Posted on 05/28/2010 9:48:45 AM PDT by marktwain
Alaska has become the eighth state to declare that firearms made, sold and owned in the state are beyond the reach of the federal bureaucrats along the Potomac, with Gov. Sean Parnell's signature on the plan today.
"The Alaska Firearms Freedom Act frees Alaskans from overly bureaucratic and restrictive federal firearm regulation, and allows our state to assume the responsibility for regulation," said Rep. Mike Kelly, the lead sponsor on the plan endorsed by lawmakers in the recently closed session of the Alaska Legislature.
"The Interstate Commerce Clause is used by the federal government to regulate firearms that cross state borders. The Alaska Firearms Freedom Act makes it clear that Alaskans will be responsible for firearms that are made in Alaska, for use in Alaska, and have 'Made in Alaska' stamped on them.
"Outdoorsmen, hunters and all Alaskans defending and feeding their families, and protecting their property, should welcome this new law," he said.
Here are answers to all your questions about guns, ammunition and accessories.
The law also requires the state to defend any Alaskan who is "prosecuted by the federal government under their authority to regulate interstate commerce."
"We welcome Alaska into this states' rights liberty march," said Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Well placed words with an uncanny accuracy DC.
A tough row to hoe but it needs hoeing for sure.
LOL
Pack a lunch, It's going to take a while.
I could be wrong but this appears to be a new twist: The Alaska law states in part, Alaska must defend any Alaskan who is prosecuted by the federal government under their authority to regulate interstate commerce.
Please ~ping~ me to articles relating to the 10th Amendment/States Rights so I can engage the pinger.
I've stopped monitoring threads and unilaterally adding names to the ping list, so if you want on or off the list just say so.
Tenth Amendment Chronicles Thread
Tenth Amendment Center
The Right Side of Life/State Initiatives
Sovereign States
Firearms Freedom Act
Health Care Nullification
CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES |
It will never come to WA. That’s for sure!
I fail to understand the LIBs reasoning. Their claim is that under the commerce clause they can legislate anything. How can one clause in the Constitution overrule the entire document? If it is that powerful, why bother with the rest of the Constitution?
The other argument, that the laws inhibit interstate commerce is more ridiculous. Is the federal government arguing to maintain the flow of guns across state lines?
No matter how the courts rule on this matter, it won’t be the final word. Neither side shows any sign of backing down. And a court ruling will only intensify the battle.
The entire premise of the nation is based on respect for the Constitution, the rule of law. Lacking that we are just another unstable democracy waiting for tyranny to rise.
NFA arms are precisely the types the second amendment was intended to protect the right to keep and bear. It was never about hunting or sport, ever.
Now, http://www.usacarry.com/ seems to have filled the gap.
Now, Holder and Company are throwing out the line that all these states getting on this bandwagon might someday affect interstate commerce. WTF ever. Federal gun laws do that already, and those subsequent amendments trump, it seems to me.
It is a tough situation because too many unconstitutional federal laws have been allowed to stand for too long. Regardless of what happens with regard to this particular states' rights issue, we need to continue pushing back to repeal those old laws. It is their existence that gives weight to the administration's argument and nothing that is actually in the constitution.
>>Now, Holder and Company are throwing out the line that all these states getting on this bandwagon might someday affect interstate commerce.<<
This is like those bad sci-fi movies where you are guilty of a crime before you actually commit the crime. The fallacy is that if you are punished for a crimme you commit in the future, the crime never gets committed and you are punished for something that never happens. Worse, all memory of that crime is erased.
What does the “commerce clause” have to do with the right to bear arms? Why do people that claim to be protecting the 2nd amend always feel the need to use other laws to do it? Does the “commerce clause” affect the sell of books and movies?
Scalia's ELASTIC view of the Commerce Clause is well suited to an expansive fedgov:
"...the authority to enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce is not limited to laws governing intrastate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce."
J. Scalia, concurring, Raich
They claim that guns and ammo are sold in interstate commerce and that gives government the power to regulate them. This needs to be challenged just like all government power grabs.
Good news...Tipping point should be around state # 20 (IMHO)
Why doesnt this commerce clause affect the 1st amend things. You know books, movies, and music items.
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.