Washington drops hammer on state gun plan

WEAPONS OF CHOICE
[FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+2]Washington drops hammer on state gun plan
[FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]'As you may know, federal law … supersedes the act'[/SIZE][/FONT]
[/SIZE][/FONT]<hr size="1"> [SIZE=-1]Posted: July 21, 2009
9:14 pm Eastern

[/SIZE]By Bob Unruh
[SIZE=-1]© 2009 WorldNetDaily [/SIZE]

Federal gun regulators have written to gun dealers around Tennessee, dropping the hammer on a new state law that exempts weapons made, sold and used inside the state from interstate regulations.
The letter, dated just days ago, was distributed to holders of Federal Firearms Licenses.
In it, Carson W. Carroll, the assistant director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, told dealers the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, adopted this year, "purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition manufactured in the state, and which remain in the state, from most federal firearms laws and regulations."
The exemption is not right, the federal agency letter contends.
"As you may know, federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain with the same state," the letter said. "All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made.
"These, as well as other federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunition have crossed state lines," the letter said.
Get "Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense" and learn why you have a responsibility to be armed.
The law was adopted by the state Legislature this year. It provides that "federal laws and regulations do not apply to personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition that is manufactured in Tennessee and remains in Tennessee." It also carries exemptions for certain types of weapons and ammunition and the requirement that all firearms made or sold in the state have "Made in Tennessee" on them.
Tennessee is not the first state to move in this direction. WND reported earlier that Utah was considering such a plan, and the state of Montana earlier adopted its own gun exemption procedure.

<table align="right" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="338">
Montana statehouse</td></tr></tbody></table> Montana's bill provides that guns, ammo, accessories, silencers and other products made, sold and used in the state would not require any federal documentation, registration, serial numbers, records check or waiting period.
The pushback from the states comes at a time when the federal administration is replete with anti-gun activists in influential positions, including an attorney general, Eric Holder, who supported a complete handgun ban in the District of Columbia before it was tossed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Obama administration has even pushed for a treaty that would require sportsmen who reload their ammunition to obtain a federal license.
The Montana plan cites the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that "guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the Constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889."
"The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889," the Montana plan states.
"The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States Constitution, particularly if not expressly pre-empted by federal law. Congress has not expressly pre-empted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition," it says.
Further, state lawmakers cite the Second Amendment right of the people to "keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889."
The Tennessee plan includes many of the same arguments.
The Tennessee Gun Owners website includes this comment: "And the battle begins. I don't believe this was unexpected. According to the 10th Amendment, the state has authority. Tennessee is applying its constitutional rights. The feds are saying, no, the Constitution doesn't count. Calling all lawyers!"
In Montana, a Democrat governor signed the law; in Tennessee, a Democrat governor allowed it to become law without his signature.
At Resistnet.com, there was a discussion among hundreds of members who have stated their willingness to bring a lawsuit against the federal government over the issue.
"The sovereign state of Tennessee should stand her ground. If people would stand up to the bully (Big Brother) we might take back some of the rights that have been stolen from us. It will not be comfortable. It will not be easy. But, it can be done, if we want it bad enough," said one participant.
One other was a little less eloquent, but his message came through.
"This is a crock! This is a free state and it's time to tell the thieves in Washington to butt out."
The weapons definitions are part of a general move on the part of states – Alaska being the most recent – to simply declare their sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment.
About three dozen states have begun working on such plans.
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin signed House Joint Resolution just days ago. It "claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States."
The joint resolution does not carry the force of law, but supporters say it is a significant move toward getting their message out to other lawmakers, the media and grassroots movements.
While seven states – Tennessee, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Alaska and Louisiana – have had both houses of their legislatures pass similar decrees, Alaska's Palin and Tennessee's Bredesen currently are the only governors to have signed their states' sovereignty resolutions.

 

I knew that Atf letter was a serious step over the line. To which Chuck baldwin says ok let it come!
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090721.html
<noscript><img src=http://x3.extreme-dm.com/z/?tag=cblive&p=http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com&j=n height=1 width=1></noscript> <center> "Let It Come!"
by Chuck Baldwin
July 21, 2009



</center> <!-- +++++++++++++++ BODY TEXT OF THE ARTICLE GOES BELOW THIS LINE +++++++++++++++ -->
During Patrick Henry's famous "Give me liberty or give me death" speech, he said the following:
"Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst and to provide for it."
Later in his historic speech Henry said, "Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, Sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone. It is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, Sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable. And let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come!"
Of course, Henry ended his stirring speech with the immortal words, "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
(The complete text of Patrick Henry's immortal address on March 23, 1775, is found in my giant compilation of great, historic documents called THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS, which may be ordered exclusively at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/products.html )
Many people today (including the vast majority of my Christian brethren) are doing exactly what Patrick Henry said many were doing 234 years ago: they prefer to "shut [their] eyes against a painful truth." Just as in 1775, many today, "having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not."
Serious students of history, however, cannot mistake the similarities between the British Crown in 1775 and the federal government in Washington, D.C., today. In fact, I would argue that federal usurpations of State sovereignty, personal liberty, and constitutional government are far more egregious today than at any time during the reign of old King George III. Were America's Founding Fathers alive today, they would have waged another war for independence years ago. Compared to the violations of liberty by the federal government in 2009, the abridgements of liberty committed by the Crown in 1775 were miniscule. We should all hang our heads in shame that we have not already exerted our right and responsibility as free people to "throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for [our] future security" (Declaration of Independence, Paragraph 2). Were we as righteous as our forebears, we would have already done so.
If we were writing a Declaration of Independence today, in which we would "let Facts be submitted to a candid world," the examples of federal abuse of power would be so multitudinous it would be difficult to contain them to a single document. The question is not, "Has the current federal government become tyrannical?" The question is, "How long will the States continue to tolerate it?"
For example, within the last couple of months, the States of Montana and Tennessee have each passed their own "Firearms Freedom Act." Briefly stated, the bills provide that any firearms or ammunition that are manufactured, sold, and kept within the State are not subject to federal law or federal regulation. Clearly, Montana and Tennessee have the Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution on their side.

Of course, the Constitution doesn't matter to the federal government. On July 16 of this year, BATFE Assistant Director Carson Carroll sent an "Open Letter" to all firearms dealers within the States of Tennessee and Montana, telling them in no uncertain terms, "Federal law supersedes the [Tennessee or Montana] Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply."
You see folks, in the minds of the politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., there is no such thing as constitutional government. There is no such thing as State autonomy. There is no such thing as balance of power. To the miscreants in Washington, D.C., there is only federal authority. To them, these States United are merely colony-subjects, who must bow to an omnipotent, ubiquitous federal power that knows no limits and no boundaries.
I hope and pray that the Tennessee and Montana governors, State legislatures, and State supreme courts will tell Mr. Carroll "where to go," and will defend their State sovereignties "to the end." And by the same token, I hope and pray that dozens more states will put teeth to their State Sovereignty resolutions and follow the examples of Montana and Tennessee.
Add to the continual usurpations of State sovereignty the fact that both the Republican and Democratic parties in Washington, D.C., have allowed our once-great free enterprise system to become a giant socialist economy, and the outlook only gets bleaker. This is why Republicans in D.C. have no moral credibility in opposing President Barack Obama's Marxist-style universal health care proposals. Under George W. Bush, the Republican Party expanded socialism in America like no administration in recent history. Now they are going to oppose the Democrat version of socialism? What a joke!
The only difference between the economic policies of the Democrats and Republicans in Washington, D.C., is Democrats want to tax-and-spend America into socialism for the benefit of the Welfare State, while Republicans want to borrow-and-spend America into socialism for the benefit of the Warfare State. Neither party wants to confine Washington, D.C., to the prescribed limits of the U.S. Constitution. And neither party in Washington, D.C., is willing to recognize the constitutional authority and autonomy of the States United.
Given the fact that both parties are hell-bent on destroying constitutional government, dismantling State sovereignty, and trampling individual liberties, it seems painfully obvious to me that a war for State independence is inevitable. Just exactly what that means is unknown at this point, but all of the elements and ingredients that existed in 1775 exist today. In fact, in view of the battle currently taking place between Nashville/Helena and Washington, D.C., the war has--for all intents and purposes--already begun. And unlike many of my Christian brethren who want to "shut [their] eyes against a painful truth," I say with Patrick Henry, "Let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come!"
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php
<!-- +++++++++++++++ BODY TEXT OF THE ARTICLE GOES ABOVE THIS LINE +++++++++++++++ --> © Chuck Baldwin
This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090721.html
<hr align="center" width="100%"> <!-- GOING BACK: 1 LEVEL OR HOME --> <table><tbody><tr><td width="50%"> <form onmouseover="change(event, 'ORANGE')" onmouseout="change(event, 'yellow')"> <input style="" value="2009 Columns" class="initial2" onclick="jumpto2('../speech.html')" type="button"> </form> </td> <td width="50%"> <form onmouseover="change(event, 'NAVY')" onmouseout="change(event, 'blue')"> <input style="" value="Home Page" class="initial3" onclick="jumpto3('../index.html')" type="button"> </form></td></tr></tbody></table>

 

Patriots need to get on this...or just quit filling out those IRS forms & keeping our money!

Bobby



http://www.nightingaleforgovernor.com/



ct: Fwd: OK ALL - WE KNEW IT WAS COMING - "VERY IMPORTANT"
To:
Bet the criminals will rush right out and do this! YEAH!







Senate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form
all guns that you have or own. It may require fingerprints and a tax of $50
per gun.

The bill was introduced on Feb. 24th and will become public knowledge 30
days after it is voted into law.. This is an amendment to the Internal
Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the Finance Committee can pass this
without the Senate voting on it at all..

The full text of the proposed amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage

You can find it by doing a search by the bill number, SB-2099.
http://ron.dotson.net/guns/sb2099.htm

You know whom to call; I strongly suggest you do. Please send a copy of this
e-mail to every gun owner you know to help STOP this bill !!!

 

Read the bill, it sure sounds like something the .gov would try. I see a lot saying it is a hoax; I am as cautious about Snopes et al as I am about .gov. If they do something like this, I'll give them my guns....or at least some of my ammunition.

 

first reaction to that sb2099: Are they "f'in" nuts??? Go on poke that caged bear in the snout, keep poking.

 

From what I have read, SB2099 was floated back in 2000 - it died on the vine. And the much ballyhooed HR45 is also a dead duck. No politician will touch them - it would be political suicide, especially with 2010 midterm elections nearing.

If the Kenyan manages to steal another term, THEN we will have one heck of a fight on our hands. Lock & load.

 

"Senate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form
all guns that you have or own. It may require fingerprints and a tax of $50
per gun."

Taxes?
We don't pay no stinkin' taxes!
No tax forms = No taxes!
(don't worry, I do it legally too!)