Kentucky Senate Overwhelming Passes Bill Prohibiting Federal Gun Laws

page: 2
22
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by Lostmymarbles
 


You couldn't be more wrong the state enforces state laws but federal law is handled by the federal government. The state can inact laws in addition to or even mirror federal laws. But the state doesn't have the power or authority to enforce federal law. For example bank fraud is a federal offense if committed the local sherriff won't arrest you the FBI will. If local law enforcement attempted to get involved they would be told to go home and leave this to the big boys.So a state saying they wouldn't enforce federal law means nothing. And as far as the constitution there is no requirement for any federal agency to talk to any state they may do so out of courtesy but most of the time they choose not to. So obviously if they don't enforce the law saying they won't means noithing does it?


Incorrect sir the County Sheriff is the highest law authority in the state he can arrest anyone including federal agents for violating state law. He can prevent federal authorities from arresting anyone in his county. I did a 4 page memorandum of law on this very thing if you'd care to educate yourself:

www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lostmymarbles

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by Lostmymarbles
 


You couldn't be more wrong the state enforces state laws but federal law is handled by the federal government. The state can inact laws in addition to or even mirror federal laws. But the state doesn't have the power or authority to enforce federal law. For example bank fraud is a federal offense if committed the local sherriff won't arrest you the FBI will. If local law enforcement attempted to get involved they would be told to go home and leave this to the big boys.So a state saying they wouldn't enforce federal law means nothing. And as far as the constitution there is no requirement for any federal agency to talk to any state they may do so out of courtesy but most of the time they choose not to. So obviously if they don't enforce the law saying they won't mean nothing does it?


Actually your the one who's wrong because I never said states can enforce federal laws. Why don't you reread what I posted.

What I said was the states can pass laws requiring federal agents to notify them before entering into the state. Also a state can pass laws that protect it's citizens even if it goes against federal laws and anyone who enters the state can be arrested for violating the state's law. Which means federal agents attempting to enforce federal laws in a state that has a law that is counter to federal law can be arrested by sheriffs for violating the state law.


Do you know what the supremacy clause is this doesnt allow sheriffs or police to arrest any federal agenets enforcing federal law. Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution is known as the Supremacy Clause because it provides that the "Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land." It means that the federal government, in exercising any of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, must prevail over any conflicting or inconsistent state exercise of power. To make this simple if the government passesa law and the supremecourt upholds it there is no alternative. In other words state law means nothing all that would happen is the sheriff would go to jail for impeading a federal agent. The federal government cannot involuntarily be assubjected to the laws of any state. So back to the point Kentucky can pass all the fake laws they want but in the end it doesnt change a thing.



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 





Do you know what the supremacy clause is this doesnt allow sheriffs or police to arrest any federal agenets enforcing federal law. Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution is known as the Supremacy Clause because it provides that the "Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land." It means that the federal government, in exercising any of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, must prevail over any conflicting or inconsistent state exercise of power. To make this simple if the government passesa law and the supremecourt upholds it there is no alternative. In other words state law means nothing all that would happen is the sheriff would go to jail for impeading a federal agent. The federal government cannot involuntarily be assubjected to the laws of any state. So back to the point Kentucky can pass all the fake laws they want but in the end it doesnt change a thing.


Check the post right above yours from me to you. Go read the memorandum of law in the link I posted. Several Sheriffs have prevented Federal agents from acting in their counties and the Courts have upheld that.

U.S. Constitution, Article Six, Clause 2:
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 Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
(The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution)

Notice it says the laws in pursuance to the Constitution in the first line... That means the laws cannot violate the Constitution especially the Bill of Rights.


Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137 (1803):
“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.”

Any law that violates the constitution is null and void from inception "not from the date so branded in an open court of law" and is as as if it has never been passed. They cannot pass a law that violates the Constitution it does not need to wait for the courts to rule on it this ruling covers it immediately!

Murdock v. Penn. 319 US 105: (1943)
“A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution... No state may convert any secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it.

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Al. 373 US 262: (1962)
“If the state does convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it, you can
ignore the license and a fee and engage the right with impunity.”

State laws are not meaningless they are in full force and effect as long as they do not violate the US constitution. Any Federal statute that violates the Constitution is null and void as proven above not automatically the supreme law of the land until some court rules otherwise. These are supreme court rulings and never been over tuned!

And last but not least:

Printz v. United States (95-1478), 521 U.S. 898 (1997)
The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere." The Federalist No. 39, at 245. [n.11]

Read that again! Local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy and are not subject to the General authority any more then it is subject to them within its own sphere. Did you hear that? The Sheriff is not subject to the state authority nor the federal Authority within his own sphere anymore then they are to him!!! That means the Sheriff is the highest officer of the law in his jurisdiction and the only authority he answers too is the People! That means he has the authority to protect his county from federal encroachment and enforcement of unconstitutional acts statutes and polices! The Supreme Court even quotes the Federalist Papers in their Ruling!

edit on 2-3-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Ahh you beat me to it!

I was about to lay down some knowledge on him and give him a nice face palm.

How dare you teach him before I got to
!

Nice finds, most people forget that there are Supreme Court cases help clarify laws (state/federal) and the Constitution.



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Got to love the "Unbridled Spirit" of KY! Sfs, here checking in from E KY.

The sun shines bright. And our own starlet Ashley may come home to exercise her political prowess. Now that will be worth watching.
edit on 2-3-2013 by SunflowerStar because: 2nd line



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by Lostmymarbles
 


You couldn't be more wrong the state enforces state laws but federal law is handled by the federal government. The state can inact laws in addition to or even mirror federal laws. But the state doesn't have the power or authority to enforce federal law. For example bank fraud is a federal offense if committed the local sherriff won't arrest you the FBI will. If local law enforcement attempted to get involved they would be told to go home and leave this to the big boys.


That is false - the Sheriff as the elected law enforcement representative of the people has supreme authority in his jurisdiction.

Just because the Feds have overstepped and the local Sheriffs have allowed it doesn't make it so. In theory the Feds should in the case you mentioned appear before the Sheriff and present evidence of their case and he would either allow them to effect their arrest or conduct the arrest himself and then relinquish custody to "the big boys". They have zero authority outside of D.C., a military post or federal land.


Originally posted by dragonridr
So a state saying they wouldn't enforce federal law means nothing. And as far as the constitution there is no requirement for any federal agency to talk to any state they may do so out of courtesy but most of the time they choose not to.


You have this backwards.

That is dependent upon the Constitution of each State. Most acknowledge the Sheriff as the ultimate and final law enforcement authority in his jurisdiction.

There is no provision in the US Constitution for a Federal Law enforcement agency of any kind actually (other than Treasury Agents to enforce counterfiting laws) so the Sheriff is required by his oath to protect the people who elected him from the agents of the government who in this case are acting without authority.

And yes a Sheriff can arrest an FBI/DHS/Treasury/USDA (and all the other Alphabets) Agent if he comes into the County without probable cause or due process and seizes/threatens a citizen with arrest without his permission and he should. This is how the next Civil War will begin IMO. I know if I were Sheriff I would go to jail before my citizens would for this...

This nonsense has gone on far too long.


Originally posted by dragonridr
So obviously if they don't enforce the law saying they won't means noithing does it?


Yes, it does it is in effect a declaration of intent by the duly elected representatives of the people of the State of Kentucky that they intend to enable and support thier LEO'sin thier effort to protect the citizens of the State of Kentucky from the illegal (unconstitutional) actions of federal agents acting without jurisdiction.

Saddly - I think that this is exactly what the Federal Government wants actually…
edit on 2/3/2013 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Damn I type slow you beat me to it.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Sar far this makes Kentucky, Montana, Wyoming and Alaska. Utah is working on passing a similar bill as are Texas and Colorado.

Good to see that several states have decided to give the Federal Government a giant middle finger.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by KILL_DOGG
 

WHen I was in Kentucky on a 3 month job, EVERYONE I met owned at least a dozen guns and they are as normal there as food on the table and clothes on your back.

Good job Kentucky. The whole purpose of 50 states, is to keep the feds in checks and balances.!!!



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr



" It means that the federal government, in exercising any of the powers enumerated in the Constitution"





This is the key statement in your post,

Please detail the enumerated power that allows the feds to pass unconstitutional limits on a named right within the constitution or do any gun grabbing.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   
i live in a small town in kentucky.

People think i tell lies but guns are so easy to get here it isnt funny.
I can go down to the local trading post or hang out for old men and trader's that congregate every morning before work.They will sell you any gun you want or knife ect.
No background checks no bullcrap..ask for a price jew them down some if ya lucky and pay for it and walk out...

It's been like this my entire life and im 38 or 39 years old...
You can go to the local fleamarket too and see hanguns rifles shotguns for sale..ask em if they got anything automatic if they got it they will walk you over to the trunk of there car and sell you it.

Just always been like this here where im at.
No one buys a gun at the pawn shop or store around here..no one i know anyways



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Great going! Kentucky!

I believe before this is finished the feds will see the handwriting on the wall and come to their senses.

Momentum is building and I see more states soon following this example - thank god for it!

Even #$@&holes like NY have hope with recent ruling by its supreme court putting the onus of proof on that dastardly government to demonstrate its gun law constitutionality.

Meanwhile the public across this nation continue to vigorously exercise their second amendment rights with their pocket books and wallets in record numbers.






top topics



 
22
<< 1   >>

log in

join