facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Kansas goes crazy over guns



Published: Thu, July 17, 2014 @ 12:00 a.m.

Los Angeles Times: The concept would be laughable if there weren’t so many people taking it seriously.

The idea is that states have the right under the 10th Amendment to unilaterally reject federal laws on issues not expressly reserved for the federal government in the Constitution. It’s an old idea — it had a lot of currency among segregationists during the Civil Rights era — and has been debunked by the Supreme Court.

Nevertheless, the Kansas Legislature last year turned that empty-headed theory into law, adopting what it called the Second Amendment Protection Act (as if the National Rifle Association and the Supreme Court weren’t already doing that). The law exempts guns made in Kansas — and that remain in the state — from all federal gun control laws, and makes it a felony for a federal official to enforce them. That includes laws requiring serial numbers and background checks as well as laws barring the sale of handguns to minors and the sale of firearms to violent domestic abusers.

COURTS REJECT ARGUMENT

Some two dozen other states have similar laws or are contemplating their own versions. Kansas argues that guns that don’t cross state borders fall outside the federal government’s authority to regulate interstate commerce under the Constitution. Courts have already rejected that argument.

Last week, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence asked a federal judge to strike down Kansas’ law; barring an unimaginable upending of decades of precedent, the challenge will prevail. The legal argument is dead. So why are so many state legislators wasting public time and money on these efforts?

So that politicians can strut before their constituents and claim they stood up to the federal government over gun rights — rights, by the way, that the backers of these laws believe are enshrined in the very Constitution they seek to subvert.


Comments

1redeye1(4564 comments)posted 3 months, 1 week ago

It's nice to see that some states are finally waking up to Obammy 's dictator rules. I can only hope OHIO follows the rest of the states in this too.

Suggest removal:

2tnmartin(247 comments)posted 3 months, 1 week ago

the legal argument is NOT dead. The notion that the states are the creatures and servants of the federal government is not only laughable, it's demonstrably wrong. The states created the federal government, not the other way around, and I'm not convinced it was a good idea.
And for the love of all that's holy, the Brady campaign is a collection of loose nuts with a collective IQ in the low 60's, don't cite them as a source for anything but amusement.

Suggest removal:

3lajoci(269 comments)posted 3 months, 1 week ago

"Collective IQ in the low 60"s?"

Sounds like what the pot called the kettle!

For that matter, what gives these right-wingnuts the notion that they are, in some fantasy bubble of their own design, capable of legal analysis beyond the level of asserting the reciprocal of anything they disagree with?

To assert that something is "demonstrably wrong," without bothering to demonstrate the error is what is really laughable.

I guess that's the character of the not-so loyal opposition.

Suggest removal:

4tnmartin(247 comments)posted 3 months ago

If you can find a book that you can puzzle the words out, small ones, or perhaps an audio recording covring the history of the events, you might possibly discover that the states, the original 13 anyway, existed well prior to the formation of the federal government. Said federal government being created as a servant of those states, not their master.
You might, should you be able to do so, learn also that the founding document -- we call it a "Constitution" -- of the new federation, clearly laid out some INDIVIDUAL rights, rights that come directly from the Creator, that are to be defended by that federal government. We sometimes call it "Bill of Rights" in case your attention span carries that far after your cookies and milk and afternoon nap and diaper change. And at the end of that Bill of Rights is very clearly stated that the definitions of powers, scope, responsibility, and reach of that federal government, having been quite explicitly stated earlier, reach NO FURTHER. Any matters beyond those areas are explicitly reserved to the states or to We The People.
Those who worship at the altar of the Leviathan State hate those restrictions, as we see here. Yet the Kansas legislature is proceeding quite properly in warning that the feds need to back off. High time too, and they deserve thanks and similar action in every other state. Beginning here.

Suggest removal:

5lajoci(269 comments)posted 3 months ago

Notice that whenever right-wingnuts advance a particularly weak argument, they resort to the puerile tactic of interjecting school-yard taunts; this line of comments started, remember, with an amateur psychologist's analysis of an opposing group's collective IQ.

It's sad, really, that any loooony-tooon with a computer can sit at home and convince himself that he is a constitutional expert of some kind, and then proceed to look up the whack-a-doodle rants of like-minded amateurs, and post the equivalent of "Yeah! Wadda 'bout dat?"

These little amateurs need to remember that the Federal government is "We the People" as well, having been duly elected by a vote of the majority, and subject to removal from office in subsequent elections.

Suggest removal:

6tnmartin(247 comments)posted 3 months ago

shaking head. Where to begin?
NO, the federal government is NOT "we the people". I really don't know where that particular fantasy began, but there are medications available for certain mental conditions. Or are we hearing from an old-line acid head or other psychedlic day tripper?
The government and the society is not, never has been, and never ever should be conflated. Two different things entirely. The average person knows this, but that is a mental standard well above the run-of-the-mill "Progressive".
And the federal government is not, and was never intended to be, our master. Our servant, at best. We were once warned, and knew, that "government, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a terrible master". It needs to be kept small and starved and weak and inoffensive, and most decisions need to be made at as local a level as is humanly possible. Limits the spread of stupidity. So that, say, some dolts in Leetonia (for example) do something stupid, it's not a requirement in Columbiana. Or Hubbard. Or Sharon. Putting everything at the federal level makes for unlimited stupidity with nearly zero recourse nor accountability. Which seems to be the objective of the American version of the Soviet-era 'nomenklatura' (look it up), complete with our own versions of the NKVD and the Stasi.
The state government in Kansas, responding to the will of the free citizens there, has served notice to the Stasi types in D.C. The folks in Columbus and Harrisburg should do likewise. Soon.

Suggest removal:

7lajoci(269 comments)posted 3 months ago

I repeat, for the enlightenment of the hard-of-hearing, these little amateurs need to remember that the Federal government is "We the People" as well, having been duly elected by a vote of the majority, and subject to removal from office in subsequent elections.

The government, federal, state, or local, is elected -- it does not spring from the earth or fall from the sky, nor does it achieve its position by right of primogeniture or Royal appointment or Papal decree. We, the people, vote.

The paranoia of the baggers is exceeded only by their resentment of legitimate authority.

Suggest removal:

8tnmartin(247 comments)posted 3 months ago

except that you are still wrong.
We The People are the society.
Government, at ANY level, is just that: government.
They are not the same thing. The conflation of the two classifications is one of those distinguishing characteristics of socialism and its first cousin, fascism.
And I repeat.
The states got together and created the federal government to take care of those few and carefully defined matters best handled at a level above. Such things as postal services, sound coinage (another failure), national defense, and very little else. Most things were to be done at a local level, a few things at the level of the county, some at the state level, and very very very few at the federal level.
And the federal government, like such at the state or county or town level, is intended to be the servant of the nation, not the master of the citizens or of the several states.
Sadly, too many either are ignorant of this basic truth, or as in the case of the idiot "Progressive" types, either lie about the truth or work furiously to bury the truth.
Kansas did right. We should push for similar actions in Columbus and in Harrisburg.

Suggest removal:

9lajoci(269 comments)posted 3 months ago

No. You are wrong.

WE THE PEOPLE govern ourselves through our ELECTED representatives.

Government, elected by the people, serves the people. It's why Lincoln, the first Republican president, used the words "government of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE, and for the PEOPLE."

It's why the Constitution begins: "We, the People . . ."

Please go back to freaking school and pay attention this time.

(The real failure of public education is that there are these idiot baggers running around pontificating on their versions of what America was, is, and should be, when, in reality, the baggers need to have their high school diplomas revoked. Sad!)

Suggest removal:

10lajoci(269 comments)posted 3 months ago

By the way, your understanding of the terms "fascism" and "socialism" is, well, wrong, too.

Please learn something about the terms you use BEFORE slinging your blather . . . uh, er . . . opinion around for us all to laugh at.

(But it's obvious that no one who knows you bothers to pay any attention to your ignorant rants, so this blog serves something of a purpose for you, I guess. Just do us all a favor and self-educate yourself. It will make you feel better, and we'll all be less irritated.)

Suggest removal:

11tnmartin(247 comments)posted 3 months ago

first, let us recall the term "totalitarian". One of the distinguishing marks of it is when the distinct roles of the government and the Society are blurred into one. Ain't supposed to be, and it inevitably leads to tyranny.
second, sorry but fascism and socialism are, as I said, first cousins.
recall the true fascist state (and for the time being forget that we've actually HAD a President whose philosophy and inclination are quite distinctly fascist, is was that father of Progressivism, Woodrow Wilson). The usual reference to real Fascism by that name is Italy under Benito Mussolini. Old Benny was, for a good while, much admired by the "progressives" here and elsewhere, why he made the trains run on time, they said. All the omelets and cracked eggs arguments got used. But do you remember Benny's previous role? He was a BIG shot with the Italian Communist Party. Fell out with them over the matter of WW1, but lived the rest of his life and died believing he was a "true" socialist.
Or let us consider the other movement that the illiterate call fascist. Adolf (Schicklgruber) Hitler. You know, the Nazi type. Do you recall the REAL name of the party? National SOCIALIST German Workers Party. Socialist. Not of the Marxist flavor, true, but socialist yes. And, like Benny, he lived and to the day he died believed that he was a socialist. And so he was.
I know the truth is often hidden in justifiable shame, but the FACT is that during the 1920's and 1930's, really up to around the start of WW2, a whole lot of "progressives" in the US were big supporters of the two movements both here and in "sophisticated" Europe. Fact is, they and the Communists were more competitors than opponents, and even during the war it wasn't until Hitler chose to attack east, to gain the breadbasket of Russia and Ukraine rather than west towards England, that the "progressive" opinions changed. It wasn't the the "Holocaust" that changed their minds; they were (and in places like the New York Times still are) hiding the "Holodomor", the great famine in Ukraine, that was deliberate genocide by the socialists. Look up the name Walter Duranty some time.
Things like the Holodomor and the Holocaust and the Killing Fields of Cambodia can happen when the State and the Society are seen as the same thing and there is no limit on size and power of the State. "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuehrer!" is music to the ears of the Progressives, they just change the words to mean "Hope and Change".

Suggest removal:

12lajoci(269 comments)posted 2 months, 4 weeks ago

"Do you recall the REAL name of the party? National SOCIALIST German Workers Party. Socialist. Not of the Marxist flavor, true, but socialist yes."

The Nazis loooooved to play with words and their meanings almost as much as you do. Remember the slogan that adorned the entrance to Auschwitz?

Once again, that you do NOT know what you are talking about is so obvious as to be laughable.

Believe what you will.

I'm done with this.

Suggest removal:

13tnmartin(247 comments)posted 2 months, 4 weeks ago

and, again, the words are evidently too big for you.
Let me say it again. There is more than one variety of socialism. Some evidently think that the only type is the sort we associate with Karl Marx and Lenin. That is incorrect. Wrong, in other words.
Hitler very definitely did consider himself to be a socialist, he just opposed the Internationalist version of Marx, Engels, Lenin, et al. Yet he managed to cooperate with them when it suited. You might remember that the invasion of Poland that some call the start of WW2 had Poland invaded by the Germans AND by the Russki's. If one was wrong and evil -- and it was -- then both were.
Yes, "Arbeit Macht Frei" was a deceptive slogan. Wife's grandfather died in one of those camps. But I also know people whose grandparents died in the Holodomor of the Ukraine, a matter that LIEberals covered for, and still do.
Have a nice day. Didn't know they had internet access at the group home.

Suggest removal:

14lajoci(269 comments)posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago

No amount or variety of baseless assertions will negate the fact that the Nazis are considered a prime example of a fascist government, the antithesis of socialism. Their use of the term "socialist" was as ironic as their use of the death-camp inscription -- indeed, the Nazis were as well-known for the violence they perpetrated on language as they were for their other murderous pursuits.

Hitler portrayed himself as whatever would ingratiate himself with his base, the disgruntled, paranoid German middle class, who were as easily inflamed by bitterness and negativity as the baggers of today.

By the way, none of your words, genuine or make-believe, will ever be too big for me, so forget trying to portray yourself as some kind of intellectual elitist or erudite literati. Try to confine your comments to the issues at hand, and dispense with the weak, school-yard taunts.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport