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

To: xmission
I agree with most of what you said. I just think if push comes to shove we need a limited set of clearly articulated goals.

For example, "interstate commerce" means a product or service has to cross state lines for the Feds to have a say. Raich is hogwash, and if I want to make firearms (or aspirin or cars or whatever) and offer them for sale only within my state, tough noogies for the Feds.

Might this make it harder to have 'national' standards? Sure, but so what? Our liberty is more important than standardization and economy of scale.

126 posted on 02/22/2009 12:03:11 PM PST by pierrem15 (.338 Lapua-- reach out and touch someone from 1000+ yds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]


To: pierrem15

We agree.


128 posted on 02/22/2009 12:15:45 PM PST by xmission (www.iwilldefendtheconstitution.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]

To: pierrem15
...if I want to make firearms (or aspirin or cars or whatever) and offer them for sale only within my state, tough noogies for the Feds.

That would seem an obvious choice, but Wickard vs. Filburn says otherwise.

Brief summary: "By not engaging in interstate commerce, you are affecting interstate commerce, and the Fed. gov. can regulate you."

195 posted on 02/23/2009 7:00:20 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]

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