View Single Post
Old January 13, 2013, 01:45 PM   #39
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabama Shooter
...The case cited was about medical MJ. Medical MJ is no longer being pursued....
Users are apparently not currently being prosecuted for their use. However, Reich was decided in 2005, and the various articles I linked to in post 34 relate to federal law enforcement actions against medical marijuana dispensaries and a farm during the period June, 2012 to September, 2012.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven1776
...You seem to know all there is about Constitutional law...
No, I don't know all there is about constitutional law, but this is all real basic stuff. In any case, I sure seem to know a good deal more about the constitutional law, and law in general, than you do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven1776
...I do not have the time today to look up these cases...
Then you can hardly expect anyone to take you seriously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven1776
...You have a serious misconception! If you think that what you see today, not only from the State but the people as well will not effect what happens in congress or the supreme court,...
And it looks like you didn't read post 18:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Ettin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Norris
...All of these State laws are aimed at restricting the reach of Raich, in that the regulation of interstate commerce has gone too far when it explicitly interferes with a States police power...
Al, I agree, and symbolically these laws contain a powerful political message.

But legally, the only way the reach of Raich can be restricted is by the federal courts or by federal statutes limiting their preemptive effect. In effect either the federal courts will need to find bases upon which to retreat from their expansive application of the Commerce Clause, or Congress will need to decide that excessive encroachment on state prerogatives is bad public policy.

And of course there are tradeoffs, and we in the gun community have our own ambivalence. On one hand we complain about the expansion of the Commerce Clause and applaud state laws like this one in Wyoming purporting to restrict that expansion. On the other hand, in other contexts we rail at the confusion created by a hodgepodge of state gun laws.

And of course the 10th Amendment tension goes far beyond firearm laws. Do we want to see "states' rights" again surface as a justification for discrimination against blacks, Asians, Jews, or guys named Al or Frank?
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper

Last edited by Frank Ettin; January 13, 2013 at 02:26 PM. Reason: correct typo
Frank Ettin is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04960 seconds with 7 queries