The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 13, 2013, 08:51 PM   #1
17ghk
Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2007
Location: austintown, ohio
Posts: 45
Ohio joins Texas and others

Yea baby lets here it for Ohio. show your support

http://ohio.tenthamendmentcenter.com...potential-ban/
__________________
HOCKEY ABOVE ALL
17ghk is offline  
Old February 13, 2013, 09:14 PM   #2
Rebel
Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Location: West Chester, Ohio
Posts: 28
Thank you for bringing this bill to the forum here.

I emailed the bills sponsor and co-sponsor to personally thank them for introducing SB36 to protect our second amendment rights!

Buckeyes please take the 5 minutes to send an email to our elected officials to express the support of this bill!

Thank you and God bless.
Rebel is offline  
Old February 13, 2013, 09:23 PM   #3
Dwight55
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 18, 2004
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 2,559
Thanks 17ghk, . . . I never heard about it from any of the usual sources.

We are in for a fight though, . . . gotta keep the pressure on.

May God bless,
Dwight
__________________
www.dwightsgunleather.com
If you can breathe, . . . thank God!
If you can read, . . . thank a teacher!
If you are reading this in English, . . . thank a Veteran!
Dwight55 is offline  
Old February 13, 2013, 10:26 PM   #4
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,516
You realize these state laws have zero effect on FEDERAL law, right?
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old February 13, 2013, 11:21 PM   #5
Ghost1958
Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2012
Posts: 86
How so? Ky waited but now finally introduced a bill based on the fact that some other bill about guns they were going to pass might hinder federal enforcement in the state. Of course now thats not a concern since its what they want to do.

As far as I know unless power is specifically given to the Feds by the Constitution which 2A isnt then it is reserved to the states or the people.
Ghost1958 is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 01:38 AM   #6
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,788
Quote:
You realize these state laws have zero effect on FEDERAL law, right?
If the law has teeth and is enforced it will. Federal agents do not have immunity from state and local laws. I gather there isn't much support in Columbus.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 07:40 AM   #7
Ben Towe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 6, 2009
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 1,120
Quote:
You realize these state laws have zero effect on FEDERAL law, right?
Handcuffs work on federal agents just as well as on anyone else. If the law is enforced it will work. Not many people will risk going to prison for life over a job.
__________________
'Merica: Back to back World War Champs
Ben Towe is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 07:48 AM   #8
UtahHunting
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 26, 2009
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 424
Didn't Ohio just introduce a bill to ban all magazines 10 rounds and over?
UtahHunting is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 08:01 AM   #9
HeathH
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by UtahHunting View Post
Didn't Ohio just introduce a bill to ban all magazines 10 rounds and over?
Yes, but S.B. 18 (assault weapon bill) has very little chance from what I have been hearing back from my senator.
HeathH is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 08:05 AM   #10
KMAX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,062
Bravo! The states need to stand up and protect the rights that are rightfully theirs and not let the federal government trample on them. After all it is the United STATES of America and not Obamaland. Most of the power was intended to remain with the state governments with the federal government having a few limited powers rather than the massive power grab that the Feds continually pursue.
__________________
This is my gun. There are many like her, but this one is mine.

I'm not old. I'm CLASSIC!
KMAX is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 09:29 AM   #11
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,435
Quote:
You realize these state laws have zero effect on FEDERAL law, right?
Maybe so - maybe not.
A passage of state laws would send a clear message to a senator of exactly how the people of his/her state really thought.
In this case, both of the Ohio senators are on board with more federal gun control and will work to see it passed.

If "we the people" of Ohio say we don't want it, then they should back off.
Hal is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 11:42 AM   #12
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,516
Didn't anyone pay attention in history class?

Quote:
Ghost1958 How so?
Ever hear of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

Quote:
johnwilliamson062 ..... Federal agents do not have immunity from state and local laws.
See above.
When in performance of their official duties they do.


Quote:
KMAX Bravo! The states need to stand up and protect the rights that are rightfully theirs and not let the federal government trample on them. After all it is the United STATES of America and not Obamaland. Most of the power was intended to remain with the state governments with the federal government having a few limited powers rather than the massive power grab that the Feds continually pursue.
Read your own country's Constitution.....this has nothing to do with Obama.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 02:14 PM   #13
17ghk
Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2007
Location: austintown, ohio
Posts: 45
I have called and emailed many senators and they are keeping tabs on either for or against. Keep it up guys this is it
__________________
HOCKEY ABOVE ALL
17ghk is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 01:46 AM   #14
KMAX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,062
Quote:
The Supremacy Clause only applies if Congress is acting in pursuit of its constitutionally authorized powers. Federal laws are valid and are supreme, so long as those laws were adopted in pursuance of—that is, consistent with—the Constitution.
KEY POINT ^^^

Quote:
The Supreme Court has rejected nullification, finding that under Article III of the Constitution, the power to declare federal laws unconstitutional has been delegated to the federal courts and that states do not have the authority to nullify federal law.
This is where the real fight will be, but first the challenge must be made.

Quote:
Read your own country's Constitution.....
I keep a copy of it on my dresser for almost daily perusal. Where do you keep your most available copy?

BTW, Obama is the figurehead for the anti movement. Everything bad is his fault because he is the current President. When or if he leaves office everything bad will be the fault of the next President. That is the way it seems to work in this nation.
__________________
This is my gun. There are many like her, but this one is mine.

I'm not old. I'm CLASSIC!

Last edited by KMAX; February 15, 2013 at 01:57 AM.
KMAX is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 11:25 AM   #15
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,516
Quote:
KMAX
Quote:
Quote:
The Supremacy Clause only applies if Congress is acting in pursuit of its constitutionally authorized powers. Federal laws are valid and are supreme, so long as those laws were adopted in pursuance of—that is, consistent with—the Constitution.
KEY POINT ^^^
Thank you for agreeing with me.
Until the USSC rules differently, these state firearm freedom laws carry no weight.



Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The Supreme Court has rejected nullification, finding that under Article III of the Constitution, the power to declare federal laws unconstitutional has been delegated to the federal courts and that states do not have the authority to nullify federal law.
This is where the real fight will be, but first the challenge must be made.
What challenge?
The US Supreme Court has been there, done that.(and did so loooong ago)

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Read your own country's Constitution.....
I keep a copy of it on my dresser for almost daily perusal. Where do you keep your most available copy?
In my bookcase.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 12:21 PM   #16
KMAX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,062
Tom, Perhaps I misunderstand, but it seems to me that you are good with the federal government's continual power grab. If so, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I personally feel the federal government over reaches it authority way too often and that it should be watched diligently. This is why I feel federal enforcement of constitutionally questionable laws should always be challenged. End of discussion for me. Thank you.
__________________
This is my gun. There are many like her, but this one is mine.

I'm not old. I'm CLASSIC!
KMAX is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 07:59 PM   #17
17ghk
Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2007
Location: austintown, ohio
Posts: 45
Make sure to contact these boobs and tell them to stick there gun grabbing laws. here is one SB 18 awb. I called the senators that sponsored this bill and told them that we all don't want there inner city politics in the rest of the state. One told me that guns already owned are grandfathered in and not affected only future sales banned. Thats not what I see anyway. Oh boy they must think we are all as stupid as those inner city flunkies they represent.

Here is the link

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/b...m?ID=130_SB_18
__________________
HOCKEY ABOVE ALL
17ghk is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 11:20 PM   #18
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,516
Quote:
KMAX Tom, Perhaps I misunderstand, but it seems to me that you are good with the federal government's continual power grab.
Correct, you DO misunderstand.
The point I am making is that these state firearm freedom laws are MEANINGLESS. They are simply political pandering with no value other than symbolic chest beating.

Would you be as excited if you state legislature passed a law saying "we absolutely refuse to enforce federal immigration law".......Before you answer realize that states DON"T enforce federal immigration laws.......the FEDS do.

The "power grab" BTW occured DECADES ago, this is nothing new.


Quote:
..... I personally feel the federal government over reaches it authority way too often and that it should be watched diligently. This is why I feel federal enforcement of constitutionally questionable laws should always be challenged....
Don't like a FEDERAL law.....you change it via FEDERAL court or Congressional action. Getting excited by a state passing a hot air balloon is a waste of time.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 12:26 AM   #19
Rebel
Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Location: West Chester, Ohio
Posts: 28
@dogtown tom

I respect your opinion and understand your view point but i would just like to add something to the debate. It's a fact that a movement/stand can gain momentum and support when states stand up for the will(rights) of its people which can and will influence the debate. I believe if more states took a stand to the federal governments over reach of power then the people in Washington would be changed for the better.

This reason alone is while I would support what what you regard as "meaningless". Legally you may be right but that is something that I believe will have to play out in the courts.

If states have the "right" to ban pretty much any semi-automatic gun then why would they not have the right to pass laws that would refute such a ban. I don't claim to be a legal expert by any means but to me it's something that should be pursued along with many other efforts

I just don't think it's right to dismiss a states ability(not matter what the issue is) to at least try to have some sort of sovereignty with in these United States.
Rebel is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 09:13 AM   #20
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,435
Quote:
The point I am making is that these state firearm freedom laws are MEANINGLESS. They are simply political pandering with no value other than symbolic chest beating.
I can't agree at all with that.

Laws passed on the state level show our elected ones in DC how the voters really feel.
Sen. Sherrod Brown is going to vote for more federal gun control.
Sen. Robert “Rob” Portman has said he's open to the gun control issue.

All the letters in the world aren't going to change Brown's stance.

Letters may sway Portman - but - one of those, as you call them, MEANINGLESS laws would send a clear message that we mean business & he better not get too comfortable in his DC office.
Hal is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 02:54 PM   #21
Kevin Rohrer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2010
Location: Medina, Ohio
Posts: 507
Not a Useless Law

That Ohio law, if passed, would not be useless chest-beating.

Currently in Ohio, during a divorce, if one side wants to make-up a story about abuse from her/his spouse, the local Domestic Relations Court can and routinely DOES order the Sheriff to (temporarily) impound the accusee's deadly weapons (guns, bows, swords, etc) until the divorce is final. The accusee need not to *ever* have even been suspected of a crime. This is a clear 2A violation, but the liberal courts and prosecutors allow it to happen. SB36 would prevent this unless written in such a way as to allow the unConstitutional seizure.
__________________
Member: Orange Gunsite Family, NRA--Life, Varmint Hunters' Assn., ARTCA, American Legion, & South Cuyahoga Sportsmen's Assn.

"Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery...all else is twaddle!" --Admiral Sir John Fisher, RN
Kevin Rohrer is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11587 seconds with 9 queries