Firearms Forum Online
http://forums.buckeyefirearms.org/

Gun Confiscation
http://forums.buckeyefirearms.org/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=16355
Page 2 of 3

Author:  robertov416 [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

While everyone has their antenna up, perhaps it's a good time for residents of more states to push for legislation that prohibits the enforcement of unconstitutional federal laws within that state.

Is Ohio legislature receptive to a move like this (or am I ignorant of something like this already on the books)?

Author:  Ken45 [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

robertov416 wrote:
While everyone has their antenna up, perhaps it's a good time for residents of more states to push for legislation that prohibits the enforcement of unconstitutional federal laws within that state.

Is Ohio legislature receptive to a move like this (or am I ignorant of something like this already on the books)?


As far as I can tell, not a whole lot is accomplished by such legislation. Who defines "unconstitutional"? IMO, NFA '34 and GCA '68 and the whole NICS process is "unconstitutional" (hint "Shall not be infringed") but I doubt we would win that argument.

I would rather spend our efforts on more practical things in the legislature, like notification, employer parking lots, etc.

YMMV.

Ken

Author:  CamdenMike [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 3:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

Ken45 wrote:
Who defines "unconstitutional"? IMO, NFA '34 and GCA '68 and the whole NICS process is "unconstitutional" (hint "Shall not be infringed") but I doubt we would win that argument.


Last I looked the SCOTUS defines what's unconstitutional and Scalia et al made clear in Heller that the 2nd Amendment is no more absolute than the 1st.

Were we to adopt your absolutist argument every felon, druggie, wife beater, illegal alien, nut case and dishonorably discharged veteran would have the right to own firearms. I can see no compelling reason why it would be good public policy to go there.

As Justice Goldberg observed in Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, "...for while the Constitution protects against invasions of individual rights, it is not a suicide pact."

Author:  jabeatty [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

CamdenMike wrote:
Were we to adopt your absolutist argument every felon, druggie, wife beater, illegal alien, nut case and dishonorably discharged veteran would have the right to own firearms.

Yep.

Got a problem with freedom?

Obviously, making something illegal simply doesn't work. What if we tried something new? (Actually, something very old.) Punish people for their crimes, then when that punishment has been served, they return to society with their rights restored.

If you can't trust a man with his rights, then why is he on the streets in the first place? Attack the root problem...

Author:  robertov416 [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

CamdenMike wrote:
Last I looked the SCOTUS defines what's unconstitutional and Scalia et al made clear in Heller that the 2nd Amendment is no more absolute than the 1st.

Were we to adopt your absolutist argument every felon, druggie, wife beater, illegal alien, nut case and dishonorably discharged veteran would have the right to own firearms. I can see no compelling reason why it would be good public policy to go there.

As Justice Goldberg observed in Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, "...for while the Constitution protects against invasions of individual rights, it is not a suicide pact."


Hello neighbor!
I live just south of you in Pierce Township.

Bob

Author:  CamdenMike [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

robertov416 wrote:
Hello neighbor!
I live just south of you in Pierce Township.

Bob


Must be another Camden Twp. down your way. Mine is in Lorain County.

Author:  robertov416 [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

CamdenMike wrote:

Must be another Camden Twp. down your way. Mine is in Lorain County.


Nope.... just clicked on yours rather than James' post.

Author:  CamdenMike [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

robertov416 wrote:
CamdenMike wrote:

Must be another Camden Twp. down your way. Mine is in Lorain County.


Nope.... just clicked on yours rather than James' post.


Gotcha.

Author:  color of law [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

jabeatty wrote:
CamdenMike wrote:
Were we to adopt your absolutist argument every felon, druggie, wife beater, illegal alien, nut case and dishonorably discharged veteran would have the right to own firearms.

Yep.

Got a problem with freedom?

Obviously, making something illegal simply doesn't work. What if we tried something new? (Actually, something very old.) Punish people for their crimes, then when that punishment has been served, they return to society with their rights restored.

If you can't trust a man with his rights, then why is he on the streets in the first place? Attack the root problem...

+1

The first and Second Amendment issues were left to the states not the feds. There are no constitutionalists on the Supreme Court. The feds took your rights and you ain't getting them back.

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment and you may have a slight chance to take back your country........

Author:  robertov416 [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

color of law wrote:
+1

The first and Second Amendment issues were left to the states not the feds. There are no constitutionalists on the Supreme Court. The feds took your rights and you ain't getting them back.

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment and you may have a slight chance to take back your country........


Are you suggesting that it is easier to influence and pull the wool over the eyes of the citizens of a state (via media) vs the legislature of a state where we might risk cronyism?

Author:  1stMarDiv [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 8:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

SC-JG wrote:
robertov416 wrote:
More of a "frog in a boiling pot of water" kinda guy, eh?

Not exactly.

It's obvious that there are those who have the disarmament if the American people high on their agenda; recently, they have gained some significant ground (NY). This needs to be fought against by every lawful means possible. I just don't think that it's risen to the house to house confiscation point yet, and I have some hope that it came be squelched before it does.


NY exactly my thoughts, But that new law made something like 70 percent of currently owned pistols illegal to sell, I might be wrong but it is very concerning that an entire state of people seem to have just laid down and took it where the sun don't shine. without a whimper. very curious that I haven;t heard nearly a word from NY citizens about it. It;s almost like no big deal to them, and its the closest thing to getting neutered that I can imagine

Author:  SC-JG [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

1stMarDiv wrote:
NY exactly my thoughts, But that new law made something like 70 percent of currently owned pistols illegal to sell, I might be wrong but it is very concerning that an entire state of people seem to have just laid down and took it where the sun don't shine. without a whimper. very curious that I haven;t heard nearly a word from NY citizens about it. It;s almost like no big deal to them, and its the closest thing to getting neutered that I can imagine

"NYSRPA, in co-operation with the NRA, are having the Cuomo law reviewed by a highly qualified legal team. We ask that no other 3rd party legal action be taken without prior consultation. We realize that this law impacts a large number of people, but a proper legal review will take some time. NYSRPA/NRA will be filing a Notice of Claim prior to submitting a brief on the merits of the constitutionality of the new gun law. Involved in the lawsuit will be two of the nations best 2nd Amendment attorneys. This is a very important proceeding and must be handled properly with the best lawyers. We will not win without support from gun owners. You can help either by joining/renewing your membership or making a online donation.

Please do not call or e-mail the office or directors asking for more information. Any announcements on this issue will be published here on our website. Thank you for your understanding."
http://www.nysrpa.org/

Honestly, I wouldn't expect the media to give much voice to those protesting.

http://www.news10.com/story/20630358/gu ... at-capital
Thousands attend ‘Guns Across America’ rally at NY Capitol

Author:  robertov416 [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

1stMarDiv wrote:

NY exactly my thoughts, But that new law made something like 70 percent of currently owned pistols illegal to sell, I might be wrong but it is very concerning that an entire state of people seem to have just laid down and took it where the sun don't shine. without a whimper. very curious that I haven;t heard nearly a word from NY citizens about it. It;s almost like no big deal to them, and its the closest thing to getting neutered that I can imagine


I had a guy in my class this past week from upstate NY. I didn't sound like he was taking it sitting down. But he did point to the example of the former Canadian long gun registration where over 70% went unregistered despite billions spent to get them to do otherwise.

Author:  robertov416 [ Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

Ken45 wrote:
As far as I can tell, not a whole lot is accomplished by such legislation. Who defines "unconstitutional"? IMO, NFA '34 and GCA '68 and the whole NICS process is "unconstitutional" (hint "Shall not be infringed") but I doubt we would win that argument.

I would rather spend our efforts on more practical things in the legislature, like notification, employer parking lots, etc.

YMMV.

Ken


Employer parking lots... yes. At work they are trying to change that one for us, but it would be better if it was a state wide benefit.

Author:  diamondsun [ Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Gun Confiscation

robertov416 wrote:
Ken45 wrote:
As far as I can tell, not a whole lot is accomplished by such legislation. Who defines "unconstitutional"? IMO, NFA '34 and GCA '68 and the whole NICS process is "unconstitutional" (hint "Shall not be infringed") but I doubt we would win that argument.

I would rather spend our efforts on more practical things in the legislature, like notification, employer parking lots, etc.

YMMV.

Ken


Employer parking lots... yes. At work they are trying to change that one for us, but it would be better if it was a state wide benefit.


One thing that could be done on the state level would be a bill like the new one in Texas HB553. Instead of trying to stop the Feds from enforcing gun laws, this makes it illegal for state and local officers to enforce new anti-2A laws or in any way assist federal LE to enforce those laws. It has the advantage of being constitutional and that the Feds have already made our argument for us (not wanting locals involvrd in immigration laws in the SW)

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/