ATF KILLS TN FIREARMS FREEDOM ACT!

[GLOCKMEISTER]

[Motasyco]

And the battle begins. I don't believe this was unexpected. According to the 10th ammendment, the state has authority. Tennessee is applying it's constitutional rights. The feds are saying, no, the constitution doesn't count. Calling all lawyers!

Edited July 16, 2009 by Motasyco

[Guest HexHead]

I wouldn't say they killed it. More like a warning shot across the bow.

Bredesen was right when he said this wasn't really a gun bill. He was wrong that it will quickly be dealt with by the courts. It'll end up at the SCOTUS. This is a 10th Amendment issue.

It was just made a gun bill to fast track it. Like waving a red cape in front of a bull, Holder won't be able to help himself going after it. Brilliant.

Edited July 16, 2009 by HexHead

[Defender]

That was expected though, wasn't it? My understanding was that one state or another, probably Montana or Texas if not us, would have a case that goes through the court system, perhaps to the US Supreme Court.

[G27]

It's going to take an individual - not a firearms dealer - to test this...

[Guest canynracer]

sounds like the AG's from all the states need to take this on...one state standing alone will not help.

[Guest momuzyk]

sounds like the AG's from all the states need to take this on...one state standing alone will not help.

Exactly..We all stand together or hang individually!

[Motasyco]

I'm pretty sure Montana has passed a similar law but it's not yet in effect. I also think Texas is coming on board. I believe the intention here was not so much a firearm bill but a constitutional challange to a too big for it britches federal government.

Edited July 16, 2009 by Motasyco

[mousegunner]

Something like this got tried before, in the 1860's, and brought on the War of Yankee Aggression. The FEDS will maintain the Union, no matter what the cost. I believe if we push it, the same thing will happen again, just for different issues. And maybe that is OK.

[Guest Rem_700]

THe letter said federal law supercedes the act, I thought that the states own laws would supercede the federal laws placed upon it?

[Motasyco]

THe letter said federal law supercedes the act, I thought that the states own laws would supercede the federal laws placed upon it?

I think that's the 10th ammendment part.

[USMCJG]

THe letter said federal law supercedes the act, I thought that the states own laws would supercede the federal laws placed upon it?

There's the way that things are and the way that things are supposed to be. The way things are the feds have near complete control over the states, which is exactly the opposite of the way things are supposed to be. Hopefully this bill and others like it can help return states rights and reinstate the Tenth Amendment which, at this point in the minds of the feds, is simply the mindless ramblings of a bunch of prehistoric old farts and not meant to be taken literally.

[Jasongar8]

Guys anyone that plays with ATF on this issue is going to get burned. They will find a way to prove that you broke the law, when you mess with ATF about NFA stuff you will lose. I hate to be that way but look at the history with ATF. They dont play fair, period. As much as I want to be able to build NFA items without all the hassle and money its just not going to happen. I will be glad to eat crow on this one if Im wrong.

-Jason G

[Guest Linoge]

I am honestly kind of surprised the BATFE took the initiative on this one, and sent out the letter before anyone actually did anything... I was rather counting on them ignoring the situation until forced to acknowledge it.

That said, this is going to have to go to the Supreme Court for any final decision to be made, and I am willing to wager that we will ultimately lose. At that point, what the states and their residents want to do is another matter entirely...

[Motasyco]

Guys anyone that plays with ATF on this issue is going to get burned. They will find a way to prove that you broke the law, when you mess with ATF about NFA stuff you will lose. I hate to be that way but look at the history with ATF. They dont play fair, period. As much as I want to be able to build NFA items without all the hassle and money its just not going to happen. I will be glad to eat crow on this one if Im wrong.

-Jason G

Personally, it's not the NFA issue I'm concerned with. I really don't need a suppressor, regardless of where it comes from. My concern is the that the federal government is acting beyond the intentions of the Constitution. This is just a means to get this into the courts to see if we, as a country, stand by the Constitution as intended or do we disregard it. I feel that if we further disregard our Constitution we are continuing down a dangerous path we have already begun to follow. This is a turning point for our future. Are we the country we thought we were or are we now something else. I'm truely concerned about the outcome of this and for me, it has nothing to do with where my firearms parts come from. It has to do with where my country is headed.

[Guest HexHead]

Something like this got tried before, in the 1860's, and brought on the War of Yankee Aggression. The FEDS will maintain the Union, no matter what the cost. I believe if we push it, the same thing will happen again, just for different issues. And maybe that is OK.

No maybe about it.

[Guest HexHead]

There's the way that things are and the way that things are supposed to be. The way things are the feds have near complete control over the states, which is exactly the opposite of the way things are supposed to be. Hopefully this bill and others like it can help return states rights and reinstate the Tenth Amendment which, at this point in the minds of the feds, is simply the mindless ramblings of a bunch of prehistoric old farts and not meant to be taken literally.

Oh, you mean like the 2nd?

[Guest HexHead]

Personally, it's not the NFA issue I'm concerned with. I really don't need a suppressor, regardless of where it comes from. My concern is the that the federal government is acting beyond the intentions of the Constitution. This is just a means to get this into the courts to see if we, as a country, stand by the Constitution as intended or do we disregard it. I feel that if we further disregard our Constitution we are continuing down a dangerous path we have already begun to follow. This is a turning point for our future. Are we the country we thought we were or are we now something else. I'm truely concerned about the outcome of this and for me, it has nothing to do with where my firearms parts come from. It has to do with where my country is headed.

Amen, brother. Guns were picked to be the "issue" knowing Holder wouldn't be able to restrain himself and ignore it. Like waving a red cape at a bull. If we actually suppressors or SBRs out of this it would just be icing on the cake, but that's a really small part of it.

The other states that have been passing those "10th Amendment Resolutions" are nothing but lip service and would never generate any action on this principle. Alaska's AG has gone so far as to say that if the BATF goes after an Alaska resident over this, the state would fund their defense.

[Mark@Sea]

BATF contradicting state (or hell, federal) law? Color me shocked...

Still can't get over the chutzpah of an unelected federal employee telling a state legislature to piss up a rope.

[Guest HexHead]

BATF contradicting state (or hell, federal) law? Color me shocked...

Still can't get over the chutzpah of an unelected federal employee telling a state legislature to piss up a rope.

Would it make you feel any better if he gets promoted to Czar?

[Guest GimpyLeg]

Would it make you feel any better if he gets promoted to Czar?

Ahhh.... An ATF Czar. More of BO's "shadow" government.... Haven't seen that in the Constitution either. Wish I had the 'nads to carry this one to the SCOTUS!

[USMCJG]

Oh, you mean like the 2nd?

Sadly, yes.

[Guest mikedwood]

I don't think the state will fund a defense of the firearms act to the supreme court.

[JayC]

Amen, brother. Guns were picked to be the "issue" knowing Holder wouldn't be able to restrain himself and ignore it. Like waving a red cape at a bull. If we actually suppressors or SBRs out of this it would just be icing on the cake, but that's a really small part of it.

The other states that have been passing those "10th Amendment Resolutions" are nothing but lip service and would never generate any action on this principle. Alaska's AG has gone so far as to say that if the BATF goes after an Alaska resident over this, the state would fund their defense.

The Montana law requires the AG to defend any citizen charged...

But, the solution to this problem is very simple, add an amendment that removes federal employees police powers in TN when dealing with any case covered under the Firearm Freedom Act, and make it unlawful (Class A felony) to attempt to take anybody into custody...

That will solve the ATF problem really quick...

We (TN citizens and legislature) allow this problem to grow and fester inside out own state... All we have to do is change the law to no longer give federal employees police powers over certain sections of the law, and the problem disappears.

[ukerduker]

The Montana law requires the AG to defend any citizen charged...

But, the solution to this problem is very simple, add an amendment that removes federal employees police powers in TN when dealing with any case covered under the Firearm Freedom Act, and make it unlawful (Class A felony) to attempt to take anybody into custody...

That will solve the ATF problem really quick...

We (TN citizens and legislature) allow this problem to grow and fester inside out own state... All we have to do is change the law to no longer give federal employees police powers over certain sections of the law, and the problem disappears.

Make it so, number 1. [implied Star Trek humor]