If I'm understanding correctly, the distinction SHOULD be moot.
The 14th Amendment is SUPPOSED to prevent the States from violating the Bill of Rights.
[papertyger] Oh, I agree completely. The fact that the "Progressives" selectively apply the law only further points up their hypocrisy. But as a society-wide understanding, I think any wide-spread citizen resistance would only happen when a gun-grabbing effort spread outside a single state.
"But the Federal government is not going to seize normal weapons from law-abiding voters so long as the constitution is enforced."
[BroJoeK] And again, what will the military do when that point is reached. "If" Hillary had followed Obama, I think that threshold just might have been reached. Neither Obama nor Hillary give a puff of anal gas for the Constitution, and neither do the Democrats in Congress. Just suppose the legally elected Congress passes, and the legally elected president signs the law and tells the military......"go get the guns".
What does the military do in the face of this blatantly un-Constitutional and illegal order??