Anyone following the state's rights bills that have been introduced?
Feb 5, 2009 | 01:28 AM
#1
Thread Starter
High on diesel fumes
iTrader: (70)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,658
Likes: 3
From: Phoenix, AZ
Anyone following the state's rights bills that have been introduced?
These have been posted on a local Jeep forum that I joined. I wonder if we're going to see a state's rights vs federal law battle sometime in the near future? Sounds like some of the states are getting uncomfortable with the recent trends of the federal government. Seems like a lot of interest in claiming sovereignty under the 10th amendment to the Constitution.
Here's a link to New Hampshire's bill:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...9/HCR0006.html
...and an excerpt
Here's Arizona's bill:
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument....s/hcr2024p.htm
...and a summary
Montana
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm
Washington
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...overeignty.pdf
Oklahoma
http://www.ok-safe.com/files/documen...JR1089_int.pdf
Thoughts?
Here's a link to New Hampshire's bill:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...9/HCR0006.html
...and an excerpt
A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles...
...That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:
I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.
II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and
That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government...
...That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:
I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.
II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and
That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government...
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument....s/hcr2024p.htm
...and a summary
claiming sovereignty under the tenth amendment to the constitution of the united states over certain powers, serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates and providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or repealed.
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm
Washington
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...overeignty.pdf
Oklahoma
http://www.ok-safe.com/files/documen...JR1089_int.pdf
Thoughts?
Feb 5, 2009 | 08:17 AM
#3
ive read about some of this too. I believe its the state of montana thats also pushing a bill to override all federal gun laws. Which would be the HR246 i believe. I'll bet Texas will soon join that list.
IMO, about time states stood up and spoke out, gov't is getting way too big and having too much control.
IMO, about time states stood up and spoke out, gov't is getting way too big and having too much control.
Feb 5, 2009 | 08:27 AM
#4
That's nice and all, but don't overlook one small, but important detail- these states rely on, and need federal monies for operation and programs, especially now. If states want to start overriding federal laws, then I would see federal grant money disappear, federal highway money disappear, programs for the needy in those states disappear. I'm sure there's more that would disappear, monies for National Guards, not too mention, Senators would have some explaining to do...
The states might introduce bills, but I doubt they would pass. States like their federal monies way too much...
The states might introduce bills, but I doubt they would pass. States like their federal monies way too much...
Feb 5, 2009 | 08:40 AM
#6
TECH Addict
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,149
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, TX......was Lake Charles, LA
ahhh gun laws and ****.
also heard this (not statin its true or i believe it)
Ammo will be controlled instead of the guns. A cursor or code will be on EACH round. for the people that make their own ammo, better buy the bulk cuz before long, you wont be able to buy powder.
oh well. i'm from Louisiana, they can take the guns..... the ones they know about haha
also heard this (not statin its true or i believe it)
Ammo will be controlled instead of the guns. A cursor or code will be on EACH round. for the people that make their own ammo, better buy the bulk cuz before long, you wont be able to buy powder.
oh well. i'm from Louisiana, they can take the guns..... the ones they know about haha
Feb 5, 2009 | 08:48 AM
#7
That's nice and all, but don't overlook one small, but important detail- these states rely on, and need federal monies for operation and programs, especially now. If states want to start overriding federal laws, then I would see federal grant money disappear, federal highway money disappear, programs for the needy in those states disappear. I'm sure there's more that would disappear, monies for National Guards, not too mention, Senators would have some explaining to do...
The states might introduce bills, but I doubt they would pass. States like their federal monies way too much...
The states might introduce bills, but I doubt they would pass. States like their federal monies way too much...
, but they sure don't control their population growth. I think why you are seeing these bills come about is, states have power too and the federal gov't is gotten so big that its either their way or no way and the constitution, well they sure don't seem to follow that anymore. The representatives we have in washington DC don't represent the people anymore, they get elected by people and then once that happens they have their own agenda.
Trending Topics
Feb 5, 2009 | 08:52 AM
#8
ahhh gun laws and ****.
also heard this (not statin its true or i believe it)
Ammo will be controlled instead of the guns. A cursor or code will be on EACH round. for the people that make their own ammo, better buy the bulk cuz before long, you wont be able to buy powder.
oh well. i'm from Louisiana, they can take the guns..... the ones they know about haha
also heard this (not statin its true or i believe it)
Ammo will be controlled instead of the guns. A cursor or code will be on EACH round. for the people that make their own ammo, better buy the bulk cuz before long, you wont be able to buy powder.
oh well. i'm from Louisiana, they can take the guns..... the ones they know about haha
obama was thinking/rumor had it an executive order that would ban importation of ammo such as wolf, Brown/Silver/Gold Bear, Sellier and Bellot. That would be nothing more than to drive up more demand and jack up prices again in order to "try" to make ammo so high priced we can't afford it. They don't have to take or implement any kind of ban if they can control the ammo and tax the hell out of it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post