rights, no one should feel safe from the government, be it local, state, or federal, attempting to take away those Rights. And it doesn't matter who is in office from the top, down.
 
Am I the only one that understands the difference between "a state is required to enforce federal law at their own expense" and "nobody can enforce federal law?"
 
nOW IF THEY CAN ONLY PASS A LAW ON DAILY BRUSHING WITH TOOTHPASTE
 
Deuce said:
Am I the only one that understands the difference between "a state is required to enforce federal law at their own expense" and "nobody can enforce federal law?"
Click to expand...

What do you think this even means?
 
I was hoping someone would come along and clear it up for me, didn’t want to stick my neck out!^^^
 
Polar Bum said:
Former President James Madison – Father of the U.S. Constitution – would be proud.

A West Virginia lawmaker has introduced a bill to the state House that would outlaw enforcement of current and future gun-control laws that violate the U.S. or state constitutions.


1 state aims to be ‘sanctuary state’ … for gun rights


This should prove interesting.....
Click to expand...
They can do whatever they want as long as they're laws do not conflict with federal laws.
This means that they are full of crap. All bark, no bite.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
If it prohibits state and local government from enforcing federal laws the state doesn’t support then I fully support it, regardless of what the federal laws are. But just like with immigration, if the state is going to prohibit federal law enforcement officers from enforcing federal laws then that will be problematic.
Click to expand...

I always thought the issue was the feds wanting states tto enforce federal law for free. An unfounded mandate. Making state cops do federal cops' jobs, not blocking feds from doing theirs.

I was unaware that sanctuary states were prohibiting feds from doing their jobs.
 
What if...? said:
I always thought the issue was the feds wanting states tto enforce federal law for free. An unfounded mandate. Making state cops do federal cops' jobs, not blocking feds from doing theirs.

I was unaware that sanctuary states were prohibiting feds from doing their jobs.
Click to expand...

California is threatening to prosecute business owners for cooperating with ICE. That's a step in that direction.
 
apdst said:
California is threatening to prosecute business owners for cooperating with ICE. That's a step in that direction.
Click to expand...

You mean a business that gives away private information about an employee without permission or a subpoena? Yeah I'm gonna go ahead and be fine with that.
 
Deuce said:
You mean a business that gives away private information about an employee without permission or a subpoena? Yeah I'm gonna go ahead and be fine with that.
Click to expand...

Commission of a crime isn't private information. In fact, failing to report a crime is obstruction of justice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom