No legislation being considered to protect TN

[Guest sreksuhn]

As of today there are no bills in the the Tennessee General Assembly being offered up to protect the citizens of Tennessee from federal gun control. Wyoming and Texas both have bills that would make it a felony for ANY law enforcement agent to enforce federal law, executive order, rule or regulation that becomes effective on or after January 1, 2013. Call your rep or senator and demand they submit such a bill immediately.

[LagerHead]

We can't get a decent carry bill or a parking lot bill. Please don't tell me THIS surprises you.

[Guest bkelm18]

As of today there are no bills in the the Tennessee General Assembly being offered up to protect the citizens of Tennessee from federal gun control. Wyoming and Texas both have bills that would make it a felony for ANY law enforcement agent to enforce federal law, executive order, rule or regulation that becomes effective on or after January 1, 2013. Call your rep or senator and demand they submit such a bill immediately.

 

No. I'm not going to waste my time. Those bills are just feel-good measures and will do absolutely nothing to "protect" their citizens. When a state law conflicts with federal law, federal law will supercede the state law.

[Guest sreksuhn]

All true, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. The feds need to be stood up to. The supremacy clause needs to be challenged. And I don't want my state agencies standing behind the feds. Then again, they may come at it through regulation, medically, psychologically, liability, environmentally.....whatever

Edited January 15, 2013 by sreksuhn

[battleop]

I read somewhere that no one going to introduce a bill until they saw exactly what Obama wanted to do.   

[JayC]

No. I'm not going to waste my time. Those bills are just feel-good measures and will do absolutely nothing to "protect" their citizens. When a state law conflicts with federal law, federal law will supercede the state law.

 

I'm not sure that is true in this case, federal agents get their "police powers" ie the power of arrest from the states....  While the federal government can charge you with a crime, and issue a warrant, a state can remove federal agents powers of arrest altogether if they wish.  

 

So it would leave the feds with only one option, which is to request that a local sheriff make the arrest, and it's up to that sheriff to "prioritize" their request at that point :)

 

Frankly all the states should just go ahead and remove police powers from federal agents altogether, which would also revoke their ability to carry a firearm in public without an HCP in this state.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

No. I'm not going to waste my time. Those bills are just feel-good measures and will do absolutely nothing to "protect" their citizens. When a state law conflicts with federal law, federal law will supercede the state law.

Still hung up on that supremacy clause, huh? Not in all cases.

 

Those feel good measures, as you call them, send a message to people who may be trying to usurp power by claiming that

supremacy clause you think applies, when it doesn't.  Is the ATF mentioned in enumerated powers? No. The 10th amendment

allows states to supercede the federal government over anything else not mentioned in the enumerated powers portion of the

Constitution. That's the way I read it, anyway.

[Guest bkelm18]

If anyone actually thinks ATF agents are going to be arrested and put in the county pokey while the federal govt twiddled its thumbs, I smile at your naïveté. :) Sure, if you want to waste time and taxpayers money by pushing these pointless bills through the state government, then by all means go right ahead. This is the same thing as those firearms freedom acts that were put through not long ago. Pointless, feel-good measures that the federal government will plow right through. As for sending messages, what messages? You think the federal government is completely oblivious to what they're doing? They know exactly what they're doing and they know exactly who's with them and who's against them.

[K191145]

No. I'm not going to waste my time. Those bills are just feel-good measures and will do absolutely nothing to "protect" their citizens. When a state law conflicts with federal law, federal law will supercede the state law.

 

 

[Garufa]

Tennessee stand up against the Federal Government?  :rofl:

[battleop]

The only way any of these laws would really last is if the state in question can support it's self without any federal help.   If they passed a law the feds would just withhold funding until the got their way.  

[JayC]

The ATF agents only have powers granted to them by the states they operate in.  TN could remove one section of law and ATF agents would not be able to legally carry a firearm in TN without an HCP and be subject to 39-17-1359 just like the rest of us.

 

You seem to think that the ATF magically gets powers from the federal government, but the states are really what gives them the ability to make arrests, serve warrants, and carry firearms.

 

If the states give them arresting powers, they can remove some or all of those powers, and place criminal sanctions on them if they violate those provisions.

 

A perfect example of this is Texas, they were going to pass a law to prohibit certain types of pat downs and make violating that law a felony...  What did the feds do?  They threatened to prevent any flights from out of state into Texas if they passed that law...  You'll notice they didn't try to make a claim that the TSA federal agents couldn't be arrested for violating Texas law...

 

If anyone actually thinks ATF agents are going to be arrested and put in the county pokey while the federal govt twiddled its thumbs, I smile at your naïveté. :) Sure, if you want to waste time and taxpayers money by pushing these pointless bills through the state government, then by all means go right ahead. This is the same thing as those firearms freedom acts that were put through not long ago. Pointless, feel-good measures that the federal government will plow right through. As for sending messages, what messages? You think the federal government is completely oblivious to what they're doing? They know exactly what they're doing and they know exactly who's with them and who's against them.

 

 

[G27]

A perfect example of this is Texas, they were going to pass a law to prohibit certain types of pat downs and make violating that law a felony...  What did the feds do?  They threatened to prevent any flights from out of state into Texas if they passed that law...  You'll notice they didn't try to make a claim that the TSA federal agents couldn't be arrested for violating Texas law...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2011/05/26/texas-fight-against-tsa-groping-is-over-feds-win/

[JayC]

Yes, Texas gave in, but it doesn't mean their law would have been legal is passed and they could have started arresting TSA child molesters and sexual assaulters at will.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2011/05/26/texas-fight-against-tsa-groping-is-over-feds-win/

[plank white]

good for oregon sheriff wish our sheriff had these morals 

 

[G27]

Yes, Texas gave in, but it doesn't mean their law would have been legal is passed and they could have started arresting TSA child molesters and sexual assaulters at will.

What? I can't make that make sense.

 

Regardless, the example you brought up is the perfect example of saber-rattling - had Texas passed the law, the USFG would have shut down flights in and out of Texas and basically crippled their economy. Bluff? Maybe, but it worked, and proved the point.

 

The USFG can afford to play chicken, the states - essentially - cannot.

Edited January 16, 2013 by crimsonaudio

[gun sane]

So this is how Prez Zero is going to run the so-called United States of America.  Maybe we can sue for false advertising.

[m16ty]

If something passes federally, most arresting will be done by local and state police. Sure, they will call the BATF when somebody is found with a "illegal" gun and let them handle it from there but if they don't call the person wouldn't be charged.

 

I'd be willing to bet most of the arrest of people with guns that are illegal now are done by local police. After the arrest they call the BATF to file federal charges. If they don't arrest in the first place or notify the BATF, there will be no charge.

 

BATF investigations would also be hampered without cooperation of state and local police.

[Wingshooter]

I would like to see some states start to band together. I coalition of sorts. Say, TN, KY, NC, GA, AR, AL, FL, IN, TX, etc.. reach a mutual public agreement that basically says to the Fed Govt "come get some". If a lot of states would join in just publicly reaffirming their local and state-level commitment to the US constitution and pledge ALL of their resources to defend against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC, we might see more posturing than action coming from DC.

Edited January 16, 2013 by Batman

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I would like to see some states start to band together. I coalition of sorts. Say, TN, KY, NC, GA, AR, AL, FL, IN, TX, etc.. reach a mutual public agreement that basically says to the Fed Govt "come get some". If a lot of states would join in just publicly reaffirming their local and state-level commitment to the US constitution and pledge ALL of their resources to defend against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC, we might see more posturing than action coming from DC.

That could very well happen.

[RED333]

I would like to see some states start to band together. I coalition of sorts. Say, TN, KY, NC, GA, AR, AL, FL, IN, TX, etc.. reach a mutual public agreement that basically says to the Fed Govt "come get some". If a lot of states would join in just publicly reaffirming their local and state-level commitment to the US constitution and pledge ALL of their resources to defend against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC, we might see more posturing than action coming from DC.

 

That could very well happen.

Seems it did, bout 1861.

[K191145]

I would like to see some states start to band together. I coalition of sorts. Say, TN, KY, NC, GA, AR, AL, FL, IN, TX, etc.. reach a mutual public agreement that basically says to the Fed Govt "come get some". If a lot of states would join in just publicly reaffirming their local and state-level commitment to the US constitution and pledge ALL of their resources to defend against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC, we might see more posturing than action coming from DC.

 

This time we could add a few states, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, N & S. Dakota, don't forget the great red state of Oklahoma either.

Plus a few more. Oh and Alaska.

[Chucktshoes]

Basically the middle of the country without the ends and some of the Great Lakes states.

[K191145]

Basically the middle of the country without the ends and some of the Great Lakes states.

I can see Michigan, at least the people and not their politicians. It's a little like Illinois, Detroit pretty much controls the state like Chicago controls Illinois.

[Volzfan]

http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0042

Rep. Joe Carr has filed one. HB 42

 

Also http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0010&GA=108

Edited January 16, 2013 by Volzfan