3
   

Gun Sales Within a State

 
 
gollum
 
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2018 05:53 pm
What gives Congress authority to regulate the sale of guns when both buyer and seller are within the same State?
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2018 06:42 pm
@gollum,
The Supreme Court?

I think the rationale is a combination of the commerce clause... and the "necessary and proper" clause.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2018 07:02 pm
@gollum,
When the Supremes handed down a decision in The United States versus Miller in 1939, upholding the National Firearms Act of 1934, they concluded that it (the NFA) was not an unconstitutional invasion of the reserved powers of the states. They cited Sonzinsky v. United States, 300 U. S. 506, and Narcotic Act cases. P. 307 U. S. 177. Inferentially, they referred to Article One, Section Eight, 16th paragraph, which reads, in its entirety:

"[Congress shall have the power] To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

The referential portion of the decision reads:

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense."

No challenge has since been made to the right of Congress to regulate firearms.
gollum
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2018 07:07 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona-

Thank you.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 06:23 am
@gollum,
gollum wrote:
What gives Congress authority to regulate the sale of guns when both buyer and seller are within the same State?
Nothing does.

Democrats like to ignore the Constitution.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 06:24 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
When the Supremes handed down a decision in The United States versus Miller in 1939, upholding the National Firearms Act of 1934, they concluded that it (the NFA) was not an unconstitutional invasion of the reserved powers of the states. They cited Sonzinsky v. United States, 300 U. S. 506, and Narcotic Act cases. P. 307 U. S. 177.
This was sophistry on the part of the Supreme Court. If it was merely a tax, as they were pretending, then the law would not have prohibited certain people from paying that tax.

Setanta wrote:
Inferentially, they referred to Article One, Section Eight, 16th paragraph, which reads, in its entirety:

"[Congress shall have the power] To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

The referential portion of the decision reads:

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense."
This part of their ruling dealt with the question of whether Miller's possession of the weapon was covered by the Second Amendment, not with the question of whether the federal government had jurisdiction over guns within a state.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  5  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 06:59 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
Democrats like to ignore the Constitution.


Nah. We like the odd numbered amendments. You like the even ones.
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 07:03 am
@gollum,
gollum wrote:

What gives Congress authority to regulate the sale of guns when both buyer and seller are within the same State?

Federal law trumps state law. It's in the freaking US Constitution.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 07:10 am
@tsarstepan,
This is either an oversimplification, or it is just plain wrong.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 07:46 am
@tsarstepan,
tsarstepan wrote:
Federal law trumps state law. It's in the freaking US Constitution.
The Constitution also says that the federal government only has the authority to pass laws in the specific limited areas that the Constitution gives it jurisdiction over.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 07:50 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Nah. We like the odd numbered amendments. You like the even ones.
I like all of the Bill of Rights.

You do realize that the Fourth Amendment is an even numbered amendment?
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 08:08 am
@oralloy,
I prefer the Fifth.
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jul, 2018 09:11 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

I prefer the Fifth.

Would that be a fifth of vodka?
0 Replies
 
gollum
 
  2  
Reply Fri 6 Jul, 2018 04:26 am
@Setanta,
Setanta-

Thank you.

I guess you are a lawyer or a good researcher.

The Second Amendment, which is often cited by people who don't want gun control, references the militia.

Article One, Section Eight, 16th paragraph also references the militia but the same people don't cite it.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 6 Jul, 2018 05:02 am
@gollum,
gollum wrote:
The Second Amendment, which is often cited by people who don't want gun control, references the militia.
Article One, Section Eight, 16th paragraph also references the militia but the same people don't cite it.
There is a difference between "the federal government only having jurisdiction over limited areas" and "the government not being allowed to violate a fundamental human right".

Both are certainly important, but they aren't the same thing.

Your original question was related to jurisdiction. The Second Amendment is a fundamental human right.
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2018 10:34 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Your original question was related to jurisdiction. The Second Amendment is a fundamental human right.


...a fundamental AMERICAN right.

Our "god-given-rights as god-damn-Americans" doesn't apply outside our border (which is quite sad; how we treat many others)....and in many cases doesn't apply very well within our border.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2018 10:49 am
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:
...a fundamental AMERICAN right.
No. A fundamental human right.

maporsche wrote:
Our "god-given-rights as god-damn-Americans" doesn't apply outside our border
The fact that all the other nations have abolished freedom means that America is the last free country on the planet. But freedom still has the same meaning, even in countries where it no longer exists.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Gun Sales Within a State
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/28/2022 at 05:14:18