House Republicans launch Second Amendment Caucus

[Holland&Holland]

So...we think that, if national reciprocity legislation is passed and signed, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, New York will just meekly go along? I think they will simply ignore any such legislation passed by a Republican-led government. It will become an unbelievable legislative mess.

I think they'd simply roll roll over and abide by the law without complaint, the way they have with FOPA.
http://warshawskylawfirm.com/lawyer/2011/01/21/Civil-Rights-Law/U.S.-Supreme-Court-Denies-Cert-In-Important-Gun-Rights-Case,-Revell-v.-Port-Authority-of-New-York--New-Jersey._bl1727.htm

I suspect that they'll rebel over anything that comes out of the new political order that exists in America these days. We'll have to wait a bit to see how it turns out, but the whole sanctuary city thing will show us for certain a) how far the government is willing t push and b) the extent to which the cities/states are will to rebel in the face of Federal legislation that contravenes their political ideology. It's a hot-button topic that will get most of the national attention, at least initially. I suspect gun rights legislation is pretty far down priority list for the new Congress and new Administration.

Rebel with what? The guns they do not have?

[Holland&Holland]

Full autos could be done by either appealing or amending the Hughes amendment, or by judicial ruling. In US v Miller the court ruled that weapons adoptable to militia use (as in use by the military) are protected by the 2A.

The case ruled that a sawed off shotgun wasn't protected by the 2A as it wasn't in use by the military in 1934. However, by this interpretation (which established precedent) both SBSs and machine guns would be protected today, as they are in common use by the military.

I don't believe congress will ever have the balls to repeal the Hughes amendment. But it only takes 5 Supreme Court judges, given the right case to rule Hughes unconstitutional. I don't expect this to happen anytime soon, but it's the best shot at getting post 86 machine guns back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We have both houses, the POTUS, and should have the court shortly. If we can't get some sweeping changes like this done now we never will.

Now is the time to be on the offensive.

[Hmac]

Rebel with what? The guns they do not have?

Armed insurrection fantasies . LOL

No, they'll rebel by just refusing to enforce the law. I suspect we'll soon see how committed they would be to ignoring Federal law/sanctions, as they have said that they will do, when immigration policy gets revamped and sanctuary cities end up in the crosshairs of the Trump administration. That will tell us a lot about how such cities will react to Federal infringement on their local societal views like gun control.

[Randygmn]

So...we think that, if national reciprocity legislation is passed and signed, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, New York will just meekly go along? I think they will simply ignore any such legislation passed by a Republican-led government. It will become an unbelievable legislative mess.

Well, they forced the states, even the reddest ones, to honor gay marriages from other states.

[Hmac]

So...we think that, if national reciprocity legislation is passed and signed, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, New York will just meekly go along? I think they will simply ignore any such legislation passed by a Republican-led government. It will become an unbelievable legislative mess.

Well, they forced the states, even the reddest ones, to honor gay marriages from other states.

"They" being the Obama apparatus. It will be interesting to see if the Trump administration gets the same level of compliance.

[jshuberg]

Full autos could be done by either appealing or amending the Hughes amendment, or by judicial ruling. In US v Miller the court ruled that weapons adoptable to militia use (as in use by the military) are protected by the 2A.

The case ruled that a sawed off shotgun wasn't protected by the 2A as it wasn't in use by the military in 1934. However, by this interpretation (which established precedent) both SBSs and machine guns would be protected today, as they are in common use by the military.

I don't believe congress will ever have the balls to repeal the Hughes amendment. But it only takes 5 Supreme Court judges, given the right case to rule Hughes unconstitutional. I don't expect this to happen anytime soon, but it's the best shot at getting post 86 machine guns back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We have both houses, the POTUS, and should have the court shortly. If we can't get some sweeping changes like this done now we never will.

Now is the time to be on the offensive.

I agree, but I'm not holding my breath on machine guns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hmac]

Full autos could be done by either appealing or amending the Hughes amendment, or by judicial ruling. In US v Miller the court ruled that weapons adoptable to militia use (as in use by the military) are protected by the 2A.

The case ruled that a sawed off shotgun wasn't protected by the 2A as it wasn't in use by the military in 1934. However, by this interpretation (which established precedent) both SBSs and machine guns would be protected today, as they are in common use by the military.

I don't believe congress will ever have the balls to repeal the Hughes amendment. But it only takes 5 Supreme Court judges, given the right case to rule Hughes unconstitutional. I don't expect this to happen anytime soon, but it's the best shot at getting post 86 machine guns back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We have both houses, the POTUS, and should have the court shortly. If we can't get some sweeping changes like this done now we never will.

Now is the time to be on the offensive.

I agree, but I'm not holding my breath on machine guns.

From a medical perspective, I recommend you not hold your breath for ANY meaningful gun legislation.

[Jackpine Savage]

I've heard the Democrats say they would filibuster national reciprocity, I'm not holding my breath on that one. I'm hopeful the Hearing Protection Act will make it through. I really hope the BATF gets an attitude adjustment.

[jdege]

Rebel with what? The guns they do not have?

Armed insurrection fantasies . LOL

No, they'll rebel by just refusing to enforce the law. I suspect we'll soon see how committed they would be to ignoring Federal law/sanctions, as they have said that they will do, when immigration policy gets revamped and sanctuary cities end up in the crosshairs of the Trump administration. That will tell us a lot about how such cities will react to Federal infringement on their local societal views like gun control.

That is exactly what the Port Authority of New York has been doing with respect to FOPA. They keep arresting people, they keep prosecuting people, and they lose as often as not.

[Hmac]

Rebel with what? The guns they do not have?

Armed insurrection fantasies . LOL

No, they'll rebel by just refusing to enforce the law. I suspect we'll soon see how committed they would be to ignoring Federal law/sanctions, as they have said that they will do, when immigration policy gets revamped and sanctuary cities end up in the crosshairs of the Trump administration. That will tell us a lot about how such cities will react to Federal infringement on their local societal views like gun control.

That is exactly what the Port Authority of New York has been doing with respect to FOPA. They keep arresting people, they keep prosecuting people, and they lose as often as not.

Oh, if new gun legislation national CCW gets passed, they'll lose that fight too. But it will be a fight, and it will be messy. I wouldn't blame Trump for putting that one on the back burner until they have a little more momentum. As I said...if it happens at all, don't hold your breath. I'll bet it won't be soon.

[jdege]

That is exactly what the Port Authority of New York has been doing with respect to FOPA. They keep arresting people, they keep prosecuting people, and they lose as often as not.

Oh, if new gun legislation national CCW gets passed, they'll lose that fight too. But it will be a fight, and it will be messy. I wouldn't blame Trump for putting that one on the back burner until they have a little more momentum. As I said...if it happens at all, don't hold your breath. I'll bet it won't be soon.

They don't need to win to keep out-of-state permit holders to leave their guns at home. They just need to convince them that winning will be expensive.

[Holland&Holland]

Rebel with what? The guns they do not have?

Armed insurrection fantasies . LOL

No, they'll rebel by just refusing to enforce the law. I suspect we'll soon see how committed they would be to ignoring Federal law/sanctions, as they have said that they will do, when immigration policy gets revamped and sanctuary cities end up in the crosshairs of the Trump administration. That will tell us a lot about how such cities will react to Federal infringement on their local societal views like gun control.

How would that work? If federal agents arrest illegals they would refuse to house them in their jails? Does not seem that that would work well when they have a capital murder case and want federal court to hold the proceedings. I suspect politicians might make statements and puff out their chests but there is quite a difference between that an ignoring federal law.

[Hmac]

Rebel with what? The guns they do not have?

Armed insurrection fantasies . LOL

No, they'll rebel by just refusing to enforce the law. I suspect we'll soon see how committed they would be to ignoring Federal law/sanctions, as they have said that they will do, when immigration policy gets revamped and sanctuary cities end up in the crosshairs of the Trump administration. That will tell us a lot about how such cities will react to Federal infringement on their local societal views like gun control.

How would that work? If federal agents arrest illegals they would refuse to house them in their jails? Does not seem that that would work well when they have a capital murder case and want federal court to hold the proceedings. I suspect politicians might make statements and puff out their chests but there is quite a difference between that an ignoring federal law.

Yes, exactly. They won't let them be housed in their jails, or they'll release them, or won't cooperate with prosecution or investigation. They've already been doing that. I"m surprised you don't know that. It's been in all the papers.

The hook that they have is/will be withholding Federal funding. That will cost them dearly

[xd ED]

Yes, exactly. They won't let them be housed in their jails, or they'll release them, or won't cooperate with prosecution or investigation. They've already been doing that. I"m surprised you don't know that. It's been in all the papers.

The hook that they have is/will be withholding Federal funding. That will cost them dearly

"Them" being the residents/ taxpayers of these cities.
St Paul's ersatz mayor has already been whining about how much taxes will likely go up because Trump got elected.

[Hmac]

Yes, exactly. They won't let them be housed in their jails, or they'll release them, or won't cooperate with prosecution or investigation. They've already been doing that. I"m surprised you don't know that. It's been in all the papers.

The hook that they have is/will be withholding Federal funding. That will cost them dearly

"Them" being the residents/ taxpayers of these cities.
St Paul's ersatz mayor has already been whining about how much taxes will likely go up because Trump got elected.

Your elected representatives have decided that the principles they stand for are worth the extra money it will cost you.