Wisconsin bill would bar police from enforcing any new Federal gun restrictions

[Little-Acorn]

It's about time the states started standing up and resisting Federla usurpation of their own authority.

Federal law trumps state law, of course...but only where the Fed govt has the authority to make those laws.

In the case of gun restrictions, the Feds clearly have no such authority. The 2nd amendment flatly bans any govt from banning or restricting people's personal weapons.

Wisconsin can't restrict people's weapons either. But they CAN make laws saying the Fed can't do it. And now they are.

Hey, Wisconsin! Nice job on "new federal gun restrictions"!

Now, how about the old ones, like the 1934 National Firearms Act and the 1968 Gun Control Act? Don't put your legislative pens away yet.....

----------------------------------

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/12/wis-bill-would-bar-police-from-enforcing-gun-bans/

Wisconsin bill would bar police from enforcing any new federal gun restrictions

Published June 12, 2013
Associated Press

MADISON, Wis. – Wisconsin police would be forbidden from enforcing any new federal gun and ammunition restrictions, bans or registration requirements under a bill a Republican lawmaker is circulating.

Rep. Michael Schraa of Oshkosh, a first-term legislator and a member of the National Rifle Association, sent out an email Tuesday to his fellow lawmakers seeking co-sponsors for the proposal. He also issued a statement to the media saying the bill is meant to send a message that Wisconsin won't help the federal government restrict the public's constitutional right to bear arms.

"I'm not this cowboy, gun-toting legislator," Schraa said in a telephone interview. "I just think it's ultimately important to protect our constitutional rights. When I raised my right hand on Jan. 7 and took the oath of office, I took an oath that I would defend the Wisconsin Constitution and the federal constitution. That's the motivating factor."

[BillyBob]

Any law that restricts a US citizen from owning and carrying a firearm is unConstitutional.

[logroller]

Any law that restricts a US citizen from owning and carrying a firearm is unConstitutional.
Excepting due process of course. For example, you don't believe convicted violent felons should still enjoy the right to bear arms, do you?

[red states rule]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT9FOXS3uhbq7zOWBVLI01iXQD6FSxNp eXiGSIdhgRmDAToEfqEqw

[Little-Acorn]

Excepting due process of course.

Of course. Says so right in the Constitution:

"A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except by due process of law."


For example, you don't believe convicted violent felons should still enjoy the right to bear arms, do you?

Is the law based on what I believe? Or on what the law itself says?

[fj1200]

Is the law based on what I believe? Or on what the law itself says?

It's buried in the 14th IIRC.

[Little-Acorn]

It's buried in the 14th IIRC.

The only way the 14th amendment has anything to do with the 2nd, is to say: "Whatever restrictions the 2nd amendment places on the Fed govt, must also apply to state and local governments too."

But the 2nd amendment was way ahead of th 14th-amendment folks. The 2nd ALREADY forbade both Federal AND state&local, from restricting people's right to keep and bear arms, equally. So the 14th changed nothing.

(Note that, in contrast to the 2nd, the 1st amendment initially restricted only the Fed govt ("Congress shall make no law..."), not state or local governments. In fact, when the BOR was first enacted, most states had official state religions, and the 1st was carefully crafted to not inferfere with that. The 14th amendment made the restrictions expressed in the 1st amendment, apply to state&local also.

[gabosaurus]

Federal laws supersede state laws.

[Little-Acorn]

Federal laws supersede state laws.

Only if the Fed govt has the constitutional authority to make that particular law.

In the case of gun control laws, they have no such authority.

(This has been pointed out to little gabby many times before on this forum. Without exception, she has vanished from the thread immediately after without replying, and remained absent for weeks. She reappears much later, apparently hoping no one remember she got her ass handed to her, and tries to make the same debunked claims yet again. It seems to be a chronic pattern with her.)

[Voted4Reagan]

Federal laws supersede state laws.

Not in regards to the Second Amendment.

You may wish to brush up on the Bill of Rights Gabby.

[aboutime]

Federal laws supersede state laws.


Keep telling yourself that, gabby. Do it often. And....thanks once more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

[jimnyc]

Federal law trumps state law, of course...but only where the Fed govt has the authority to make those laws.


Federal laws supersede state laws.


Only if the Fed govt has the constitutional authority to make that particular law.

In the case of gun control laws, they have no such authority.

(This has been pointed out to little gabby many times before on this forum. Without exception, she has vanished from the thread immediately after without replying, and remained absent for weeks. She reappears much later, apparently hoping no one remember she got her ass handed to her, and tries to make the same debunked claims yet again. It seems to be a chronic pattern with her.)

Mind you, if she spent about 3 seconds reading your OP, she would see that you already covered that.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Of course. Says so right in the Constitution:

"A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except by due process of law."



Is the law based on what I believe? Or on what the law itself says?

"A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except by due process of law. " and the enlightened brilliance of the coming teleprompter messiah and his cronies".. One should always read the microscopic fine print too. I read it under a microscope myself.. ;)--Tyr