|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
SC: Second amendment bill advances to Senate floor
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A House-passed bill that would prohibit the enforcement of certain federal gun laws is headed to the Senate floor but its detractors could keep the legislation from being passed before next month’s adjournment.
The Second Amendment Preservation Act would ban the state enforcement of any federal law or regulation which goes into effect after last year that limits the right of a person to own, possess or use a firearm, ammunition or accessory.
The bill also would prohibit accepting any federal funds for the enforcement of such laws or spending state funds on enforcement of any federal law or regulation which goes into effect after last year requiring the registration or confiscation of firearms. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/12/2016)
|
“It’s unconstitutional,” he said, explaining that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution would not allow the state to refuse to enforce federal law.
Given his lack of understanding of the Constitution this guy shouldn't be in an elected office with the power to make law.
It is settled law that the federal government cannot commandeer state governments or their subdivisions for the purpose of enforcing federal law. This bill merely codifies the state's existing authority. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
