Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Doesn't Heller make Feinstein's Proposed Legislation Unconstitutional?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2051305" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>Only the mandatory checks done locally until NICS was up and running. See Printz v. US <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States</a></p><p></p><p>This is actually an area where we may make strides in the near future. The Progressives are making excellent headway in refusing to enforce federal laws or mirroring state laws regarding immigration (so called sanctuary cities) and marijuana possession. Many conservative states can follow suit by refusing to enforce gun laws and other populace control efforts by the feds. With an already overburdened system, it will be difficult for them to enforce these laws themselves. Nine times out of ten, the feds pick up where local and state agencies provide the initial call. Without those calls, the feds will have plenty of time to polish their shoes instead. <img src="/images/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not an issue for them. Just as Obama and his Progressive pals want to divide and conquer in all manner of legislation, so they will do with the media. Special exemptions will be carved out for them (so long as they continue not biting the hand that feeds them) and they'll eliminate the competition from small media outlets, blog services and individuals on the internet. Left as the only game in town, they'll reap the rewards from fat ad revenues and a captive audience. Selling the news isn't about integrity or truth, it's about money. </p><p></p><p></p><p>As far as DiFi and Obama's bills being a violation of Heller v. DC etc., they could care less. They have plenty of mouthpieces in and out of gov't that will say it ain't so, then drag it out in the courts until they get the makeup of the SCOTUS bench remade in their own image. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2051305, member: 1132"] Only the mandatory checks done locally until NICS was up and running. See Printz v. US [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States[/url] This is actually an area where we may make strides in the near future. The Progressives are making excellent headway in refusing to enforce federal laws or mirroring state laws regarding immigration (so called sanctuary cities) and marijuana possession. Many conservative states can follow suit by refusing to enforce gun laws and other populace control efforts by the feds. With an already overburdened system, it will be difficult for them to enforce these laws themselves. Nine times out of ten, the feds pick up where local and state agencies provide the initial call. Without those calls, the feds will have plenty of time to polish their shoes instead. :) Not an issue for them. Just as Obama and his Progressive pals want to divide and conquer in all manner of legislation, so they will do with the media. Special exemptions will be carved out for them (so long as they continue not biting the hand that feeds them) and they'll eliminate the competition from small media outlets, blog services and individuals on the internet. Left as the only game in town, they'll reap the rewards from fat ad revenues and a captive audience. Selling the news isn't about integrity or truth, it's about money. As far as DiFi and Obama's bills being a violation of Heller v. DC etc., they could care less. They have plenty of mouthpieces in and out of gov't that will say it ain't so, then drag it out in the courts until they get the makeup of the SCOTUS bench remade in their own image. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Doesn't Heller make Feinstein's Proposed Legislation Unconstitutional?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
