Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: WV Bill Proposes to Nullify Fed Gun Laws...

  1. #1

    Default WV Bill Proposes to Nullify Fed Gun Laws...

    http://www.wnd.com/2018/01/1-state-a...or-gun-rights/

    A West Virginia lawmaker has introduced a bill to the state House that would outlaw enforcement of current and future gun-control laws that violate the U.S. or state constitutions.

    House Bill 2138, introduced by Republican Del. Pat McGeehan, would effectively nullify all federal gun control within the state’s boundaries, according to a report from the Tenth Amendment Center. The bill would make any attempt to enforce such laws a felony.

    HB2138 reads:

    “All current and future federal, state, and local statutes, ordinances, laws, orders, rules, and any other actions which attempt to restrict, tax, or regulate the possession, use, discharge in lawful self-defense, transportation, purchase, acquisition, sale, transfer, ownership, carrying, manufacture, or repair of firearms, firearm accessories, ammunition and their accouterments contradict the true meaning and original intent of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Section twenty-two, Article III of the Constitution of the State of West Virginia. Those statutes, ordinances, laws, orders and rules which violate the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of West Virginia are invalid, and therefore, are null and void.”

    McGeehan’s bill is a page out of “Federalist #46,” where Madison laid out a strategy for nixing unpopular or unconstitutional federal programs. Among Madison’s remedies was “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union.” The West Virginia bill goes two steps further by offering legal assistance to state citizens targeted by federal agents enforcing unconstitutional gun laws, and by subjecting federal, state or local agents attempting to enforce federal gun laws to arrest, prosecution, jail and fines.

    While acknowledging the arrest and prosecution of federal agents for acting within the scope of their official duties is a non-starter – in such cases, federal statute automatically transfers such cases to federal court – non-cooperation can be an effective roadblock to federal action, as seen by California and many large Democrat cities declaring themselves sanctuaries for illegal aliens.

    The simple fact is the federal government depends on local cooperation for most enforcement of its laws. Without support and cooperation from the state, there are not enough federal agents to widely enforce federal law.

    “Partnerships don’t work too well when half the team quits,” Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center said. “By withdrawing all resources and participation in federal gun control, states can help bring these unconstitutional act to their much-needed end.”

    While the West Virginia bill mimics the sanctuary actions of California, the distinction is found in the Constitution. The West Virginia bill takes a literal position on the Second Amendment’s guarantee that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” In the case of California’s sanctuary-for-illegals policy, the state is usurping federal authority to regulate immigration, enumerated in the Constitution.

    “More conservative states should do the exact same thing,” said Boldin.

    HB2138 was submitted to the House Judiciary last week.
    Last edited by osan; 01-18-2018 at 07:20 AM.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    "So I guess we're going to have "heck week" from now on"
    -Master Chief, SEAL V, bitching about PC being foisted on the teams, as related by my little brother, some years back.





  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    I like the idea, but.. ( The bill would make any attempt to enforce such laws a felony.)..

    That seems..a little ambitious ?
    "The Patriarch"

  4. #3

    Default

    All weapons laws are illegal , including state laws .

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    I like the idea, but.. ( The bill would make any attempt to enforce such laws a felony.)..

    That seems..a little ambitious ?
    It sounds great.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It sounds great.
    I just don't like their chances of conviction in a federal court.
    "The Patriarch"

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    I just don't like their chances of conviction in a federal court.
    State law=A State court.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    State law=A State court.
    But doesn't the appeals chain ultimately lead to SCOTUS?
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    "So I guess we're going to have "heck week" from now on"
    -Master Chief, SEAL V, bitching about PC being foisted on the teams, as related by my little brother, some years back.



  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    But doesn't the appeals chain ultimately lead to SCOTUS?
    It does, but what if the state refuses to accept a federal ruling after locking the G-man up?
    It may seem far fetched but any state willing to pass this law is halfway there already.
    Also SCOTUS might just uphold the state law under the right circumstances.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It does, but what if the state refuses to accept a federal ruling after locking the G-man up?
    Good question. Point taken. Am I mistaken in my belief that this is, as yet, unprecedented?

    It may seem far fetched but any state willing to pass this law is halfway there already.
    Another good point. Besides, what can the feds do, refuse to give back the highway monies they stole from the people of the state?

    I guess my suspicion would be that the feds would at least attempt to take the governor by force on a federal warrant to charge him with some federal crime. Perhaps legislators and anyone down the food chain deemed complicit. That, of course, would be a very risky gambit, holding such people hostage in trade for fed agents. Where, pray tell, could that lead other than to ultimate disaster in terms of long term relations? In the end, the feds would have to back down for the sake of attrition because I am confident such a state would take very careful and effective measures to protect their own. Armed guards with standing orders to shoot to kill if a federal agent so much as approached a protectee in the wake of a standing disagreement of this sort. There are more of us than there are of them. In addition, a smart state would extend such authority to every man, woman, and child. If you see a fed attempting to take your mayor (or whatever) into custody, put one between their eyes and you will stand immune from prosecution.

    The bottom line is that such an approach by the feds would lead to their destruction.

    I cannot imagine them attempting to break the convict out by armed force... but then, I never expected them to go after Koresh with tanks, either, so...

    Also SCOTUS might just uphold the state law under the right circumstances.
    Extremely remote, IMO. To do so would be to knock the feds, of which the SCOTUS are part, down more pegs than either you or I have fingers, toes, and hairs to count. Think of it - they would essentially, if indirectly, be declaring to the nation that SCOTUS has no ultimate standing as per Marbury, once the supremacy of state statute over federal was established, especially when the statute in question references the state's constitution, which could then be interpreted to mean that such an instrument holds at least the same valence as the Constitution. I cannot envision any circumstance under which they would allow their power to simply wing away into the mists like that.

    OTOH, what in hell do I know?
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    "So I guess we're going to have "heck week" from now on"
    -Master Chief, SEAL V, bitching about PC being foisted on the teams, as related by my little brother, some years back.



  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Good question. Point taken. Am I mistaken in my belief that this is, as yet, unprecedented?
    It is as far as I know



    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Another good point. Besides, what can the feds do, refuse to give back the highway monies they stole from the people of the state?

    I guess my suspicion would be that the feds would at least attempt to take the governor by force on a federal warrant to charge him with some federal crime. Perhaps legislators and anyone down the food chain deemed complicit. That, of course, would be a very risky gambit, holding such people hostage in trade for fed agents. Where, pray tell, could that lead other than to ultimate disaster in terms of long term relations? In the end, the feds would have to back down for the sake of attrition because I am confident such a state would take very careful and effective measures to protect their own. Armed guards with standing orders to shoot to kill if a federal agent so much as approached a protectee in the wake of a standing disagreement of this sort. There are more of us than there are of them. In addition, a smart state would extend such authority to every man, woman, and child. If you see a fed attempting to take your mayor (or whatever) into custody, put one between their eyes and you will stand immune from prosecution.

    The bottom line is that such an approach by the feds would lead to their destruction.

    I cannot imagine them attempting to break the convict out by armed force... but then, I never expected them to go after Koresh with tanks, either, so...
    Either the feds would fold and lose all of their ability to intimidate the states and we would quickly see this spread to every state or there would be civil war.



    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Extremely remote, IMO. To do so would be to knock the feds, of which the SCOTUS are part, down more pegs than either you or I have fingers, toes, and hairs to count. Think of it - they would essentially, if indirectly, be declaring to the nation that SCOTUS has no ultimate standing as per Marbury, once the supremacy of state statute over federal was established, especially when the statute in question references the state's constitution, which could then be interpreted to mean that such an instrument holds at least the same valence as the Constitution. I cannot envision any circumstance under which they would allow their power to simply wing away into the mists like that.

    OTOH, what in hell do I know?
    Definitely a remote possibility but still possible because the 2nd amendment is part of the federal Constitution and they could rule that the state was acting under it's authority.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It is as far as I know





    Either the feds would fold and lose all of their ability to intimidate the states and we would quickly see this spread to every state or there would be civil war.





    Definitely a remote possibility but still possible because the 2nd amendment is part of the federal Constitution and they could rule that the state was acting under it's authority.

    The mind reels at the possibilities. WV could be at the tip of a very pointy spear. I cannot imagine this being enacted - I dare not hope. Oh who am I kidding... I hope, I hope, I hope...

    I now know what to wish for come my pending birthday on 2/1. WOOHOO...
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    "So I guess we're going to have "heck week" from now on"
    -Master Chief, SEAL V, bitching about PC being foisted on the teams, as related by my little brother, some years back.



  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Also SCOTUS might just uphold the state law under the right circumstances.


    Uncontrollable_laughing.GIF
    Last edited by TheTexan; 01-22-2018 at 02:12 AM.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Rand Paul (Vice Pres) 2016!!!!

  14. #13

    Default

    MT and TN have passed a law called the Firearms Freedom Act which prevents local and state officials from enforcing federal gun laws on firearms that are made in their respective states. The ATF immediately sent out a memo saying these new state laws were void because federal laws trumps.

    As far as I know there has been no success in getting teeth put in to these bills meaning they are essentially unenforceable at present.



    But Constitutional Carry is lower hanging fruit and is a good victory in and of itself.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst






Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-11-2015, 06:31 PM
  2. Missouri About To Nullify Federal Gun Laws?!?
    By Matt Collins in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-29-2013, 03:43 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-22-2011, 05:02 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-08-2011, 07:59 AM
  5. Will Michigan Nullify Federal Gun Laws?
    By BCR_9er in forum Second Amendment
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-18-2009, 03:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •