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

Skip to comments.

Rep. Massie cites Constitution to slam Biden's upcoming 'ghost gun' rule: 'Congress makes laws'
foxnews ^ | Apr 11, 2022 | By Emma Colton

Posted on 04/11/2022 12:46:54 PM PDT by RandFan

Rep. Thomas Massie and Second Amendment advocates are pushing back against the Biden administration's upcoming rule on "ghost guns," characterizing the rule to rein in privately made firearms without serial numbers as unconstitutional.

"The Constitution does not authorize the federal government to prevent you from making your own firearm. This a fact that has been recognized for 200+ years. Also, Article 1, Section 1 (literally the first operative sentence in the Constitution) says Congress makes law, not POTUS!" Rep. Thomas Massie tweeted Sunday.

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


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: Kentucky
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; batfe; ghostguns; ghostprostitutes; ghostprostitution; massie; nra; secondamendment; thomasmassie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last
To: RandFan; All
All that Rep. Massie or any other patriot has to argue against unconstitutional federal firearm controls is this. The states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to regulate peacetime use of non-militia-related guns.

In fact, even in cases where domestic violence involves guns, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had limited federal involvement in such violence to formal request by state government.

"Article IV, Section 4 (4.4): The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence [emphases added]."

Consider that Justice Joseph Story had explained the domestic violence part of 4.4 as a check against the feds dreaming up any excuse to interfere with a state's affairs.

”§ 1819. It may not be amiss further to observe, (in the language of another commentator,) that every pretext for intermeddling with the domestic concerns of any state, under colour of protecting it against domestic violence, is taken away by that part of the provision, which renders an application from the legislature, or executive authority of the state endangered necessary to be made to the general government, before its interference can be at all proper [emphasis added]. On the other hand, this article becomes an immense acquisition of strength, and additional force to the aid of any state government, in case of an internal rebellion, or insurrection against its authority. The southern states, being more peculiarly open to danger from this quarter, ought (he adds) to be particularly tenacious of a constitution, from which they may derive such assistance in the most critical periods.” —Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, Article 4, Section 4.

Consider that the reason that federal peacetime gun control laws are now in the books is the following. Simply put, constitutionally limited federal government power-ignoring FDR and the likewise Constitution-ignoring Congress at the time established such laws in blatant defiance of the United States v. Butler excerpt above.

Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control

Corrections, insights welcome.

Also, patriots are reminded that they must vote twice this election year. Your first vote is to primary career RINO incumbents. Your second vote is to replace outgoing Democrats and RINOs with Trump-endorsed patriot candidates.

Again, insights welcome.

21 posted on 04/11/2022 1:44:10 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

Scotus has been making laws since a couple decades after the 17th Amendment.

Congress doesn’t like taking the hits for making laws. New laws risk reelection.

Laws are best left to the Administrative State and federal courts.


22 posted on 04/11/2022 1:50:41 PM PDT by Jacquerie (ArticleVBlog.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RandallFlagg

Since when does a Representative have charging authority? That’s an executive branch function.


23 posted on 04/11/2022 1:55:01 PM PDT by jagusafr ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

So was abiding by them


24 posted on 04/11/2022 2:31:55 PM PDT by mrmeyer (You can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him. Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Creating agencies and giving them broad authority to create rules with the rule of law is arguably the most unconstitutional thing Congress has ever done.


25 posted on 04/11/2022 3:07:09 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Inside every liberal is a blood-thirsty fascist yearning to be free of current societal constraints.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

Bkmk guns


26 posted on 04/11/2022 6:23:11 PM PDT by ptsal (Vote R.E.D. >>>Remove Every Democrat ***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

Bkmk guns


27 posted on 04/11/2022 6:30:29 PM PDT by ptsal (Vote R.E.D. >>>Remove Every Democrat ***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
Anyone who is a prohibited person who possesses an uncompleted 80% receiver and a jig for that 80% receiver is considered to be in possession of a firearm.

There will be plenty of litigation on this.

The basic philosophy the ATF is relying on is simple: Guns are bad.

It is not true.

28 posted on 04/12/2022 4:30:57 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
"Anyone who is a prohibited person who possesses an uncompleted 80% receiver and a jig for that 80% receiver is considered to be in possession of a firearm."

There will be plenty of litigation on this.

There will be litigation. Gun owners of America and the Second Amendment Foundation are already preparing litigation against the "80% receiver/frame plus a jig = 'readily convertible' firearm."

But the point of the rule isn't to prosecute people, it is to dry up the 80% receiver/frame market. Putting Poly80 and other companies out of business.

29 posted on 04/12/2022 5:22:20 AM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary? Pray for President Biden: Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RandFan

That was before the 2020 election was stolen by a CCP cyber attack putting an illegitimate rebellious force in power. The US government is currently a captured operation. We are at war right now its just not a shooting war. Its an information war.


30 posted on 04/12/2022 7:55:43 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Friend’s son was a low level junkie, did some time, in Alabama, got pulled over for a tail light out, he worked as a mechnic, so had a tool box, and a couple of joints. He ended up doing more time for possing a weapon over the screwdrivers in his tool box. So anything can then be classified as a weapon if you’ve done time.


31 posted on 04/12/2022 12:12:50 PM PDT by GailA (Constitution vs evil Treasonous political Apparatchiks, Constitutional Conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Howie66

Totally agree


32 posted on 04/12/2022 12:14:36 PM PDT by GailA (Constitution vs evil Treasonous political Apparatchiks, Constitutional Conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Even Congress cannot make a law that violates the Constitution...and the regs on “ghost guns” does, in fact, violate the 2A.

There were literally no serial numbers required on any long guns sold to the public by FFLs until 1968 (with the unconstitutional GCA), or until 1934 on handguns and full autos (with the equally unconstitutional NFA).

Individuals making their own firearms (which has been done since the 1700s, at least, in this country) have never been required to put a serial number on their firearms. There is no authority, that’s why it was never done before.


33 posted on 04/12/2022 1:17:04 PM PDT by Ancesthntr (“The right to buy weapons is the right to be free.” ― A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2
That was before the 2020 election was stolen by a CCP cyber attack putting an illegitimate rebellious force in power.

Of which there is no evidence that has been released to the public in the way of packet captures, etc.

34 posted on 04/12/2022 3:38:01 PM PDT by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 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