Kansas gun bill

[Nick1911]

Okay, so I interjected this in another thread, but thought I should have a proper one here to discuss it.

Kansas just passed this into law:
http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14/measures/documents/sb102_enrolled.pdf

Eric Holder isn't happy, and in response to his angry letter, our governor told him to pound sand:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/15293-kansas-governor-to-ag-holder-we-will-continue-to-defend-2nd-amendment

Among other things, this bill did an end run around registering suppressors as NFA weapons with the feds if they aren't going to leave the state.

So, where do you expect this to go?  What impact does this have on the relationship between the feds and the states, and what impact does or will this have on the greater gun rights conflict going on right now?

Personally, I expect this to get shot down hard; but the feds didn't shoot down legalized pot [yet], so who knows? 

[Tallpine]

We just need 26 states to tell the feds to shove it 

[AZRedhawk44]

Don't worry... John Roberts knows how to read the Constitution on this issue.

[charby]

I do have to admit I like how gun control and Obamacare have turned into a pissing match between the current administration and many of the states.

[Nick1911]

I do have to admit I like how gun control and Obamacare have turned into a pissing match between the current administration and many of the states.

Legalized pot too, although the current administration seems to be generally okay with that one.

[roo_ster]

Legalized pot too, although the current administration seems to be generally okay with that one.

Huh, what?

IIRC, BHO has prosecuted the WoSD more vigorously then GWB.

[drewtam]

I do have to admit I like how gun control and Obamacare have turned into a pissing match between the current administration and many of the states.

It warms the cockles of the libertarians.

[HankB]

IIRC, one of the states - Montana? - passed a law exempting firearms that don't cross the state line from Federal gun control laws. Has there been a test case yet?

Hmmm . . . here's a question for our legal eagles: what if a state declared that all US citizens with established residency in that state were members of the State Militia and were expected to be armed, with a list of acceptable firearms that mirrored (for example) Feinstein's new AW ban proposals? Exactly how would the Feds go about subverting something that was such a "pure" exercise of the Second Amendment?

[41magsnub]

IIRC, one of the states - Montana? - passed a law exempting firearms that don't cross the state line from Federal gun control laws. Has there been a test case yet?

This is still in the courts.

[Tallpine]

Huh, what?

IIRC, BHO has prosecuted the WoSD more vigorously then GWB.

This.   

Not only has The One offended all our allies and rammed mandatory health insurance down our throats, He has out puritaned the Puritan Prohibitionists   

[SteveS]

Hmmm . . . here's a question for our legal eagles: what if a state declared that all US citizens with established residency in that state were members of the State Militia and were expected to be armed, with a list of acceptable firearms that mirrored (for example) Feinstein's new AW ban proposals? Exactly how would the Feds go about subverting something that was such a "pure" exercise of the Second Amendment?

Interesting.  I don't think the feds could subvert that approach.  IIRC, even the Heller and McDonald dissents said that state militias had the right to KABA.  I would love to see a state do this.

[Nick1911]

Huh, what?

IIRC, BHO has prosecuted the WoSD more vigorously then GWB.

Oh?  Apparently I have some research to do.  I was unaware that the feds had actually done much with respect to Colorado and Washington's legalization laws.

[RoadKingLarry]

I do have to admit I like how gun control and Obamacare have turned into a pissing match between the current administration and many of the states.

political posturing and chest pounding to appease the masses. Much sound and fury signifying nothing.

[charby]

political posturing and chest pounding to appease the masses. Much sound and fury signifying nothing.

Pretty much, makes for great entertainment watching the reactions of both sides.

[Tallpine]

Oh?  Apparently I have some research to do.  I was unaware that the feds had actually done much with respect to Colorado and Washington's legalization laws.

You are unaware of how they slammed down hard on the Montana medical MJ providers        

Ten years in prison for growing and selling weed legally under state law, but of course if you rob or rape someone you get off with a couple years suspended 

[MicroBalrog]

If they really wanted to make a statement, they'd just make a law prohibiting KS cops  - over whom the Feds have no authority - from helping Federal LEOs on these issues.

There's only, what, 5000 BATFE agents in the whole country? They can't run after every illegal suppressor owner.

The way it's written it's designed to get smacked down.

[erictank]

You are unaware of how they slammed down hard on the Montana medical MJ providers        

Ten years in prison for growing and selling weed legally under state law, but of course if you rob or rape someone you get off with a couple years suspended 

Well, you've gotta have your priorities straight, right? 

[Nick1911]

You are unaware of how they slammed down hard on the Montana medical MJ providers        

Yea, actually.  I'll admit that I haven't really followed the medical marijuana movement; my attention has been on the gun stuff.  I suppose it shouldn't come as a surprise that this administration cracked down on those hardcore criminals gardeners.

On the Kansas law; I'm inclined to agree after some thought - this is pandering.  It will mean nothing, because the feds are NOT going to let go of their use of "interstate commerce" to regulate things that are neither moving interstate, or in commerce.

[Hutch]

On the Kansas law; I'm inclined to agree after some thought - this is pandering.  It will mean nothing, because the feds are NOT going to let go of their use of "interstate commerce" to regulate things that are neither moving interstate, or in commerce.

Still, it makes me want adopt 'em as honorary Southerners.

[freakazoid]

You are unaware of how they slammed down hard on the Montana medical MJ providers        

Ten years in prison for growing and selling weed legally under state law, but of course if you rob or rape someone you get off with a couple years suspended 

The movement seems to be going all right in California.

On the Kansas law; I'm inclined to agree after some thought - this is pandering.  It will mean nothing, because the feds are NOT going to let go of their use of "interstate commerce" to regulate things that are neither moving interstate, or in commerce.

We just need a massive amount of people to do it and then a test case. 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

You are unaware of how they slammed down hard on the Montana medical MJ providers       

Ten years in prison for growing and selling weed legally under state law, but of course if you rob or rape someone you get off with a couple years suspended 

you overlook the 600  pound ape.
they aren't allowing the dealer/growers to deduct the normal costs of doing biz. are holding them liable for taxes on gross receipts.
thats real leverage

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

The movement seems to be going all right in California.

you are joking right?


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

[HankB]

If they really wanted to make a statement, they'd just make a law prohibiting KS cops  - over whom the Feds have no authority - from helping Federal LEOs on these issues . . .

Isn't that already the case? Didn't the Obama administration make it clear that they considered it illegal for state/local LEOs to enforce Federal laws when they went after Arizona on the illegal immigration issue?

[SteveS]

Isn't that already the case? Didn't the Obama administration make it clear that they considered it illegal for state/local LEOs to enforce Federal laws when they went after Arizona on the illegal immigration issue?

I think he is saying that they should just refuse to provide any kind of aid to federal law enforcement.  Most states don't allow local or state police to enforce federal laws, but still provide some kind of support.

[Tallpine]

The movement seems to be going all right in California.

It was going all right in Montana for some years.

Then the feds raided every provider operation in the state at the same time.