View Single Post
Old October 10, 2013, 03:33 PM   #26
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXAZ
But no, Mr. Genius decides to start shooting rounds into the air, with others following his actions. He chose to do so in a neighborhood, not the open expanses of Central California.

I'm all for responsible ownership and use, had this happened in my neighborhood, I would have turned him in.
There is enough question as to who did what first that neither he, nor his teammate who also fired into the air is being charged with anything about that (so far). There were apparently gang members of some kind at the party who fired at the players providing enough self-defense justification that prosecutors are using their discretion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Ettin
Nope. That is a clear and direct attempt to regulate commerce (i. e., commercial activity). It has nothing to do with the possession by an individual of personal property for his own use.
Actually I think it was a clear and direct attempt to generate revenue off the backs of people with a "smaller" voice in state policy. The fact remains that licensing professionals Legal Dictionary is a police power. In this case licensing wholesalers and importers.

(And unfortunately here I need to go work, so I'm going to add the half a thought I had running in VERY broad strokes so I can come back to it when I return to free time and not lose what I've already got down so far...) So for my own notes Passenger cases, Chief Justice Taney,
Quote:
It is immaterial under what power duties on imports are imposed. That they are the principal means by which commerce is regulated no one can question.
A ban is a duty that cannot be paid. Look for case law that states, or supports that idea... And get more into the power to permit = power to deny, GCA, NFA, Title 18, The first F in FFL is Federal, The feds require a local business license, but don't infringe on 10A grounds there...


If the power to permit, and the power to deny are opposite sides of the same police power coin, then a case where police power allowing something not trumping the Congressional power denying that commerce should also suffice.

As states are legalizing medical, and now, recreational marijuana, the prohibition against the transfer of firearms in interstate commerce to those individuals who partake remains. In fact, as has been pointed out in this forum numerous times, a State's permission does not trump the Federal denial, as the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

Edit to add: Also revise and extend to include the Taking's clause.

Last edited by JimDandy; October 10, 2013 at 04:14 PM.
JimDandy is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04598 seconds with 7 queries