|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 15, 2013, 02:34 PM | #76 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
It'd be hard to point to clearly violating the constitution as they basically define/interpret the constitution as an inherent job description. I'd be more interested in what the process is for removing them for bad behavior. It's never been done that I'm aware of, and I'm not sure there's even an aparatus in place.
|
January 15, 2013, 02:46 PM | #77 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
Quote:
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. |
|
January 15, 2013, 02:51 PM | #78 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
And according to Wikipedia, there have been 63 investigations for impeachment.
__________________
"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 |
||
January 15, 2013, 02:56 PM | #79 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2012
Posts: 389
|
Quote:
|
|
January 15, 2013, 02:57 PM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
Texas is second in line to propose a Firearms Protection Act
http://radio.woai.com/cc-common/main...ticle=10700507
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
January 15, 2013, 03:01 PM | #81 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
In any case, amendment of the Constitution is not the only recourse. Sometimes when the law as applied by a court doesn't achieve a satisfactory result, a legislature can change the law -- checks and balances at work. One fairly recent example that comes immediately to mind involves 18 USC 922(q), the federal Gun Free School Zone Act. The U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the law as originally enacted was unconstitutional (United States v. Alfonso Lopez, Jr., 514 U.S. 549 (1995)). Thereafter, Congress reenacted the law revised in a manner intended to overcome the objections of the Supreme Court. More recently there was the case of Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005). It was a ruling on a matter of eminent domain law (specifically involving the "takings" clause of the Fifth Amendment applied to the States through the 14th Amendment). The result was found to be unsatisfactory by many. As a consequence, the legislatures of 42 States revised those States' eminent domain laws to avoid a Kelo result.
__________________
"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 15, 2013 at 03:48 PM. Reason: correct typo |
|
January 15, 2013, 03:07 PM | #82 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
There are currently over 70 major RKBA cases brought by private litigants pending at various stages in various federal courts around the country. Many of these cases are part of an organized litigation strategy designed to begin to add clarity and dimension to the ruling in Heller and McDonald.
__________________
"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 |
|
January 15, 2013, 04:02 PM | #83 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2012
Posts: 389
|
An individual has a case under the Second Amendment, but what I am asking is - couldn't Wyoming defend any Wyoming citizen charged under some new federal AWB, under the 10th Amendment? Defend based on the claim that the complaint against the defendant violates State's Powers ?
|
January 15, 2013, 04:03 PM | #84 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,454
|
Quote:
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/...t_Hastings.htm
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; January 15, 2013 at 04:31 PM. |
|
January 15, 2013, 04:47 PM | #85 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,352
|
It appears that this bill is stalled at introduction. It hasn't been assigned to a commitee as of today.
I just wrote the Speaker of the Wyoming House, Represenative Lubnau, and pressed my suport for getting this bill moving. His email address is [email protected] if anyone else from Wyoming would like to rattle his chain a bit. BTW he is the rep for Wyoming House District 31 in Gillette.
__________________
Go Pokes! Go Rams! |
January 15, 2013, 04:53 PM | #86 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD |
|
January 15, 2013, 05:26 PM | #87 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Quote:
|
|
January 15, 2013, 05:35 PM | #88 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Oh, and no the Chief Justice doesn't preside over the impeachment. He presides over the trial on the articles of impeachment (the charges). |
|
January 17, 2013, 01:55 PM | #89 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2012
Posts: 389
|
Missouri is following suit
http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com...2nd-amendment/
Quote:
|
|
January 17, 2013, 02:01 PM | #90 |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
And the Missouri law will have no real effect, as already discussed in connection with Wyoming. It can have, however, some symbolic benefit.
__________________
"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 |
January 17, 2013, 03:00 PM | #91 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
IF
Barack Obama and John McCain(just to cover both parties as this is a theoretical/philosophical question, not party bashing) are arrested by the FBI and/or ATF on their way to a rifle range in Wyoming, for having 30 round magazines.... And IF Wyoming had their own laws on the books that said possessing these 30 round magazines was a misdemeanor punshable by 5 seconds of community service... OR alternately demand such a standard of proof in their state courts that noone could ever be found guilty.. THEN Couldn't the state of Wyoming demand they be tried in a Wyoming state court as it was their jurisdiction, double jeopardy attaches, end result slap on the wrist obviously aimed at nullifying Federal Law? |
January 17, 2013, 03:10 PM | #92 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,184
|
JimDandy,
The state and feds our separate sovereigns and each may prosecute without violating double jeopardy. |
January 17, 2013, 03:23 PM | #93 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Really? That logic would imply that if Mother Theresa were to succumb to road rage and plow right over the top of Yitshak Rabin on I-90 in the Seattle City limits, Seattle/WA could try her, and if they failed, the Feds could then try her as it was a federal road?!
|
January 17, 2013, 04:14 PM | #94 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Jim, both the State and the Feds could try her at the same time. Theoretically. But... (just using your supposed lawbreaker) Have you really ever seen anyone try to prosecute a ghost?
|
January 17, 2013, 04:37 PM | #95 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Yeah I picked ridiculous names on purpose.
|
January 17, 2013, 05:31 PM | #96 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 28, 2011
Location: Alaska
Posts: 206
|
I guess we need to add Alaska to the list:
http://www.adn.com/2013/01/16/275538...ce-arrest.html While these, as discussed, are really symbolic gestures, it is nice to see the states putting forth some effort.
__________________
The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. -James Burgh |
January 17, 2013, 05:32 PM | #97 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 21, 2008
Location: Back in Wyoming
Posts: 1,125
|
I like the idea and am not going to get wrapped up in it with Mr. Ettin... Who has proven himself genuinely worthy of the title "Lawyer" in my book.
__________________
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results |
January 17, 2013, 05:37 PM | #98 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
When discussing someone's field that has an immediate and profound affect on your continued living or quality of life, you don't have to like him, but you better damn well listen to him. And don't look a gift horse in the mouth either. You're getting free legal advice. But like everything else you get what you pay for too.
He's not saying it's not great, he's saying don't take this to mean you go strolling down mainstreet in Cheyenne with Ma Duece and a LAWS rocket. Its a black eye, not an amputation. |
January 17, 2013, 06:52 PM | #99 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,315
|
Thanks guys
Allow me to say I have seen people serve state time and federal time for the same crimes.
I'd like to take the opportunity to thank our professionals for offering advice. I find their words calming, and an anchor to reality. |
January 17, 2013, 07:58 PM | #100 |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Jim,
Let me just confirm that vranasaurus and Al Norris are correct about double jeopardy. One can be tried both for a state criminal charge and a federal criminal charge without violation double jeopardy, even if each charge is based on the same facts. You might remember the Rodney King incident in the early 1990s. The four police officers who were involved in his beating were charged under state law with various "excessive force" crimes, tried in state court and acquitted (well, one drew a hung jury as to one charge). They were subsequently tired in federal court on federal charges involving the same incident and facts, and two of the officers were convicted and sent to federal prison.
__________________
"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 |
|
|