View Single Post
Old October 11, 2013, 01:00 AM   #34
Frank Ettin
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 8,750
Originally Posted by ddestruel
...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.
Well so far three lawyers have explained in various ways the this is not a Commerce Clause issue. And I seriously doubt that Smith's lawyer will raise the Commerce Clause.

In any case, Smith bought the rifle (apparently legally) in Arizona. He merely took it to California as his property. That is not "commerce." See post 14 for a definition of "commerce."
"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
Frank Ettin is offline  
Page generated in 0.06850 seconds with 7 queries