Author Topic: Alabama..  (Read 14825 times)

santahog

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Alabama..
« on: April 30, 2013, 10:50:10 PM »
A surprise from the AL Senate today!!

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/04/alabama-senate-votes-to-nullify-all-federal-gun-control-measures-24-6/


Alabama Senate votes to Nullify All Federal Gun Control Measures, 24-6


MONTGOMERY, Ala. (April 30, 2013) – A bill to nullify all federal gun control measures passed by a wide margin in the Alabama Senate today.   The vote was 24-6 (roll call here)

Senate Bill 93 (SB93) declares that “All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, or regulations regarding firearms are a violation of the Second Amendment,”  and therefore, “are invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, are specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.”

If passed into law, the immediate effect would be that no state or local agent, employee, or asset would be authorized for us in the enforcement (or assistance in the enforcement) of any federal gun control measures – past, present, or future.

Bill Sponsor Senator Paul Sanford affirmed as much during debate on the bill.  He said, ”They’re not going to use our law enforcement officials to enforce their law that is unconstitutional.”

This would make a HUGE dent in any federal effort to further restrict the right to keep and bear arms in Alabama – and would be a big step forward for gun rights supporters there. As Judge Andrew Napolitano has said recently, such widespread noncompliance can make a federal law “nearly impossible to enforce” (video here).   And in those limited situations where enforcement does occur, Rosa Parks has taught us all the power of “NO!”  Passage of SB93 would mark the beginning of the end of federal gun control in Alabama.

When challenged on the Constitution’s supremacy clause, Sanford held his ground, ”If it’s unconstitutional then the supremacy clause never comes into effect.” 

The so-called “supremacy clause” of the Constitution says that federal laws made “in pursuance” of the Constitution are supreme:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.  (emphasis added)

There is absolutely ZERO serious dispute about the fact that the federal government cannot “commandeer” the states to carry out its laws.  None. Even the Supreme Court has affirmed this multiple times.

In the 1992 case, New York v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress couldn’t require states to enact specified waste disposal regulations.

In the 1997 case, Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not command state law enforcement authorities to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers.

In the 2012 case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court ruled that a significant expansion of Medicaid was not a valid exercise of Congress’s spending power, as it would coerce states to either accept the expansion or risk losing existing Medicaid funding.

In each of these cases, the Supreme Court made is quite clear that their opinion is that the federal government cannot require the states to act, or even coerce them to act through a threat to lose funding.  Their opinion is correct.  If the feds pass a law, they can sure try to enforce it if they want.  But the states absolutely do NOT have to help them in any way.

In case the full state and local noncompliance doesn’t work as intended, SB93 includes a mechanism to take additional steps in the future.  It reads, “The Legislature shall adopt and enact any and all measures as may be necessary to prevent the enforcement of any federal acts, laws, orders, rules, or regulations in violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

The path such measures could take will only be determined over time – and through the representatives of the People of Alabama.
With friends like these, who needs hallucinations!..

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2013, 03:00:24 PM »
"Senate Bill 93 (SB93) declares that “All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, or regulations regarding firearms are a violation of the Second Amendment,”  and therefore, “are invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, are specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.”

If passed into law, the immediate effect would be that no state or local agent, employee, or asset would be authorized for us in the enforcement (or assistance in the enforcement) of any federal gun control measures – past, present, or future."

Any questions ?   ;D


twyacht

  • "Cogito, ergo armatum sum."
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10419
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2013, 05:27:12 PM »


Yup,.....

Good For Alabama!!!!
Thomas Jefferson: The strongest reason for the people to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against the tyranny of government. That is why our masters in Washington are so anxious to disarm us. They are not afraid of criminals. They are afraid of a populace which cannot be subdued by tyrants."
Col. Jeff Cooper.

Pathfinder

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6450
  • DRTV Ranger -- NRA Life Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2013, 06:31:52 PM »
What would happen realistically in a SHTF scenario where the feds wanted to go into Alabama is they would move in - in force - arrest the po-po, and then go do what they wanted to. By the time the governor got the National Guard mobilized and on the scene, the feds would be gone with what they wanted, or would have a reinforced enclave.

Do not under-estimate your enemy people, they are mean, venal, nasty and stupid - but not that stupid!

And that's assuming the feds don't take over the NG armories and command staff too. They're still federalized ain't they?
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do this to others and I require the same from them"

J.B. Books

Solus

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8666
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2013, 07:32:37 PM »
What would happen realistically in a SHTF scenario where the feds wanted to go into Alabama is they would move in - in force - arrest the po-po, and then go do what they wanted to. By the time the governor got the National Guard mobilized and on the scene, the feds would be gone with what they wanted, or would have a reinforced enclave.

Do not under-estimate your enemy people, they are mean, venal, nasty and stupid - but not that stupid!

And that's assuming the feds don't take over the NG armories and command staff too. They're still federalized ain't they?

Well, I tell ya what.

If it comes down to the feds coming in like that, having the State Police, Local Police, Sheriffs all on The People's side will make it quite a fight.  

If passed the next thing I would do if I were Governor, is activate a State Militia with EVERYONE physically able in it.

I can't imagine even this administration thinking they could "make an example" of Alabama and have anything but a couple of states not succeed.  

Use cell phone or tornado warning horns in case the cell towers are shut down, to spread the alert and call to arms.
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
—Patrick Henry

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
— Daniel Webster

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #5 on: Today at 07:33:42 AM »

twyacht

  • "Cogito, ergo armatum sum."
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10419
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2013, 08:07:52 PM »
Buford T. Justice....

Get into the back counties of Alabamastan, with local support, and gee,...suddenly the Feds will realize this was a bad idea.

And yes, those are banjo's you hear....Might work in Boston, ain't gonna happen in Tuscaloosa...



Thomas Jefferson: The strongest reason for the people to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against the tyranny of government. That is why our masters in Washington are so anxious to disarm us. They are not afraid of criminals. They are afraid of a populace which cannot be subdued by tyrants."
Col. Jeff Cooper.

Solus

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8666
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2013, 01:43:17 PM »
Looks like Kansas is catching  heat from Herr Holder about this already.

Eric Holder to Kansas governor: New state gun law unconstitutional

A new law in Kansas that criminalizes the enforcement of federal gun controls in the state is unconstitutional, Attorney General Eric H. Holder said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/2/attorney-general-eric-holder-kansas-gov-sam-brownb/
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
—Patrick Henry

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
— Daniel Webster

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2013, 01:54:33 PM »
Looks like Kansas is catching  heat from Herr Holder about this already.

Eric Holder to Kansas governor: New state gun law unconstitutional

A new law in Kansas that criminalizes the enforcement of federal gun controls in the state is unconstitutional, Attorney General Eric H. Holder said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/2/attorney-general-eric-holder-kansas-gov-sam-brownb/

The outrageous hypocrisy of that gun smuggling , smug bas*ard making that statement makes me scream .    >:(
The things this communist supporting, POS has already done, dating back to the Clinton years should have seen him in prison years ago.

Solus

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8666
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2013, 02:15:42 PM »
The outrageous hypocrisy of that gun smuggling , smug bas*ard making that statement makes me scream .    >:(
The things this communist supporting, POS has already done, dating back to the Clinton years should have seen him in prison years ago.

You got that right.

In the story, Holder complains that this law would make federal officers have to decide between risking arrest and doing their duty.

I would change just a few words and it would read.   "Gun laws make honest citizens have to decide between risking arrest and protecting themselves and their families."

And it's the laws those poor put upon federal officers are trying to enforce that put honest citizens in that situation.


Takes hypocrisy to the sublime.

sub·lime  (s-blm)

     2. An ultimate example.

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
—Patrick Henry

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
— Daniel Webster

twyacht

  • "Cogito, ergo armatum sum."
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10419
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Alabama..
« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2013, 04:50:02 PM »
Heard a good point that when Progressive/Lib's cry "That's Unconstitutional",...and than immediately return to usurping, violating, stonewalling, obfuscating, and passing Un-Constitutional Legislation, they are justified...

IF, (big if), the Feds want to get froggy and enter a state with the intention of flexing a little Fed muscle, they better remember the state they choose very carefully. Boston/Mass. was a test.

A Red Southern/Mid-Western State, will be the FINAL EXAM!!!

Most uh dem kountry boyz, don take right kindlee to dem dayum yankee dc fellas startin a rukus down heare...Bring It On Son!!

When the Feds actually kiss their wives and children good-bye, to deploy into a state like Alabama (and a good number of others) KNOWING there is a chance they are going to DIE, Holder will slither away like the coward he is.

It will not end well. OBTW, CNS news is reporting 29% of registered voters think Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary.

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/poll-29-registered-voters-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary







Thomas Jefferson: The strongest reason for the people to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against the tyranny of government. That is why our masters in Washington are so anxious to disarm us. They are not afraid of criminals. They are afraid of a populace which cannot be subdued by tyrants."
Col. Jeff Cooper.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk