Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NRA files lawsuit over Florida gun control law
WHSV ^ | Fri 6:23 PM, Mar 09, 2018 | Associated Press

Posted on 03/09/2018 4:06:29 PM PST by Jed Eckert

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — UPDATE (6:15 p.m.):

The National Rifle Association has filed a federal lawsuit over gun control legislation Florida Gov. Rick Scott has signed, saying it violates the Second Amendment by raising the age to buy guns from 18 to 21.

The lawsuit came just hours after Gov. Scott, a Republican, signed the compromise bill Friday afternoon.

Lawyers for the NRA want a federal judge to block the new age restriction from taking effect.

The new legislation raises the minimum age to buy rifles from 18 to 21, extends a three-day waiting period for handgun purchases to include long guns and bans bump stocks that allow guns to mimic fully automatic fire. It also creates a so-called "guardian" program that enables teachers and other school employees to carry handguns.

The new measures come in the wake of the Feb. 14 shooting rampage at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, that killed 17 people.

....more at link

(Excerpt) Read more at whsv.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; browardcounty; florida; guncontrol; lawsuit; mediawingofthednc; nra; parkland; partisanmediashills; presstitutes; rickscott; scottisrael; secondamendment; statesrights; whathappened
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-149 next last
To: snarkytart; Trump20162020

“The GOP is so worthless. If they can’t even support gun rights, what good are they?”


Worthless is an understatement. The GOP is traitorous, treacherous and poisonous.


101 posted on 03/10/2018 3:48:39 AM PST by miniTAX (au)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
They’ll lose. You can’t buy alcohol until you’re 21.

Then raise the voting age (and enlistment age) back up to 21 - if one can't be trusted with one responsibility, one can't be trusted with any of them - especially voting...

102 posted on 03/10/2018 4:15:22 AM PST by trebb (I stopped picking on the mentally ill hypocrites who pose as conservatives...mostly ;-})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert

Excellent!!! I joined the NRA 1 week after Parkland. Saw the direction the idiots were going.


103 posted on 03/10/2018 4:29:32 AM PST by Basket_of_Deplorables (Trump has implemented Supply Side Economics!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trump20162020
The GOP is so worthless. If they can’t even support gun rights, what good are they?

I am wondering why anyone should vote "R" - I can only hope Trump will run in 2020 as an "I" and let the GOP ride into the sunset like the Whigs.
104 posted on 03/10/2018 6:09:49 AM PST by Cheerio (#44, The unknown President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

What you propose is a losing proposition borne of ignorance

America has a two party system

Disgruntled malcontents need to choose one of the two and accept responsibility for loss when they do not vote


105 posted on 03/10/2018 6:12:41 AM PST by Thibodeaux (The FISA judge is corrupt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: precisionshootist
There is no excuse for Republicans passing new gun control legislation.

Just as the sun always rises in the east, Repubs are quaking in their boots at the criticisms the non-voting juveniles have levied against them on Commie News Network and doubly scared because it is election year.
I have a hard time believing Donald John Trump would have gone this route even after his bluster in that meeting of a few weeks back.
106 posted on 03/10/2018 6:21:34 AM PST by Cheerio (#44, The unknown President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Check out the 12 mug shots/ages of shooters at post link ....

All but Sandy Hook shooter are 21 or over ..... SH shooter STOLE his gun from his mother, didn’t buy it himself. The “over 21” is a knee jerk/feel good provision in the law that will not stop shooters, yet once again will restrict lawful people from being able to defend themselves. I saw one comment that said it’s like getting a vasectomy so your neighbor will stop having kids.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3637556/posts?page=19#14


107 posted on 03/10/2018 6:25:39 AM PST by Qiviut (Obama's Legacy in two words: DONALD TRUMP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Thibodeaux
What you propose is a losing proposition borne of ignorance America has a two party system Disgruntled malcontents need to choose one of the two and accept responsibility for loss when they do not vote

What is ignorant about that? The incumbent President usually has a great advantage. I would love to see popular Trump run against a RAT and a RINO - he would win hands down probably with 40% of the vote and the two TRADIONAL parties splitting the other 60%.

What is the difference between the two parties in 2018? Trump ran as a "R" because the GOP forced him to make that commitment on national TV.
108 posted on 03/10/2018 6:26:07 AM PST by Cheerio (#44, The unknown President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Well said.


109 posted on 03/10/2018 6:29:41 AM PST by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

Marco was very explicit in regard to the new Florida gun law...You have to be 21 to BUY a gun but not to use a gun.


110 posted on 03/10/2018 6:32:22 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

What Trump has done is start a 3rd party within the umbrella of the Republican Party. His base is his own and the old base is under constant revision.....aka....some are coming around.


111 posted on 03/10/2018 6:35:16 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Islander7

I bet these people are furiously supportive of the measure too, hypocrisy is so rampant in the Democratic party it’s embarrassing to witness. If memory serves Pelosi was advocating lowering the voting age to 16 as well.

http://www.youthrights.org/issues/voting-age/top-ten-reasons-to-lower-the-voting-age/


112 posted on 03/10/2018 6:39:56 AM PST by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof...shall be the supreme Law of the Land.
U.S. Constitution, Art. VI, Clause 2.

The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and trumps federal law.

[T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Id., Amendment II.

The Constitution does not grant ANY rights to the states or the people. It PROTECTS the PRE-EXISTING rights of the states and the people against federal incursion or "infringement".

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Id., Amendment X.

All rights not expressly delegated to the feds or prohibited to the states are RESERVED to the states and the people. The Constitution delegates NO authority to the feds regarding gun regulations, nor does it prohibit bearing arms to the states. Quite the opposite. The Constitution REMINDS the feds - HANDS OFF regarding the right to bear arms. The right to bear arms is a state's issue along with all the other rights outside constitutional proscription.

Nowhere does the Constitution delegate to the feds the power to enforce all rights guaranteed under the US Constitution. Thus, the judge's decision is strictly unconstitutional, and should be ignored, voided, and nullified.

113 posted on 03/10/2018 7:07:13 AM PST by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216

Federal courts have determined the “supremacy clause” extends all rights granted under the Constitution to all citizens and takes precedence over all state and local law to the contrary. It has been used to impose Federal Law with respect to voting rights and other civil liberties. No damn reason why it should not apply to the Second Amendment.


114 posted on 03/10/2018 7:12:37 AM PST by ZULU (End the Obama/Holder "Promise" program, FIRE Runcie, the $335,000 Broward Co. Stupidintendent of Sc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Jed Eckert

https://gothunts.com/hunting-age-requirements/


115 posted on 03/10/2018 7:12:57 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
Federal courts have determined the “supremacy clause” extends all rights granted under the Constitution to all citizens and takes precedence over all state and local law to the contrary. It has been used to impose Federal Law with respect to voting rights and other civil liberties.

It has also been used to ban the bible and prayer in schools, overturn state anti-abortion laws, and force hiring quotas and so-called "gay rights". This unconstitutional doctrine invented by the federal courts has lead to a parade of horribles, the deaths of tens of millions of unborn, and threatens to extinguish individual rights - the very opposite of the constitutional presumption of our pre-existing rights to Life, Liberty and Free Pursuits, of the the Declaration of Independence.

There is no constitutional support for federal courts' determining that the feds have authority to enforce all rights. In fact this invented doctrine expressly CONTRADICTS the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of the Constitution. The ONLY legitimate federal power is that which is delegated to them by the Constitution from the states and the people. Thus, if it is not a delegated power enumerated mostly in Article I, Section 8, it is NOT a federal power.

Stop supporting the death and destruction of the unconstitutional decisions and acts (AKA TYRANNY) of the federal government.

116 posted on 03/10/2018 7:51:26 AM PST by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216

If this clause has been used to our detriment successfully, there is NO reason it should not be used to our benefit.


117 posted on 03/10/2018 8:10:46 AM PST by ZULU (End the Obama/Holder "Promise" program, FIRE Runcie, the $335,000 Broward Co. Stupidintendent of Sc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Tzimisce

They could easily put in an exemption for those that are in or have been in the military.


118 posted on 03/10/2018 8:19:27 AM PST by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal the 16th Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
They could easily put in an exemption for those that are in or have been in the military.

Why? Are they any more of a citizen then any other American civilian?

119 posted on 03/10/2018 8:57:56 AM PST by frogjerk (We are conservatives. Not libertarians, not "fiscal conservatives", not moderates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
They could easily put in an exemption for those that are in or have been in the military.

Good idea, except have to get rid of "veterans" classification as potential terrorists... /s

120 posted on 03/10/2018 9:20:24 AM PST by LurkedLongEnough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-149 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson