I see so many stories coming out now about the ever increasing federal leviathans hopes of eliminating the Second Amendment. Crazy old Joe Biden even thinks the Second Amendment is about who can be prohibited from owning guns. And while Dimocrats and liberals say they don’t want to eliminate the Second Amendment, they just want to add background checks, and a few “common sense” restrictions, etc. etc., they are, well, lying.
Some do want to eliminate the Second Amendment, and I usually wonder “what it is that a Politician wants to do to me and my family that they can not do, unless we are disarmed and defenseless?” Of course many of those self same politicians will have armed body guards paid for out of our ever shrinking salary. Some will be do gooders, and really really really do believe in their hearts of hearts that if we just outlaw _____________________ A) scary black guns B) 30 round magazines C) rifles with pistol grips D) Guns with the shoulder thingy that goes up E) Fill in with whatever else they can come up with, that gun crime will cease and the world will now be a safe place, unicorns will roam freely and rainbow stew will be served fresh everyday with lightly buttered no calorie croissants. They also voted for obama because he was the best man for the job and believed him when he told them their health insurance would go down by $2,500 a year and they could keep their doctor and their insurance, but that’s another story.
You can see the legislative footprint if you will, of these types in things like the soviet style legislation like the turn in your family and neighbors you don’t like in California. Of course, California has a interesting history of showing up and confiscating guns (from safe people anyway, thugs not so much) already.
I, like they, have my idea of legislation that will keep us all safer too. Granted the direction of my legislative dreams is a bit different than their legislative dreams.
In my legislative dreams for some time, dwelt something called The Firearms Freedom Act. The first one was passed by Montana in 2009. It stated basically, that guns made in Montana, stamped on a large part of the central part of the gun “Made in Montana” would not be entered into the federal system of gun control. But, the gun could not leave the state. It couldn’t be sold over the internet or to someone out of the state. Therefore, they would not be interstate commerce. Wyoming came out with an even yummier version of this in 2010. Wyoming’s version had some pretty good sized teeth for federal agents that attempted to attack Wyoming citizens. Several states passed Firearms Freedom Acts, and several more tried to. This site hasn’t been updated since 2010, but you can see how many states were working on this. You can also see which ones weren’t, mostly the high crimes states.
I’m sure no one was shocked to know that a federal court ruled that the Firearms Freedom Acts didn’t matter.
“the Ninth Circuit panel unanimously ruled that Congress could regulate the internal manufacture of firearms within Montana because the creation and circulation of such firearms could reasonably be expected to impact the market for firearms nationally.”~~Wikipedia
I know, I know, I just said the firearms couldn’t leave Montana, that was part of the law. But it is the NINETH circuit court, and I always kind of wonder what they’ve been smoking. The guns weren’t going to cross state lines, but like the ATF, laws are what the courts make them to be, eh?
But it’s the toothy part that I’m heading for. The court says Firearms Freedom Acts aren’t legal? What to do as the government grows ever larger like the plant in Little Shop of Horrors, what to do?
Several states have responded by trying to pass a Second Amendment preservation act. In the last few days Arizona, Indiana and South Carolina have introduced bills in their state legislature. Missouri tried to pass one a couple years ago. The NRA helped squash that one, and gave Florida trouble trying to get theirs through as well. The Second Amendment preservation acts are really sort of anti-cooperation, anti-commandeering measure. For gun control to really succeed to it’s evil goal is going to require the use of each state’s law enforcement agencies. I still recall the ATF harassing the people at a Henrico Co. gunshow in 2006. It couldn’t have been done without the help of local law enforcement. Part of the BATFE’s “War on Women”, no doubt. And shoestrings.
Bob at Bearing Arms had some helpful suggestions along the lines of Firearms Freedoms Act type things that could be done to help the ATF as well. It involves removing some things from their jurisdiction so that perhaps with a narrower focus they won’t need to suffer the embarrassment of having their own weapons show up in Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman’s stash, cause I’m sure that’s just embarrassing. No word yet, from Erik Holder, El Chapo’s gun dealer.
This type of legislation says that the law enforcement agencies in that state will not co-operate with federal agencies. It dramatically weakens the bully power. Since I’ve seen quite a few stories lately where police chiefs and sheriffs are urging their citizens to obtain arms and concealed carry I suspect the law enforcement agencies in many states would be happy to see this pass.
For those that say Federal law trumps State law I found this great little Tom, Dick and Harry story. IF you are old enough to remember Tom, Dick and Harry, better yet, they’re grown up too.
So, while I may never get a firearm stamped with “Made in fill in your state name”,I continue to dream of Second Amendment protection acts being passed all across these United States. Because the soft fight is so much better than the hard fight. And despite what crazy old Joe Biden says, sometimes a girl just might NEED a tank, though this isn’t the model I hope for.
Just for a bit of levity.
Here’s a little booklet on the act if you want more information.