Simple Question on Gun Registration.

[KevinKohler]

Take a stand. Anthrax could easily be construed to be arms

No, it can't.

 

[vegas giants]

No, they don't. The commerce clause only addresses interstate commerce. It does not address intrastate commerce.

Article 1 Section 8-3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Link

Note it says "commerce with foreign nations and among the several states". It does not say "commerce with foreign nations and in and among the several states".

Everything about the Commerce Clause has to do with regulating commerce intrastate and with foreign governments. Nothing what so ever about intrastate commerce. As such, the federal government does not have the power to regulate intrastate commerce.

Wickard V Filburn gave congress the authority to regulate intrastate commerce

 

[vegas giants]

No, it can't.

That is your opinion. People in Syria might disagree on the subject of chemical arms

 

[vegas giants]

No, actually it can't. Neither can nukes. Or jets. Or tanks. Or battleships. Or rocket launchers. Or any other silly example you can think of.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion

 

[KevinKohler]

Take a stand. Anthrax could easily be construed to be arms

Mind blowing logic, here, lol.

So, according to you, then, anything that can easily cause harm or death to others is "arms".

Remember, YOU said it, not me.

 

[vegas giants]

Mind blowing logic, here, lol.

So, according to you, then, anything that can easily cause harm or death to others is "arms".

Remember, YOU said it, not me.

No I said something created and designed to kill others can be considered arms

 

[Kal'Stang]

Wickard V Filburn gave congress the authority to regulate intrastate commerce

Wickard v Filburn did indeed expand the power of the commerce clause. But it only did so based on interstate commerce and a farmer being able to affect prices of wheat on an interstate level. The sale of firearms by private individuals does not affect the prices of guns on an interstate level. Try again.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion

It is not my opinion that none of those are or can be considered as "arms" as it relates to the 2nd Amendment. If you don't know what arms are when it comes to the 2nd Amendment and the difference between that and those things then you have no business speaking to it even slightly.

 

[vegas giants]

Wickard v Filburn did indeed expand the power of the commerce clause. But it only did so based on interstate commerce and a farmer being able to affect prices of wheat on an interstate level. The sale of firearms by private individuals does not affect the prices of guns on an interstate level. Try again.



It is not my opinion that none of those are or can be considered as "arms" as it relates to the 2nd Amendment. If you don't know what arms are when it comes to the 2nd Amendment and the difference between that and those things then you have no business speaking to it even slightly.

You misunderstand the ruling. You do know the NFA allows the federal government to restrict the sales of weapons in every state....don't you?

You have stated an opinion about arms.....nothing more

 

[Rucker61]

No I said something created and designed to kill others can be considered arms

Not Constitutionally protected arms according to Heller.

 

[vegas giants]

Not Constitutionally protected arms according to Heller.

I agree that they do not meet the definition created by Heller

 

[Kal'Stang]

You misunderstand the ruling. You do know the NFA allows the federal government to restrict the sales of weapons in every state....don't you?

Show me where in the decision does it mention intrastate commerce. I'll be waiting.

You have stated an opinion about arms.....nothing more

The only one here that has stated an opinion about arms is you. Learn the difference between ordnance and arms and biological weapons and arms.

 

[vegas giants]

Show me where in the decision does it mention intrastate commerce. I'll be waiting.



The only one here that has stated an opinion about arms is you. Learn the difference between ordnance and arms and biological weapons and arms.

It doesn't. By controlling interstate commerce you by definition control intrastate commerce. Now what about that NFA?

I assure you I know more about ordnance than you do

 

[ttwtt78640]

As you have been told before. The federal government cannot regulate intrastate sales. They do not have the power to do so. So even IF the law was made and brought before SCOTUS it would be shot down based on that fact alone.

Don't be so sure about that. The FLSA (MW laws) and PPACA apply to mom and pop shops, and even private citizens that are mere employees of them, which have no effect on interstate commerce. The commerce clause makes growing marijuana on non-commercial property for personal consumption federally illegal even if the state law specifically allows it. Of course, the power to tax (thanks to CJ Roberts) could also be used if the gun registration provided federal tax revenue via 'user fees'.

What should stop gun registration, CHLs and CCW permits is the 2A - since adding requirements to take classes, pass tests and pay 'user fees' essentally converts a right of the people into a mere state issued privilege. The language of the 24A uses 'denied or abridged' while the 2A uses 'infringed' - it is high time that the SCOTUS affirms that the two share a common (historical?) meaning and intent.

 

[Kal'Stang]

It doesn't. By controlling interstate commerce you by definition control intrastate commerce. Now what about that NFA?

So you can't show me where in the decision it mentions intrastate commerce? Got it.

And no, the two are separate. They might intermingle at times. But they do have their own separate areas.

And the NFA only regulates businesses that have interstate sales of firearms.

I assure you I know more about ordnance than you do

Apparently not if you are trying to claim that anthrax can be considered as arms as it relates to the 2nd Amendment.

 

[vegas giants]

So you can't show me where in the decision it mentions intrastate commerce? Got it.

And no, the two are separate. They might intermingle at times. But they do have their own separate areas.

And the NFA only regulates businesses that have interstate sales of firearms.



Apparently not if you are trying to claim that anthrax can be considered as arms as it relates to the 2nd Amendment.

The NFA allows you to buys those restricted arms INTRASTATE???? Really???

 

[ttwtt78640]

If I want to leave the country and get back in I have to fill out a long form and pay expensive fees for a passport. I am a citizen....but I must prove it to get back in

OK, but what constitutional right (for free international travel?) is being abridged or denied? Surely you do not deny that the federal government has the power to control immigration and that positive identification of individuals for that purpose is a must. What you propose is the conversion of the 'right of the people to keep and bear arms' into a mere state issued privilege.

 

[vegas giants]

OK, but what constitutional right (for free international travel?) is being abridged or denied? Surely you do not deny that the federal government has the power to control immigration and that positive identification of individuals for that purpose is a must. What you propose is the conversion of the 'right of the people to keep and bear arms' into a mere state issued privilege.

Freedom of assembly. I have the right to leave and return as I wish.

A permit to publicly speak does not abridge free speech

 

[Kal'Stang]

Don't be so sure about that. The FLSA (MW laws) and PPACA apply to mom and pop shops, and even private citizens that are mere employees of them, which have no effect on interstate commerce. The commerce clause makes growing marijuana on non-commercial property for personal consumption federally illegal even if the state law specifically allows it. Of course, the power to tax (thanks to CJ Roberts) could also be used if the gun registration provided federal tax revenue via 'user fees'.

Mom and pop stores sell items to people regardless if they are from the state or outside of the state. Which is why they are subject to interstate laws.

Regarding Marijuana, if so then they are applying Wickard v Filburn which also claims that a farmer growing wheat for their own consumption affects prices when it is done by several farmers and as such can be considered as affecting interstate commerce.

As for the tax/user fees...you might have a point. Roberts really screwed up on that one and made it to where anything and everything could be considered and enforced as a "tax".

What should stop gun registration, CHLs and CCW permits is the 2A - since adding requirements to take classes, pass tests and pay 'user fees' essentally converts a right of the people into a mere state issued privilege. The language of the 24A uses 'denied or abridged' while the 2A uses 'infringed' - it is high time that the SCOTUS affirms that the two share a common (historical?) meaning and intent.

Not to mention our right to privacy would be involved.

 

[vegas giants]

Mom and pop stores sell items to people regardless if they are from the state or outside of the state. Which is why they are subject to interstate laws.

Regarding Marijuana, if so then they are applying Wickard v Filburn which also claims that a farmer growing wheat for their own consumption affects prices when it is done by several farmers and as such can be considered as affecting interstate commerce.

As for the tax/user fees...you might have a point. Roberts really screwed up on that one and made it to where anything and everything could be considered and enforced as a "tax".



Not to mention our right to privacy would be involved.

What law stops me from buying a fully auto weapon made in 2016?

 

[Kal'Stang]

The NFA allows you to buys those restricted arms INTRASTATE???? Really???

Read that part again. A bit more slowly.

And just to make sure, you are talking about the National Futures Association NFA right? We were talking about the commerce clause after all so figured you were talking about that. If you're talking about another NFA you'll need to clarify.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Freedom of assembly. I have the right to leave and return as I wish.

A permit to publicly speak does not abridge free speech

Some of those 'time, place and manor' 2A restrictions have been upheld (or at least not yet struck down) by the SCOTUS but converting the keeping of a gun in your home from a constitutional right into a state issued privilege (by permit only) is not likley to pass muster.

 

[Rucker61]

Read that part again. A bit more slowly.

And just to make sure, you are talking about the National Futures Association NFA right? We were talking about the commerce clause after all so figured you were talking about that. If you're talking about another NFA you'll need to clarify.

National Firearms Act 1934. And regarding Wickard, that current interpretation would say that the federal government has the power to restrict my growing tomatoes and squash for my own consumption as thousand of garden plots could impact the import of vegetables into Colorado.

Lopez and Gonzalez seem to indicate a trend of ratcheting back the previously unlimited power Wickard gave Congress.

 

[vegas giants]

National Firearms Act 1934. And regarding Wickard, that current interpretation would say that the federal government has the power to restrict my growing tomatoes and squash for my own consumption as thousand of gaelrden plots could impact the import of vegetables into Colorado.

Lopez and Gonzalez seem to indicate a trend of ratcheting back the previously unlimited power Wickard gave Congress.

But to be clear.....Congress currently has the right to regulate both interstate and intrastate commerce. Yes even your tomatoes

 

[vegas giants]

Some of those 'time, place and manor' 2A restrictions have been upheld (or at least not yet struck down) by the SCOTUS but converting the keeping of a gun in your home from a constitutional right into a state issued privilege (by permit only) is not likley to pass muster.

We already require a permit to bear arms in many states. You can not bear arms at all in those states publically without a permit

 

[Rucker61]

But to be clear.....Congress currently has the right to regulate both interstate and intrastate commerce. Yes even your tomatoes

To be clear, Congress does not have rights. It has powers, both enumerated and stolen. If you believe that the Founders intended the Commerce Clause to enable Congress to prohibit citizens from growing their own food for their own consumption, then you are a statist beyond compare.