User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:42:47 AM EDT
[#1]
They don't want to
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:43:56 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They don't want to |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:45:25 AM EDT
[#3]
Pot is cool and hip
Guns aren't |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:50:09 AM EDT
[#4]
A state voting to legalize MJ is not the same as overriding the Feds.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:51:13 AM EDT
[#5]
Pot makes them money. Guns don't. It is always about the $$$$$.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:51:28 AM EDT
[#6]
That's not what is happening.
The Feds and the states have concurrent jurisdiction over certain crimes. States may choose to legalize pot but that doesn't mean you couldn't be charged under federal law for possession. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:52:17 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
there has to be some states that would allow SBRs or Suppressors. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They don't want to Some states do allow suppressors apart of hunting applications so its already in motion if you think about it |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:53:51 AM EDT
[#8]
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 8:55:16 AM EDT
[#9]
If the general public overcame its generic fear that "silencers and sawed-off shotguns are scary," and the law were flouted in large enough numbers, then eventually it would happen, just like the situation with marijuana. Marijuana prohibition has been a joke for a long time and national legalization now seems inevitable, but even so the process is taking time and there are people in power who still buy into the reefer madness memes of yesterday. Societal attitudes take a long time to change, even when the need for change is indisputable.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:03:48 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:05:31 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:07:27 AM EDT
[#12]
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:08:05 AM EDT
[#13]
Hopefully the states that are allowing suppressor use while hunting opens some other doors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:09:42 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? News to me |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:11:15 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
News to me Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? News to me I might have the state wrong, but I swear I remember reading about it here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:11:29 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
exactly Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly The DEA has those states on ignore. There is nothing stopping the feds from changing their minds and enforcing fed law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:12:25 AM EDT
[#17]
These states do their people no services.
They fail to warn any younger populations that the Feds did not condone this, and they WILL be prohibited from armed forces service and other restrictions. Of course, the Feds can step in, weigh in, and clarify, but looks who's in charge.... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:13:27 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:13:49 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
there has to be some states that would allow SBRs or Suppressors. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They don't want to Sbr's and suppressors are already legal in most states. Do you expect a state to pass a law excluding its residents from paying taxes? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:14:30 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The DEA has those states on ignore. There is nothing stopping the feds from changing their minds and enforcing fed law. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly The DEA has those states on ignore. There is nothing stopping the feds from changing their minds and enforcing fed law. This. The feds don't care enough about pot to enforce The Law. They do care, however, about suppressors and belt-feds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:14:41 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The DEA has those states on ignore. There is nothing stopping the feds from changing their minds and enforcing fed law. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly The DEA has those states on ignore. There is nothing stopping the feds from changing their minds and enforcing fed law. But the more states that legalize it, it will render the feds impotent and force a reversal. So again, why not do this with Class 3 and render the ATF impotent?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:14:47 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? - 2 members here have already explained this to you.....its still against Federal Law. They are growing and selling cannabis. - Legal under state law, illegal under federal law. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? - 2 members here have already explained this to you.....its still against Federal Law. They are growing and selling cannabis. - Legal under state law, illegal under federal law. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:14:49 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:16:21 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sbr's and suppressors are already legal in most states. Do you expect a state to pass a law excluding its residents from paying taxes? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: They don't want to Sbr's and suppressors are already legal in most states. Do you expect a state to pass a law excluding its residents from paying taxes? Legal as in go through the proper federal procedures to acquire them. Pot in Colorado doesn't have users go through the Feds to get Pot. So no your argument isn't the same.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:17:27 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. I believe it was Montana. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:18:29 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Utah passed this. Has yet to exercise it or offer me one for sale. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:18:45 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe it was Montana. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. I believe it was Montana. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Well shit, I have no idea now. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:19:16 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
exactly Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly Cuz it's more of case of the .fed deciding not to do something about it. The sates haven't done an over ride the .fed just allows them to do it/just doesn't care. If the fed wanted to they could shut it down anytime. If the states tried that shit with class 3 I don't think the fed would be so laxed about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:19:38 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But the more states that legalize it, it will render the feds impotent and force a reversal. So again, why not do this with Class 3 and render the ATF impotent? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly The DEA has those states on ignore. There is nothing stopping the feds from changing their minds and enforcing fed law. But the more states that legalize it, it will render the feds impotent and force a reversal. So again, why not do this with Class 3 and render the ATF impotent? The number of people buying the devil weed is likely a lot higher than those who want a belt fed. Simple lack of support. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:19:54 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But the more states that legalize it, it will render the feds impotent and force a reversal. So again, why not do this with Class 3 and render the ATF impotent? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly The DEA has those states on ignore. There is nothing stopping the feds from changing their minds and enforcing fed law. But the more states that legalize it, it will render the feds impotent and force a reversal. So again, why not do this with Class 3 and render the ATF impotent? Quick civics lesson....the states can't reverse the feds....the feds reverse the states. If the feds decided to enforce federal drug laws in states like CO, there is really nothing stopping them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:20:06 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:20:50 AM EDT
[#32]
Double tap
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:22:22 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
exactly Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Those laws don't override the federal givernment. They decriminalize it at the state level. How are those State laws NOT overriding the Federal Government? They are growing and selling cannabis. It would be like a State ignoring the Volstead Act, and allowing people to produce and sell alcohol. exactly Obama administration picks and chooses the laws they enforce. Nothing new with these clowns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:23:31 AM EDT
[#34]
Just for shits and giggles, I would love to see the feds break it off in coloradans asses over pot......just to see libs and potheads scream states rights!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:23:32 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. which is another reason it needs to go away.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:23:33 AM EDT
[#36]
It has been pushed in several states such as Montana. The idea is to have everything made in-state to avoid that pesky Commerce Clause and therefore the federal government. Federal government could obviously still charge your for making a can without the proper NFA paperwork/tax. Remember members here saying would State Police from state X arrest the ATF for trying to enforce the law given that circumstance, etc....?
That said even the states that have proposed it and or passed it allowed suppressors and SBRs but no MGs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:24:19 AM EDT
[#37]
Technically Kansas did this with SB102 The Second Amendment Protection Act. I don't believe it has been tested in court yet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:24:20 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It has been pushed in several states such as Montana. The idea is to have everything made in-state to avoid that pesky Commerce Clause and therefore the federal government. Federal government could obviously still charge your for making a can without the proper NFA paperwork/tax. Remember members here saying would State Police from state X arrest the ATF for trying to enforce the law given that circumstance, etc....? That said even the states that have proposed it and or passed it allowed suppressors and SBRs but no MGs. but it would be a start.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:31:31 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It has been pushed in several states such as Montana. The idea is to have everything made in-state to avoid that pesky Commerce Clause and therefore the federal government. Federal government could obviously still charge your for making a can without the proper NFA paperwork/tax. Remember members here saying would State Police from state X arrest the ATF for trying to enforce the law given that circumstance, etc....? That said even the states that have proposed it and or passed it allowed suppressors and SBRs but no MGs. One step at a time. Suppressors, then SBR/SBS, then MGs. 
Actually I'm hopeful on the suppressor front as they are going more and more "main stream". Hell, some states allow hunting with them. I mean really. A suppressor is a harmless item in and of it self. They should be at MOST a 4473/NICS item. Hell in my state (KY) my CCW by passes a NICS check for firearms. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:31:59 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. Prevailing supreme Court decisions would void those specific state laws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:32:30 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Then why don't we get state laws passed to allow Class 3 items? If enough states did it, it would force the hand of the Federal Government just like whats starting with Pot it starting to do. Or the feds could declare everyone living in those states to be an "... unlawful user of or addicted to .... marijuana" and declare them all to be prohibited persons. ATF has already said possession of a medical marijuana ID card, and note they did not day use of marijuana for medical purposes, but possession of the card, means you are an "... unlawful user of or addicted to .... marijuana" and are therefore unable to possess firearms, forever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:33:37 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Prevailing supreme Court decisions would void those specific state laws. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. Prevailing supreme Court decisions would void those specific state laws. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:33:51 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Prevailing supreme Court decisions would void those specific state laws. We all know Fed > State, the point is to nullify and push the fed to where it needs to go, which is what's happening with the whole medical marijuana deal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:34:42 AM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Then why don't we get state laws passed to allow Class 3 items? If enough states did it, it would force the hand of the Federal Government just like whats starting with Pot it starting to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:35:15 AM EDT
[#45]
Uh marijuana is still illegal federally. Doesn't matter if the state says its legal or not.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:35:42 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Yeah, Alabama sounds familiar, too. Maybe that was it. You guys are probably referring the the Firearms Freedom Acts passed by a number of states. All those really do, though I haven't read all of them, is state that items manufactured in-state and don't leave the state aren't subject to federal laws. That, however, doesn't change that most states, from my understanding, have explicit verbiage in their statutes that say NFA items are illegal unless ok'd by the feds. What that seems to do, in effect, is make these Firearms Freedom Acts nothing but feel-good legislation. Firearms Freedom Acts I'm hoping, with the outing of the ATF being a sham of an agency with regards to NFA items with the whole trust thing going on, that more states will be looking towards state legalization of NFA items. That would actually do something in conjunction with these acts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:38:51 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Uh marijuana is still illegal federally. Doesn't matter if the state says its legal or not. But if enough states legalize it, you aren't going to get the federal govt raiding a significant number of states. It just can't and won't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:39:10 AM EDT
[#48]
NY pretty much overrides the federal constitution anyway.
so as HRC said...."what difference does it make?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:40:49 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But if enough states legalize it, you aren't going to get the federal govt raiding a significant number of states. It just can't and won't. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Uh marijuana is still illegal federally. Doesn't matter if the state says its legal or not. But if enough states legalize it, you aren't going to get the federal govt raiding a significant number of states. It just can't and won't. True. But there's nothing like being that one guy the feds decided needed to be pinched. Youtube, social media, etc. they're a helluva drug. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2014 9:40:54 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't it Kentucky or something, that has, or is pushing for, the residents to be able to own Class 3 stuff without the usual fed requirements, as long as it was manufactured in state? I vaguely remember something like that but wasn't sure if it was Kentucky or Alabama. Alaska. We passed it a couple years ago its the Alaska firearms freedom act or something. IT says anything made in state somehow isn't subject to federal laws. As far as I know there hasn't been anyone to test those waters yet
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
