Montana and Tennessee have both passed laws to get the federal government out of their business regarding firearms. In Tennessee, General Assembly Bill 1796 (Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act) states that "any firearms or ammunition manufactured within the state and legally owned and kept within the state by citizens are not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration due to provisions in the Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution."
Sounds reasonable. It cuts the Commerce Clause completely out of the picture (not that it should have been used in the first place regarding federal gun control).
There seems to be this erroneous belief floating around among some folks that claim to know all about federal law, without understanding the text of the U.S. Constitution, that federal law supersedes state law.
In fact, that is how the federal government responded to Tennessee's law. Tennessee received a response from Assistant Director Carson W. Carroll of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives on July 16 that said, "Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply."
Wrong!
The Second Amendment does not allow the federal government to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear Arms in any way - meaning the federal government cannot limit ownership of firearms in any way. Gun laws are a choice for the states to make, not the feds.
In the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8 enumerates the powers of the federal government. Section 10 details what the states cannot do. The Ninth Amendment negates any expansion of governmental power on account of the enumeration of rights in the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment indicates that if an issue is not delegated to the federal government, or prohibited to the States by the Constitution, whatever it is, the issue is a State issue.
Pretty clear. Doesn't take a lawyer to understand it because the Constitution was written for We The People. States have the power to govern over their residents without federal encroachment. The federal government is limited, and if the issue is not mentioned as a power of the federal government, it is a State issue - period.
Then the federal government has this thing about the third clause of Article I, Section 8, also known lovingly as the Commerce Clause. Specifically, the clause reads: "[The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. . . "
The intention of this clause was to settle disputes regarding trade, not to stick the federal government's hands into anything that crosses state lines.
I am curious what Tennessee's response will be. I hope their response emphasizes state sovereignty. That would be the Constitutional thing to do.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Feds Declare Tennessee Gun Law Invalid - Dprogram.net
No comments:
Post a Comment