National Gun Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
Ridiculous. First, illegal. States have no right to nullify federal laws. You may recall a rather significant dust up between the states in the mid-19th century over that. And, as an opponent of Democratic strongholds attempting to oppose federal immigration laws with their 'sanctuary cities', the hypocrisy of attempting to do the same thing should be self apparent. Secondly, "oppose taxes on firearms and ammunition" ? The vast and overwhelming funding for wildlife conservation in the United States comes from two sources, the largest of which is the Pittman-Robertson excise tax on firearms and ammunition and the lesser of which is hunting license fees. So these two moronic legislators attempting to show their ideological purity are proposing that WV oppose the collection of Pittman-Robertson excise taxes? These idiots are no better than the Kansas legislators and that idiot Governor Brownback that passed a law "banning" federal firearms enforcement in Kansas. Well, there's some poor ******* still in jail today for believing those fools and buying a suppressor in Kansas without doing the federal paperwork and paying the tax stamp. But the idiots who passed the law he thought was legit haven't gone to jail. And these two WV idiots are no better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,654 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
There is a big difference between illegal alien sanctuaries and 2A. One is a right defined in the constitution of the United States, the other isn’t. As for the guy in jail, that’s going to keep happening until a war breaks out. If the 9 states pass their coalition of states concerning second amendment rights (that’s a big IF), I’ll put my money on that’s exactly where we are headed. No question. First the banding of states, then they will attempt to secede from the union when pushed. We saw this before.
 

·
Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
22,293 Posts
I suspect this is done to get the issue before the SCOTUS. If the SCOTUS rules in favor of the 2nd Amendment, a number of states will have to walk back their unconstitutional actions to limit the 2nd Amendment. Just a thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,654 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I suspect this is done to get the issue before the SCOTUS. If the SCOTUS rules in favor of the 2nd Amendment, a number of states will have to walk back their unconstitutional actions to limit the 2nd Amendment. Just a thought.
I certainly hope so but that being said, SCOTUS have historically been cowards with regard to the 2A rights. We get small wins once in a while but the overarching problem is that any law restricting the right afforded in the 2A is unconstitutional. In addition taxation on a right is a problem. Not taxation on hunting (necessary evil or many species would be extinct) but taxation on guns and ammo and the exercise of the rights to own and/or carry. Limiting a persons right is infringement, taxation on that right makes it a privilege. If you have to do anything, pay taxes, pay fees, ask permission, register a weapon, etc, it’s not a right.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,920 Posts
The Pitman/ Robertson tax is a self imposed tax. It is dedicated to wildlife and wild places. It’s not a tax like a sin tax on cigarettes. It’s not a tax that was thrown on by the government to curtail the use of gun and gun ownership. There’s a difference to how it will be received and where the money goes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,318 Posts
Ridiculous. First, illegal. States have no right to nullify federal laws. You may recall a rather significant dust up between the states in the mid-19th century over that. And, as an opponent of Democratic strongholds attempting to oppose federal immigration laws with their 'sanctuary cities', the hypocrisy of attempting to do the same thing should be self apparent. Secondly, "oppose taxes on firearms and ammunition" ? The vast and overwhelming funding for wildlife conservation in the United States comes from two sources, the largest of which is the Pittman-Robertson excise tax on firearms and ammunition and the lesser of which is hunting license fees. So these two moronic legislators attempting to show their ideological purity are proposing that WV oppose the collection of Pittman-Robertson excise taxes? These idiots are no better than the Kansas legislators and that idiot Governor Brownback that passed a law "banning" federal firearms enforcement in Kansas. Well, there's some poor ******* still in jail today for believing those fools and buying a suppressor in Kansas without doing the federal paperwork and paying the tax stamp. But the idiots who passed the law he thought was legit haven't gone to jail. And these two WV idiots are no better.
What about all the states that have nullified federal narcotics laws regarding the legalization of pot?
Seems to have worked out ok with them
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
What about all the states that have nullified federal narcotics laws regarding the legalization of pot?
Seems to have worked out ok with them
They have not nullified federal law. Pot remains enforceably illegal in federal jurisdictions in those states and, if the DOJ chose to pursue federal prosecutions in those states, the state would have no recourse.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top