View Single Post
Old October 11, 2013, 12:39 AM   #31
Junior Member
Join Date: July 13, 2013
Posts: 6
On the automobile emissions law id think that we have to remember that the federal government explicitly granted the state of CA the authority to regulate emissions on its own. other states can sign on to CA’s higher system or to the base model federal but can not create their own systems. difference here with firearms is there is a constitutional amendment, and then there is a regulatory scheme that defines dangerous and unusual, the regulatory tax stamp system for states to regulate or ban it and courts have accepted/created in common use definition… then looking at the various laws GCA, NFA etc, unlike the clean air act the feds didn’t carve out and grants states extra authority to create new classes of weapons beyond dangerous and unusual and in common use. they gave them the authority to regulate NFA tax stamp weapons… dangerous and unusual like SBR’s, Full auto, cannons etc. since semi automatic or the mechanically identical sporting rifles most likely meet the in common use criteria, the states trying to regulate it via creating some new classification that lack mechanical differences and instead are trying to regulate cosmetics are walking a thin line.
with cars its its not a right its just comers with firearms the right exist, there is something defining a low water mark…. the federal nfa and tax stamps for dangerous an unusual anything below the low water mark the states can choose to allow or deny on the grounds of granting a stamp or not but the high water mark is in common use. if a state tries to lower the bar on the in common use or not dangerous and unusual it seems they are trying to infringe. commerce or not it is the only innate object that is protected in some way shape pr form but its still being hashed out.

Don’t get me wrong I’m not trying to insert myself as an expert like some of the above posts but aren’t most federal firearms laws claiming authority via the taxing power (NFA) and also over commerce (NFA & GCA) of those….. anyways after reading above I’m still a little fuzzy and probably missed it.

Since the rifle was purchased and not home manufactured it appears commerce and in this interstate commerce was engaged in….. doesn’t it…. just asking.

Last edited by ddestruel; October 11, 2013 at 09:41 AM.
ddestruel is offline  
Page generated in 0.03461 seconds with 7 queries