Tweet
Information on fighting unconstitutional regulations.
-
-
Oh, the Irony...
Are increased age restrictions next?Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker signed the new rule Tuesday morning. This is notable considering the fact that the Obama administration did not believe that federal law allowed it to ban bump stocks.
-
Terrible. The first push down the slippery slope. Its sad that "we" are so scared and worried the democrats are going to ban stuff, that "we" don't even seem to notice or care if a republican does it? Maybe I'm wrong. Seems like a perfect example that Donkeys and Elephants aren't really that different.Last edited by Keef; 12-19-2018, 06:06 PM.Comment
-
On other sites people are talking about this regulation being ruled on by the Supreme court.
A ruling that the ban is unconstitutional would be locked into legal precedent and prevent future bans.
This may be smarter than it looks.
Tactics.
May be why Obama didn't try it.Comment
-
Maybe. What's the time frame for finding out? and what if it's found constitutional? Interesting idea!Comment
-
Exactly my concern. They've found even more egregiously unconstitutional laws to be constitutional in the past.Originally posted by Keef View PostComment
-
What is the point in passing a law that the people will not comply with?Comment
-
That seems especially true of this POTUS, who for many years was a registered Democrat, and is on the record as supporting the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.Originally posted by Keef View Post
I'd have to say anyone who actually believes that is suffering from denial and/or wishful thinking.Originally posted by bj139 View Post
There are already legal precedents which indicate this ban is unlikely to be ruled unconstitutional.
Suggested reading: https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/d...lt-weapon-bans
It allows the Administration to proudly proclaim they have "done something" about mass shootings.Originally posted by Drift View Post
"The President once again fulfilling a promise he made to the American people..."
Last edited by stanc; 12-20-2018, 03:48 PM.Comment
-
I hadn't considered this might all be nuance and erudition. Interesting premise.Comment
-
-
It's obvious, both sides (Repub & Dems) are both actively working to disarm the populace. Dems are outright attacking any point they can. Repubs are white washing it as "Compromise" when they do it.
Somebody please tell me when the last time a firearm "Ban" of any sort was repealed by the next set of lofty seats when there was a political shift in power (D to R).Sticks
Catchy sig line here.
Comment
-
The closest we saw was not extending the 94 Clinton Ban when the sunset date came and went.Originally posted by Sticks View Post
oddly enough, i bought my first AR and AK47 during the ban. The AR is long gone, horrible Olympic Arms, but i still have my Arsenal SAM7. It's one of the few guns i've bought that has increased in value.Comment
-
Since Colt AR rifles and parts were the only game in town, it could take months to receive the extremely high priced parts. We were thankful when more and more less expensive Olympic rifles and parts became available. The other advantage with Olympic AR rifles and parts was you got to know your AR rifle intimately, diagnosing and fixing all the problems.Originally posted by jaybee1669 View PostComment
-
Remember, Trump is disliked by most of the employees of the Federal agencies.
This is the so called "shadow government" working against Trump's effort to drain the swamp.
Trump is not your typical Republican or RHINO for sure.
The video points out that the ATF cannot create law which is what they are doing.
When this is overturned Trump will just say, "Oops, I guess I don't have the authority to do this under the Constitution" and it will then be clear.
Maybe I am too trusting of a political outsider. I am definitely not trusting of any political insiders.Comment
Comment