Several nights ago, I woke with a vision. I took off the tin foil sleeping cap I normally wear, and started thinking.
Most here know that back before the [first] Civil War, there was passed something called the “Fugitive Slave Act” that could be used to force the return of slaves from the “free states” to the “slave states”.
And in 1857, there was a famous Supreme Court case — the Dred Scott decision, in which Scott, a fugitive slave, was declared to have no rights under the Constitution [at least equal to those afforded to ordinary free citizens], and was to be returned to his owner.
We know how the Dred Scott decision became one of the final “fuses” that triggered secession and what followed.
Told you that to tell you this:
Just as we saw the nation “divide” once before, we are again seeing a new “great divide” __ with one of the most important issues being the Second Amendment. We are seeing some states — the blue, “new-slave” states — rush to abrogate the Second Amendment rights of those within. Most recent examples are New York and now Colorado. In at least some states, what was previously legal will become quite illegal. Perhaps some states will creep towards confiscation, certainly registration (in the sense that all AR-15 owners in NY state will now be required to either register or turn in their weapons).
On the other hand, we have “the free states” — the red states in which gun ownership (along with other traditional values) remain revered and protected. We’re even seeing moves in some states that would seek to nullify any new federal laws that attack the Second Amendment — which is what the original article about is all about.
At some point, we’re going to see an accused gun-law violater in a “new-slave” state flee across state lines into a “free state”, perhaps after an arrest and release on bail. That this will eventually happen is almost a certainty.
What will the “free state” law officials do then? Will they return the “fugitive gun owner”? Or, will they take him in and protect him, as they would do with their own citizens, perhaps offer him “sanctuary” against the unconstitutional laws of the “new slave” state that is trying to persecute him?
I foresee at least one or two legal challenges here.
But let me continue further:
If the Republicans lose the House in 2014, giving the democrats full control of the federal government, and if we continue to see fugitive gun owners crossing state lines to escape prosecution and persecution in the new-slave states, I expect that there will be a move in Congress to pass something called a “Fugitive Gun Owner Act”. This will mandate that the free states return all “fugitive gun owners” to their states of origin, so that they may be prosecuted under their home-state’s laws.
When this happens, I expect to see at least one fugitive gun owner raise a constitutional challenge — just as Dred Scott did back in 1857.
And I predict that the decision the Supreme Court hands down will become as monumental in our century, as was the Scott decision in his.
Perhaps I should put my tin foil hat back on, and go back to sleep...
Years ago I would have laughed you to scorn.
Now, your vision makes a lot of sense.
We are entering dangerous territory for our Republic.
We better all find our voices—SOON—or they will be silenced.
I think that states passing laws like this represents an unfortunate trend and a weakening of the constitutional authority (I won’t say “rights”) of the states.
It isn’t necessary for states to pass laws to “defy federal gun laws”.
The Executive departments of the states should simply assert their refusal to abide by federal law passed without constitutional authority, and refuse to permit their enforcement by federal agents within the states’ borders. No new law is necessary to enforce the existing law.