This Is Why We Will Never Register Our Guns Or Cooperate With Government Mandates

[Axeslinger]

I continue to agree.  I haven't seen anything that convinces me I want the federal government to enforce one states laws onto another.  Fantasies that they would expand our freedoms in doing so is only fantasy.

@IsailedawayfromFR @thackney

EXCEPT...for that pesky ol’ 10Th amendment which expresses the principle of federalism and states' rights, which states that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the United States Constitution.  And last I checked the 2A is an amendment, and thus part of, the constitution.  Therefore according to the 10th, neither the states nor localities; should not be screwing with “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

But then again, I am just a lowly reader of plain ol English.

[Smokin Joe]

I continue to agree.  I haven't seen anything that convinces me I want the federal government to enforce one states laws onto another.  Fantasies that they would expand our freedoms in doing so is only fantasy.

As a matter of fact, I'd appreciate it if they quit. At least have some semblance of consistency with "full faith and credit".

[IsailedawayfromFR]

@IsailedawayfromFR @thackney

EXCEPT...for that pesky ol’ 10Th amendment which expresses the principle of federalism and states' rights, which states that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the United States Constitution.  And last I checked the 2A is an amendment, and thus part of, the constitution.  Therefore according to the 10th, neither the states nor localities; should not be screwing with “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

But then again, I am just a lowly reader of plain ol English.

So the case you espouse is not throttling down a state's laws.  Instead, it is to disregard an unconstitutional law passed by a state.

[thackney]

@IsailedawayfromFR @thackney

EXCEPT...for that pesky ol’ 10Th amendment which expresses the principle of federalism and states' rights, which states that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the United States Constitution.  And last I checked the 2A is an amendment, and thus part of, the constitution.  Therefore according to the 10th, neither the states nor localities; should not be screwing with “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

But then again, I am just a lowly reader of plain ol English.

Now I would be real happy with action at the Federal level that said "Shall not be infringed" means "shall not be infringed including requirements for permits".

I am in favor of Alaskan style carry, if you are legally allowed to own the gun, you are allowed to carry it, concealed or open.

[Cyber Liberty]

Now I would be real happy with action at the Federal level that said "Shall not be infringed" means "shall not be infringed including requirements for permits".

I am in favor of Alaskan style carry, if you are legally allowed to own the gun, you are allowed to carry it, concealed or open.

 

AZ = AK in this regard.  In fact there are quite a few Constitutional Carry states nowadays.