Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control Reform Activism

Showing Original Post only (View all)

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 12:15 PM Feb 2015

Inside The Conservative Campaign To Stop Cops From Enforcing Federal Gun Laws [View all]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/26/federal-gun-laws_n_6754416.html

States are passing "nullification laws" that effectively prevent the enforcement of federal laws, particularly gun laws. How the hell can that be?

"Gary Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, was involved in writing the first draft of that (nullification) bill. He said he discussed the concept in 2009 while waiting to appear on Glenn Beck's Fox News show with Andrew Napolitano, the senior judicial analyst for Fox News, in New York City. As Marbut remembers it, Napolitano told him: "All you need to do is don't help [the federal government] enforce these federal laws, because they don't have the manpower to do it."

This can happen because in 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in Printz v. United States that the federal government cannot force local chief law enforcement officers to fulfill federal tasks. The gun nutz are counting on "small government" to allow them to flaunt federal laws. Well, there's more ways than one to skin that cat.

Montana receives $1.55 in federal revenues for every $1.00 it sends to Washington in the form of taxes. Wonder what happens to Montana's economy if that drops to, say, $.50? It seems that Red states are much more dependent on the federal trough than Blue states: http://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

Just close down a couple of military bases, cut off federal subsidies for grazing or mining on federal lands and see how long they can hold out. It can be a bitch when you bite the hand that feeds you.

22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Good. We need to be taking powers away from the police, not giving them more bluestateguy Feb 2015 #1
From the article: flamin lib Feb 2015 #2
our government goes overseas WDIM Feb 2015 #4
WTF?????? nt flamin lib Feb 2015 #6
States do not have to enforce federal law. WDIM Feb 2015 #3
I take it you have a problem with disarming convicted violent felons, flamin lib Feb 2015 #5
no i dont have a problem with it. WDIM Feb 2015 #7
You're being completely ridiculous. flamin lib Feb 2015 #8
I do WDIM Feb 2015 #9
"as long as the government has guns so should the people." Electric Monk Feb 2015 #11
Yes, they were a much better fit in the gungeon with their "until the gov't disarms, everyone should Electric Monk Feb 2015 #12
The NRA influence is strong billh58 Feb 2015 #10
Just to note: NutmegYankee Feb 2015 #13
I will wish for fewer gun deaths. flamin lib Feb 2015 #14
I support greater personal liberties for the people NutmegYankee Feb 2015 #15
All good and notable goals, except billh58 Feb 2015 #16
I was pointing out that the OP position may have unintended consequences. NutmegYankee Feb 2015 #17
The entire right-wing Teabilly billh58 Feb 2015 #18
I don't follow how you get to that point? NutmegYankee Feb 2015 #19
My wish is for more gun control, but the parent is absolutely correct. sir pball Mar 2015 #20
50% is sufficient if you don't actively violate the sop. flamin lib Mar 2015 #21
Thanks for accommodating… sir pball Mar 2015 #22
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control Reform Activism»Inside The Conservative C...»Reply #0