• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

.

how exactly does that work. i.e. jackbooted thugs show up at your door and cart you away, and you say..."hey, my state does not recognize those new federal gun control laws....." as they tase you Bro'
 
It's just some meaningless chest-thumping.

Kind of like South Carolina pulled the same shit in 1836 over tariffs.
 
Spanz said:
how exactly does that work. i.e. jackbooted thugs show up at your door and cart you away, and you say..."hey, my state does not recognize those new federal gun control laws....." as they tase you Bro'
Click to expand...

According to the article, it's more like a chance for states to join a club of other states that don't want to pass any anti-2a laws themselves. Not including los Federales.
 
only for NEW 2A laws? Not existing one, like all NFA rules, that would be sweet.

I know in TX if you're a felon, 5 years after you get out of jail you're allowed to own firearms (maybe its just long guns?) but they can not leave your property. You're a PP, so I'm sure it has to be a private sale, or maybe build your own? And you can still be charged Federally.

Maybe its like the same thing as this and MJ laws. Legal at state level, illegal at Fed level.
 
Funny how the federales only enforce laws democrats believe in. As I repeatedly say, Massachusetts, California, et al violate Heller and/or MacDonald in various capacities, but you don't see FBI coming to demanding removal of LTC's to exercise a Constitutional right.

Meanwhile, in Colorado.....
 
I think this means more coming from a state that is already constitutional carry. For example, if for some strange reason MA had started this idea, it'd be too little too late for we are so far from constitutional carry. However, AZ is essentially reaffirming that they're serious about the 2A as a civil right.
 
Back
Top Bottom