NC Bill Declares Federal Gun Control Invalid and not Enforceable.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    BBI, if may interject and offer what I think he's saying...

    If any hypothetical state was to remove all laws regarding SBS, SBR, suppressors, AOWs, DDs, whatever, and tell the fedgov, "Our sheriffs and police chiefs don't have time to waste on all your NFA papers. Our law now says that citizens may own any of these, unrestricted.", how would that differ from a state telling the fedgov, "We're done enforcing your marijuana laws, and you are not welcome to enforce them in our state, either. Our citizens may use that substance at their leisure."

    Personally, I think any state doing so would more than make up the loss in federal highway funding in sales taxes on twinkies, doritos, and ho-hos.

    It's not a question of what the law discussed in the OP is doing, it's a hypothetical comparison between two laws we'll never see.

    Pretty close, GFGT?

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    SSGSAD

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Dec 22, 2009
    12,404
    48
    Town of 900 miles
    So does this mean, that his X'O's are NOT enforceable .....The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,961
    113
    Mitchell
    H
    BBI, if may interject and offer what I think he's saying...

    If any hypothetical state was to remove all laws regarding SBS, SBR, suppressors, AOWs, DDs, whatever, and tell the fedgov, "Our sheriffs and police chiefs don't have time to waste on all your NFA papers. Our law now says that citizens may own any of these, unrestricted.", how would that differ from a state telling the fedgov, "We're done enforcing your marijuana laws, and you are not welcome to enforce them in our state, either. Our citizens may use that substance at their leisure."

    Personally, I think any state doing so would more than make up the loss in federal highway funding in sales taxes on twinkies, doritos, and ho-hos.

    It's not a question of what the law discussed in the OP is doing, it's a hypothetical comparison between two laws we'll never see.

    Pretty close, GFGT?

    Blessings,
    Bill

    Precisely.
     
    Top Bottom