Posted on 02/21/2010 9:46:46 AM PST by fight_truth_decay
Can anyone show me where the existence of the BATWTF is justified in the Constitution?
“Every state should pass the same laws and tell the Feds to F - off.”
If your approach were followed and then applied to ALL areas where the feds sticks their noses, the feds would be so hugely outnumbered that they would either have to quit or have to declare martial law.
Yep,
Exactly.
Whoriuchi is but one of many in that group of killers.
You care to learn about our vaunted BATF?
Read, The Federal Siege at Ruby Ridge.
NEVER have I been so ashamed of our gun mint.
I’m aware of the IRS acquiring shotguns.
Like so many other gub mint agencies there is NO NEED for these gestappo tactics. Unless it is THEY who are trying to pucsh it.
IRS, BATF, FBI and so many other gub mint agencies, they are murdering garbage.
While in S. Korea at the command Center at YongSon I dealt with blue helmets far too much.
Pathetic.
As a kid I use to go up near your cabin with my dad fishing.
We lived in Canoga Park at the time.
Camped in Sequoia National Park MANY times also.. Breathtakingly beautiful.
Huntington Lake, California?
Guard your piece of heaven well my friend.Few places on this earth are as fine.
He will not back down from patriots and US citizens.”
No , he won’t. He and all socialists would like us all dead.
Isn’t the murderer now working for a gun manufacturer here in the U.S. now?
or have to declare martial law.”
And under Obama, they will declare martial law.
“Is the BATFE going to go Waco on the whole state of Montana?”
That won’t last long but it will be extremely painful.
HS Precision of South Dakota used him to endorse their work. See too, HS Precision comments, when confronted by public outrage.
As far as I know, Horiuchi has a good paying job with the BATFE. IIRC, he was promoted after his action at Ruby Ridge.
“only anly agent or contractor working on behalf of the fedgov is guilty of a Class B Felony.”
Oh... that is good. I really like that. It is way beyond time that the Federal government is “taken down a notch or two” in its relationship with the states.
I'm in favor of the dynamic changing. I just don't want to be the one to initiate the change.
I don't think anyone sane does.
Most decent people just want to live their lives in peace, and will put up with a lot of difficulties thrown in their way without doing much about it because of not wanting to get into a big mess trying to fight it. I know I am that way, and the vast majority of the people in society are that way.
Which is good, as we really need to trust each other to abide by the rules in order to live in a society such as ours.
The change is going to come when a group of people who know what they are doing and are able to do it decide that they have had enough and are willing to sacrifice everything they have and act with purpose.
Kind of like our founding fathers, but with modern technology...
“And under Obama, they will declare martial law.”
Then they better hope the military doesn’t live up to its sworn duty to defend the Constitution.
Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942). The fact pattern worth knowing in order to see how much it diverges from laws that criminalize certain arms possession, and prohibit it outright in others. Although, OTOH, the premise of centrally managed agriculture as a "constitutional power of the federal government" doesn't agree with me, it is much less offensive that making a felon out of a person who fails to buy a gun-tax stamp, owns a short barrel shotgun, etc.
The controversy in Wickard was over payment of a fee. Filburn could have paid the fee, or "stored the excess" in order to avoid the fee. There was no "crime" involved. I'd have to check commodity prices at the time, but I think 49 cents a bushel was a substantial amount, relative to the price of a bushel. But also note, Filburn was aware of and agreeable with a fee for planting excess acreage. The argument was over the government increasing the fee, with the increase coming after he planted the excess acreage.
I linked the case above, in case anybody wants to read enough details to understand the nature of the controversy. Excerpts follow:
In July of 1940, pursuant to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as then amended, there were established for the appellee's 1941 crop a wheat acreage allotment of 11.1 acres and a normal yield of 20.1 bushels of wheat an acre. He was given notice of such allotment in July of 1940 before the Fall planting of his 1941 crop of wheat, and again in July of 1941, before it was harvested. He sowed, however, 23 acres, and harvested from his 11.9 acres of excess acreage 239 bushels, which under the terms of the Act as amended on May 26, 1941, constituted farm marketing excess, subject to a penalty of 49 cents a bushel, or $117.11 in all. The appellee has not paid the penalty and he has not postponed or avoided it by storing the excess under regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture, or by delivering it up to the Secretary. The Committee, therefore, refused him a marketing card, which was, under the terms of Regulations promulgated by the Secretary, necessary to protect a buyer from liability to the penalty and upon its protecting lien.The court below held, with one judge dissenting, that the speech of the Secretary invalidated the referendum; and that the amendment of May 26, 1941, 'in so far as it increased the penalty for the farm marketing excess over the fifteen cents per bushel prevailing at the time of planting and subjected the entire crop to a lien for the payment thereof,' should not be applied to the appellee because as so applied it was retroactive and in violation of [due process] the Fifth Amendment ...
Adding one point, the Wikipedia treatment of this case is abominable. It radically misrepresents the underlying facts.
"Abide by the rules" is a two way street, and when it comes to the 2nd amendment, the federal government is corrupt, rotten to the core. That includes all three branches. They lie, distort, and misrepresent in ways that are stunning for being so brazen.
In 1939, Miller's indictment is quashed, and the 1934 NFA is said to NOT apply to weapons that DO have a military use. Come 2008, the Supreme Court (in Heller) says Miller was CONVICTED (he wasn't even TRIED!), and that it would be stunning to read the case as being critical of the 1934 NFA.
The government has no moral authority in this area, and governs from pure threat and use of force against the public.
Trust the government? Heh. No way. The Mafia has a better code of honor than the government does.
Bump for later.
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.