Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Government

Here’s How Wyoming Lawmakers Are Trying to Beat Obama Admin. to the Punch on Possible Gun Ban

Jan. 10, 2013 3:22pm Jason Howerton

Wyoming Lawmakers Propose Law to Protect Gun Owners From Federal Gun Ban

File-In this Thursday, July 26, 2012 file photo an AR-15 style rifle is displayed at the Firing-Line indoor range and gun shop, in Aurora, Colo. Similar weapons have been used in at least four high-profile shootings in the past year, including most recently the Connecticut school shootings and the Christmas Eve killings of two New York firefighters. Credit: AP

A number of Wyoming lawmakers are proposing legislation intended to protect gun owners from any future federal ban on semi-automatic rifles or high capacity magazines, KTWO reports.

Introduced last week, the “Firearms Protection Act” would make any federal law banning semi-automatic rifles or limiting magazine capacity unenforceable in Wyoming.

In fact, under the proposed bill, anyone who tried to enforce a federal gun ban could be charged with a felony. The Wyoming Attorney General’s office would also be permitted to defend any state resident against a federal gun ban.

“An act relating to firearms; providing that any federal law which attempts to ban a semi-automatic firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on firearms in this state shall be unenforceable in Wyoming; proving a penalty; and providing for an effective date,” the bill states.

“Any official, agent or employee of the United States government who enforces or attempts to enforce any act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the United States government upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition that is owned or manufactured commercially or privately in Wyoming and that remains exclusively within the borders of Wyoming shall be guilty of a felony,” the proposed legislation adds.

Per the Washington Examiner’s Charlie Spiering:

One of the bill’s co-sponsors, Wyoming State Senator Larry Hicks, told The Washington Examiner that this type of legislation sends a message to the federal government in Washington D.C.

“It says that your one size fits all solution doesn’t comport to what a vast majority of the state believes,” Hicks explained in an interview.

Citing the Tenth and the Second Amendments, Hicks asserted that the legislation was Constitutional, adding that he fully expected it to pass in the Wyoming state legislature. Hicks said that his Wyoming constituents were upset about the looming threat of gun control coming from Washington, particularly since Vice President Biden signaled yesterday that President Obama was willing to issue an executive order to tackle the gun issue.

[...]

Hicks explained that the model of the bill was taken from a bill passed in the State of Montana in 2009 adding that it wasn’t much different from what he’d seen other states do.

Whether or not such a law would actually be effective is a topic that will likely be debated. However, the so-called “Supremacy Clause” in the U.S. Constitution says federal law overrules state law when the two conflict. Still, as we’ve seen in states that have recently legalized marijuana, like Colorado and Washington, the feds don’t always immediately exert their power over a state’s sovereignty.

Read the entire Firearms Protection Act here.

Featured image via Getty

(H/T: Drudge)

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (336)

pakaeboiboi
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 7:07pm
Dear Leader …. SLAVES DON’T NEED GUNS …. disarm your SLAVES NOW before it’s too late ….

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
mdy616
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 7:07pm
JROOK Says ” How exactly would you apply it in defending how gun manufacturers, wholesalers and gun shops “loose” track of 100,000 guns per year.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I guess they could take a page from Obama’s playbook from Fast and Furious and deny it ever happened and try to blame it on someone else. When that fails, refuse to answer any further questions about it. But since gun manufactures have not lost 10,000s of guns it would not apply. Those were the guns Obama used for fast and Furious or that he gave to the terrorists in Syria that we were trying to kill in Afghanistan but decided they were useful in Syria.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jfreak13713
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 7:01pm
The Constitution assures Americans of the right own gus and it doesn’t exclude certain types of guns. Whether you agree with that or not it is still fact. So unless you believe you can chage the Constitution it might be wise to come up with a plan that doesn’t keep people from buying any kind of gun they desire but also provides some oversight for those purchasing the types of guns reasonable Americans could say are more dangerous than others. Such as a weapon like the AR-15.

I would suggest asking anyone who desire to purchase that kind of weapon to simply apply for permit which would register the gun at the STATE level, be certified to use, clean, and store the weapon, and pass background check.

Easy! No rights violated.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
john654
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 7:00pm
Stock water, food and Guns!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
rickroland
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 6:59pm
Oh, and from the article “Whether or not such a law would actually be effective is a topic that will likely be debated. However, the so-called “Supremacy Clause” in the U.S. Constitution says federal law overrules state law when the two conflict.” — this would only be the case where the Federal law is constitutional. If it isn’t constitutional, it isn’t law, state’s win that argument via 10th amendment and other arguments.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
rickroland
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 6:57pm
In an era where we cannot even count on our elected Representatives, Senators and President to uphold their solemn oaths of office related to the Constitution, individual states are the next logical entities to demand and take actions to uphold those rights in the name of their citizenry. Many more states should be telling the Federal government “Not only ‘No!’, but “He** No!’”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
truthnstuff
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 6:56pm
Wyoming rocks!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
MrKnowItAll
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 6:50pm
Imagine the Man Power Needed to attempt Gun Confiscation.
Imagine trying to find that many Suicidal people to Attempt Confiscation.
Obama will claim Job Creation.
It’s leads to the Question? Are You Really Brave. Or will you Fold when they show up.
Growing up in Detroit. Many will Fold. Forever wish they did not.
Love of Country is a Battlefield.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Zundfolge
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 6:40pm
If only Laramie and Cheyenne weren’t such armpits … and the rest of the state wasn’t so cold, windy and desolate … and Jackson wasn’t so freakin’ expensive and full of liberals I’d pack my stuff and move there.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ICEDRAGONNITE
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 6:35pm
The Quest For The Ultimate Power! 1/10/2013
As Vice President Joe Biden puts on his act of looking for answers to what is needed for gun control, he is also espousing the side stepping of Congress, via Presidential Order to enact gun control bans on various part of weapons or a weapon that looks a certain way or adding additional expenses on the licensing of said weapons or ammunition.
I understand the heartfelt knee jerk reaction to the school shootings across the nation. However to null or change an Amendment to the Constitution of the United States by Presidential Order is Unconstitutional. In fact Presidential Orders themselves are Unconstitutional but have not been challenged at this time. So to accept that the President or Vice president can assume the power of the people to change a Right given by our Creator is absolutely an act of SEDITION or even HIGH TREASON. Any Congressmen allowing this Presidential Order to stand, without taking action against the said same is him/her-self guilty of Sedition and Treason by means of quietly standing by and doing nothing. This is called Nonfeasance. Which is tantamount to voting affirmative, for this Presidential Order of GUN Control or the Banning of parts or ammunition for said guns. Including the over regulation of such.

Below are the reasons for the Bill Of Rights as argued by our forefathers.
During the debates on the adoption of the Constitution

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
1SFG
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:52pm
JRook fails to realize the 2nd Ammendment protects the rest of the Bill of Rights! Sspecially the precious 1st Amendment

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
1SFG
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:49pm
Your country was founded by the British trying to enact 18th century gun control. Wikipedia what hapenned to the tyrannical British on 19 April 1775. History does repeat itself!
Don’t tread on me!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
1SFG
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:45pm
JRook
The 2nd Amendment was put there because Patriots stood up to a tyrant and the result was it gave you a country! Our forefathers saw and lived through a tyranny which your “Lord and Master’ will “try” to repeat again.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Essential_Liberty
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:43pm
Way to go Wyoming and good luck! At least we see your State is trying to beat (That Guy), his Administration & AGENDA!

Our State generates over 2million a year in hunting revenue alone. I’m contacting our South Dakota Rep asap. I would think other States would also at the very least try. Time is slipping away from us. This Administration is unfortunately moving at record speed. To achieve their goal, which those of us here see the facts.

“It is a common observation here that our cause is the cause of all mankind, and that we are fighting for their liberty in defending our own. … We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.” ~ Benjamin Franklin~

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
pappywags
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:42pm
As a Patriot there are things worth dying for.
Our Founding Fathers were willing to dedicate their very lives, so must we be prepared to stand for Liberty, for our God, our Children our Wives and our Country.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- alinskythis
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:56pm
  Right you are, and if we roll up now, how many of those who sacrificed and died will come back to haunt us?
  
  Americans have been pampered and lulled, and have to learn to reconnect with those original values, and to fight and be strong again.
  
  Report this comment
1SFG
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:39pm
JRook. Your comments obviously show how indoctrinated you really are. The Second Amendment doesn’t say that you and your toadies can tell me what I need, or have a need for. Go back to whatever Euro-trash country your ignorant ancestors came from.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Fishmanone
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:53pm
  Well said 1SFG!!! And to this troll JROOK, If the goverment has one,I can have one whether it be a machine gun,tank,battleship,genade laucher or surface to air missle!!!
  
  Report this comment
alinskythis
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:39pm
If someone with mental instability is targeted as a future convenient patsy for gun grabbing propaganda, it wouldn’t take long to nail their exact psychological profile, their fears and triggers, and implement the various ways of just how to drive that person over the edge.

Reportedly, extremely sophisticated electronic methods exist, along with psychological warfare techniques, to manipulate a target into just about anything, from bad relationship, financial or business decisions to slaughtering their co-workers.

Like Amy Bishop, who lost it and shot up her colleagues after years of workplace sabotage and mobbing. Year after year she was denied tenure, and no one asked why. Was she being targeted by the University for stalking, harassment and career sabotage??

Anyone who has been the victim of this vicious workplace mobbing – it is a world-wide phenomenon no one talks about – knows how extreme it is, and the psychological damage that can result.

The guy who shot up the babies (I can’t even remember their names anymore) already had problems.

How hard would it have been to make him even more unstable and paranoid using his own mother, possibly the person he trusted the most, and the specter of being committed, the thing he probably feared the most, just when “they” needed such an incident?

Ask yourself why the big grab now……

Because they are about to do something monstrous which they know we would never willingly accept.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- arguy
  Posted on January 11, 2013 at 7:47pm
  Something monsterous! Look at what has happened already. Five government employees have been killed for political reasons and those are the ones that we have heard reports about.
  
  Report this comment
1SFG
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:26pm
“Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war let it begin here.” Captain John Parker, Lexington Green, April 19, 1775.

Bring it!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- woodyee
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:37pm
  I think that quote pretty much answers the question regarding who fired the shot heard ’round the world.
  
  Report this comment
- 1SFG
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:46pm
  Woodyee, your 100% right brother!
  
  Report this comment
Sjah
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:26pm
GO WY need to start fighting back offense offense offense.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
alinskythis
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:25pm
Does anyone actually still believe that the sudden rash of any given collection of violent gun murders – so VERY conveniently timed – are random, isolated incidents by some crazy guy?

It is statistically impossible.

The first thing I thought of when those 20 babies were killed was, “We aren’t being compliant enough with their New World Order, so now they’re going to start executing babies like hostages…..”

And don’t say, “They would never do that” because they would. “They” hate children most of all, and I’ve personally seen little ones being blatantly corrupted by authorities who have turned to the dark side.

This Manchurian Candidate patsy business has been going on for decades, and yet they are still being treated as unconnected, random incidents.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- truthnstuff
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 6:58pm
  Kamikazes! Just because some say conspiracy doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
  
  Report this comment
thereyougoagain
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:20pm
Score one for liberty!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
merchantsailor
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:19pm
10th Amendment, Article 1, Section 8, Nullification If the States had any stones and the state legislatures invoked nullification under the 10th Amendment the Feds can’t do squat. Educate yourself on Nullification. It was put in by Jefferson and Madison as the last vestige to a runaway Federal Government. I am afraid we have gone to far down the slippery slope to claw our way back. The future looks bleak.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
woodyee
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:13pm
Apparently, someone did not hear Glenn Beck correctly. Here’s what one of our sisters has to say – HollyRye
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 4:40pm

Glenn did NOT say to hand over your guns. He said to refuse to send over your guns and tell them to arrest you for not doing so. If millions of gun owners that, what will they do? Arrest millions?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- alinskythis
  Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:50pm
  The copious use of the terms “Brother” and “Sister” are hallmarks of the Illuminati Federal Family Shadow Government.
  
  It’s a dead giveaway to me every time, as well as the copious, frivolous, callow and inappropriate use of the term, “I love you.”
  
  Man, I wish someone would pay me a nice stipend to sit on my jammie-clad, cushy buns and blog all day.
  
  Interesting that those among you here who are a member of this global cult don’t mob, stalk, harass and impersonate and misrepresent me on this site, as you have done on others. I guess that would blow your cover, right?
  
  The only tiny bone I will ever throw “you” for your part is the fact that, apparently, there is no such thing as “no,” and “if you’re not for us, you’re against us,” and NO ONE wants to have done to them what they are forced to do to others (for some very nice personal gain, I must say).
  
  That being said, I willingly share the place with you in hopes that you will come around and realize that playing ball is not only no guarantee of success or even survival, it may very well put you at the top of the hit list, and you’ll never see it coming.
  
  Report this comment
TimPatriot
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 5:00pm
If this twisted logic laid the foundation for Obamacare….

The Supreme Court interpreted the United States Constitution’s Commerce Clause under Article 1 Section 8, which permits the United States Congress “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”. The Court decided that Filburn’s wheat growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for chicken feed on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, Filburn’s production of more wheat than he was allotted was affecting interstate commerce. Thus, Filburn’s production could be regulated by the federal government.

Then…the obama administration will do as they wish….and only the SCOTUS can override after a longer set of appeals. Too bad Nobamunism is sure to pick up one or two Supreme Court Justices this term….We are screwed! The only good news here is that Wyoming is prepared to take this to the Supreme Court quickly.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
pahrumper
Posted on January 10, 2013 at 4:58pm
They might also ban anyone form Taxifornia from coming into the state,,,,they are tanted!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.