Posted on 02/07/2020 11:04:48 AM PST by PROCON
To the Democrats, a/k/a, Socialists it doesn’t. But you got to start somewhere. What they are doing flies in the Constitution, but very few in Law Enforcement give a damn about that. And it will give some the opportunity to decide which side they are on. Whether they side with the “I’m just doing my job” type that shoved the Jews into the gas chambers or decide to honor their sworn oath and defend the Constitution are the questions which remain to and will be answered in time. One way or the other. But I foresee a fight and bloodshed before this is settled.
Of course
The rally already stopped a couple of bills.
This has not made it through the Senate, yet.
The Senate is the pinch point.
The Democrats only have a majority of 21 to 19.
What is your alternative to the rally?
It is just one of a number of tactics to fight this insanity.
To the Democrats, a/k/a, Socialists it doesn’t. But you got to start somewhere. What they are doing flies in the Constitution, but very few in Law Enforcement give a damn about that. And it will give some the opportunity to decide which side they are on. Whether they side with the “I’m just doing my job” type that shoved the Jews into the gas chambers or decide to honor their sworn oath and defend the Constitution are the questions which remain to and will be answered in time. One way or the other. But I foresee a fight and bloodshed before this is settled.
Agree. I just don’t see how protests stop tyrants. You do have to start somewhere, but they laugh in the face of our protests and then just proceed.
The current legislature has been in office less than four weeks.
These bills may well be unconstitutional. But not in the way you think. The Virginia Bill of Rights has broader protections of individual liberty than the US Constitution.
There may well be relief there that cannot be won with a federal challenge.
That’s exactly the kind of legislation that Brett Kavanaugh argued against. Offending some women by repeatedly posting information about his opinions and information about his opposition was worth it.
For example:
Article I. Bill of Rights
Section 1. Equality and rights of men
That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
Safety? How can one have a right to an AR 15 today and it is taken away tomorrow?
Article I. Bill of Rights
Section 17. Construction of the Bill of Rights
The rights enumerated in this Bill of Rights shall not be construed to limit other rights of the people not therein expressed.
Article I. Bill of Rights
Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power
That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
This last one indicates that military weapons cannot be banned from the people. Not that an AR 15 is a military weapon. Not an army in the world uses it. But it is being declared a military weapon in Virginia and therefore the people cannot posses.
Lastly this:
Section 17. Construction of the Bill of Rights
The rights enumerated in this Bill of Rights shall not be construed to limit other rights of the people not therein expressed.
If it right to have a musket in the house (a military weapon) existed at the time of the adoption of the constitution, it cannot be a basis that today’s military rifle can be prohibited from ownership.
ah....that would explain the “odd” results.....
In Colorado its been a year, so we have to work hard to regain the Senate to be able to put up roadblocks.
Elections have consequences!
You missed my point, the suppressors tend to be owned by the “Donor Class”, not the Bernie loving Quickie-Mart part time employee stoners.
As to the tax stamp, that is Confidential Tax Information that ATF may not share short of an active investigation/warrant.
Does the new bill exempt LE, Fed. employees, Museaums?
The court cases may take a decade, then the appeals......
Several states ban suppressors under state law.
ATF requires that any NFA ownership comply with state law or they will not issue the Fed. tax stamp.
So yes, VA can in fact ban suppressors, but since they have previously been legal thay are opening up a can of rancid worms.
It’s not the ‘Po Folk’ that own them, a lot of the owners are doctors and LAWYERS, retired LE, ex FBI, etc., who can afford to fight this.
In CA they already banned SINGLE SHOT shotguns.
‘Cause “Slam-Fire” is SOOOOO scary!
Good info. Thanks.
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.