Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tweetr" data-source="post: 2108966" data-attributes="member: 5183">I agree that the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) is indeed the power claimed to empower federal regulation of firearms.&nbsp; This is, of course, utterly specious.&nbsp; Whatever anyone&#039;s interpretation of &quot;To regulate Commerce . . . among the several States, . . .&quot; even amplified by &quot;To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, . . .&quot; may be, - -The power to regulate commerce among the several states obviously and self-evidently cannot extend to those matters explicitly forbidden by the Bill of Rights!&nbsp; And those laws considered by Congress to be &quot;necessary and proper&quot; still obviously and self-evidently cannot exceed the enumerated powers granted by the Constitution!I argue further that the power to regulate commerce among the several states was not intended to prevent commerce among the states, but indeed to protect commerce among the states!&nbsp; That is, to prevent one state from restricting commerce to or from another state.&nbsp; Using the Commerce Clause to prevent commerce (e.g. in restricting the sale and transportation of firearms across state lines) is, in my opinion, backward and dead wrong.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tweetr, post: 2108966, member: 5183"] I agree that the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) is indeed the power claimed to empower federal regulation of firearms. This is, of course, utterly specious. Whatever anyone's interpretation of "To regulate Commerce . . . among the several States, . . ." even amplified by "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, . . ." may be, - - The power to regulate commerce among the several states obviously and self-evidently cannot extend to those matters explicitly forbidden by the Bill of Rights! And those laws considered by Congress to be "necessary and proper" still obviously and self-evidently cannot exceed the enumerated powers granted by the Constitution! I argue further that the power to regulate commerce among the several states was not intended to [I][B]prevent[/B][/I] commerce among the states, but indeed to [I][B]protect[/B][/I] commerce among the states! That is, to prevent one state from restricting commerce to or from another state. Using the Commerce Clause to prevent commerce (e.g. in restricting the sale and transportation of firearms across state lines) is, in my opinion, backward and dead wrong. [/QUOTE]

Verification