So, we can't just have gun sanctuary cities? I've read and heard that declaring a city a "sanctuary" makes the feds absolutely powerless to interfere. But, I was reading the SF Chronicle at the time so.....
From my cold drunk hands!but.. but.. but next they will go after your Whisky!
Well, if you read it in the Chronicle, it must be true!
So, we can't just have gun sanctuary cities? I've read and heard that declaring a city a "sanctuary" makes the feds absolutely powerless to interfere. But, I was reading the SF Chronicle at the time so.....
Sooo, we are happy when the States say FU to the Feds over gun control but angry when they say the same thing but about immigration?
Sadly it's true there but not here.
Sooo, we are happy when the States say FU to the Feds over gun control but angry when they say the same thing but about immigration?
Welcome to INGO - you're getting the hang of it.
It may be considered "true" there, but it is still not true. There can only be one "truth," although it is difficult in many cases to determine what the truth is.
That's why it rankles me when someone says, "this is MY truth." No, that is not truth. You are entitled to how you perceive things and your opinions, but not your own "truth."
Quit youing threads sir.Sooo, we are happy when the States say FU to the Feds over gun control but angry when they say the same thing but about immigration?
Tell Gavin Newsom. I don't think he got the memo.
Sooo, we are happy when the States say FU to the Feds over gun control but angry when they say the same thing but about immigration?
I know it's fun to look down your noses at us stupid yokels. What I hate is that the gubmint and statists seem to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution and Federal Laws they want to recognize as being valid. It seems to work out just great for them but if I, Joe normal citizen, were to do so I would be in the pokey. Certain people want to pave the way for the radical left and MORE governmental power and oversight. I guess that fits in with certain professions. I doesn't work out so good for the average citizen.
I know it's fun to look down your noses at us stupid yokels. What I hate is that the gubmint and statists seem to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution and Federal Laws they want to recognize as being valid. It seems to work out just great for them but if I, Joe normal citizen, were to do so I would be in the pokey. Certain people want to pave the way for the radical left and MORE governmental power and oversight. I guess that fits in with certain professions. I doesn't work out so good for the average citizen.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof;... shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Selective emphasis on which parts of the constitution and federal laws to "recognize" as "valid" is a unique exercise in the US: it crosses all demographics.
...and some of us know that fighting the fight against expansive government gun control will be more effective when you DON'T violate the Constitution, but work to enforce it.
States cannot legally prevent the federal government from enforcing federal laws.
Article VI of the Constitution:
It's right there in the Constitution.
Unconstitutional gun laws are fought by challenging the laws themselves as unconstitutional. That happens in the courts.
It is silly...and unconstitutional for a state to say: "yeah, well, we don't recognize your laws, they are unconstitutional and we will arrest anyone who tries to enforce them."
The states- according to the Constitution, don't get to make that call. If they think a law is unconstitutional, they can challenge it in court. They cannot prevent the enforcement of a law based upon an OPINION that it is unconstitutional.
Do we like the Constitution or not?
Do you know why some people find this whole debate humorous? It's not a superiority complex. It's not because they think they're better than anyone else. It's not because they like big government.
It's because this issue has been discussed time and time again and the answer as to whether this "let's arrest federal agents" idea is legal is so obvious even to people without any college degrees, if they put their wishes about what the law should be away and just looked at what the Constitution says.
There's a way to fight bad gun laws that is legal and proper...and not a complete and utter waste of time, money and a purely political stunt.
Let's do that.
...or elect people to federal government who won't pass bad gun laws....or enact a bumpstock ban. That would work too.
You misunderstand me, sir. I do not support passing laws "nullifying" federal laws or anything of the sort. I was merely pointing out that other entities do it and seem to get away with it. But then, that applies to a lot of things the leftists do.