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

Virginia Could Soon Refuse to Enforce Federal Gun Control

Jan. 28, 2013 12:35pm Mytheos Holt

With proponents of gun control emboldened and opponents of gun control embattled at the Federal level, it was probably only a matter of time before states started trying to flex their muscles over the question of any new regulations.

Last week, Wyoming fired the proverbial first shot. Texas, Mississippi and Tennessee followed soon. And now, the battle has spread to a state that President Obama himself carried: Virginia.

The Virginia Pilot reports the Virginia House of Delegates recently voted a bill out of committee that would effectively ban Virginia’s law enforcement community from enforcing any new regulations on gun rights by the Federal government.

This experiment in what looks an awful lot like the constitutionally discredited tactic of nullification, however, may be less inflammatory than it appears at first blush. The original Virginian-Pilot story suggests that Virginia’s gun rights advocates think the bill is simply a symbolic bit of posturing with no actual power:

For at least one gun enthusiast, the measure has a laudable intent that doesn’t go far enough.

“If we don’t put some teeth into it, it’ll be useless,” Mike McHugh of the Virginia Gun Owners Coalition told the committee. “I think we’re coming to a point in this country where the states are going to have to finally decide – and I hope it doesn’t end up like years ago – that we’re going to have to face down Barack Obama’s federal plantation.”

Asked what sort of “teeth” he meant, McHugh cited a proposed measure in Texas that would “put in jail any federal officer that dared to violate the sacred soil of Texas.”

So who’s right? We took a look at the bill itself, and it looks as though any alarmism over a constitutional crisis is probably unwarranted. It says something, for instance, that the bill is so short that we can post the full text:

1. § 1. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of law, no agency of the Commonwealth as defined in § 8.01-385 of the Code of Virginia, no political subdivision of the Commonwealth as defined in § 8.01-385 of the Code of Virginia, and no employee of either, acting in his official capacity, shall:

(A) knowingly aid any employee or entity of the federal government of the United States in any investigation, prosecution, detention, or arrest, nor participate in any search or seizure, relating to any, criminal, civil, or administrative restrictions on firearms, firearm magazines, ammunition, or components thereof, based on any federal statute enacted, or Executive Order or regulation issued, after December 31, 2012; or

(B) knowingly aid any employee or entity of the federal government of the United Sates in conducting, or the enforcement of any requirement for, any background check related to any intrastate sale, loan, gift, or other transfer of firearms between citizens of the Commonwealth who do not possesses any federal firearms license under 18 U.S.C. section 293.

Readers should notice an important omission in the bill: It does not specify any punishments for transgressing it. As such, law enforcement could arguably treat the bill as meaningless, symbolic dictum, and there’s no legal guarantee that any sort of repercussions would be forthcoming. Then again, the absence of teeth may be what makes the bill passable in the first place.

(H/T: Business Insider)

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (145)

Nevermind
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:45pm
Sure, Virginia can go right ahead and ignore federal law. Once they attempt it the federal government can enact the military cuts and all of those freedom lovers in Virginia who” dont need no stinking government” will be upset when they have to close their businesses. Wihtout the government virginia would be broke so i hope they bite the hand that feeds them

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 00100111
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:54pm
  Yawn. Oh, I’m sorry did you type something? It must not have been important. I’ll do what your name suggests…nevermind.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:56pm
  Executive orders are not binding law on the states. They are restricted mainly to those areas where the Executive branch has direct authority, such as pay raises for his x-branch lackies, etc. Since we both know Congress is going to do NOTHING to advance his gun control wet dream, and the States know this as well, then there’s no harm or wrong in telling the federal government that coming to XYZ state to enforce illegal executive orders won’t be met well by the locals.
  
  Besides, even Congressional law that infringes on a right are by definition unconstitutional. Nobody has a duty to obey unconstitutional laws, at any level.
  
  Report this comment
- ForMyKidsVA
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:56pm
  So we lose some military money in order to keep our guns. I will take that trade off. Plus, maybe the skies at VA Beach will be quieter then. Win-win.
  
  Report this comment
- John.Galt
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:57pm
  No worries. The FEDERAL govt is going bankrupt, so all those jobs will disappear anyway.
  
  Then what are YOU going to do? My guess is you will die at the hands of a hungry lib-tard.
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:07pm
  With the deepiest natural ports in America ,coal in the west and oil on and off shore I’m quite sure Vitginia could do just fine without the Government. And when that government money dries up all those leeching on virginia tax payers will just have to move to some state still sucking govt c*ck.
  And if the government wants to play hardball all that land the fede. see fits to call Their could easily face a fed. users tax REGULATION of what ever the residence decide…..
  Virginia doesn’t need Washington it Washington that needs Virginia……When the evil corrupt capital that has risen in D.C falls VIRGINIA WILL STILL BE THERE STRONGER AND STILL FOR LOVER
  LOVERS OF FREEDOM THAT IS
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:14pm
  One lst thing the article said”the constitutionally discredited tactic of nullification” Nullifacation has never been Constitutional discredited fact is the right to a jury your peers is an argument for nullifacation of injustice laws not against it. A supreme court of judges each appointed by a president with who pick judges who side with his ideology doesn’t create a panel of Constitutionalist but in most cases anti-constitutionalist instead who base decision on bias ideology thus not truely Constitutional.
  
  Report this comment
- ozchambers
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:16pm
  This freedom loving Virginian is all for biting the fist that strikes us. I hope they pass this, I hope they give it teeth, I hope it inspires others to stand.
  
  As for our State “being broke without the (federal) government” I think you need to understand that our Federal Government is already broke, as well as broken.
  
  Cutting ourselves from the Federal Government would be like cutting the ropes securing a life raft to a sinking luxury liner. Sure we will miss the Grand Staircase, the chandeliers, the mahogany dining hall with lobster and steak, the quartet playing Pachabel’s “Canon in D”. I suppose the only thing we wouldnt miss would be the 12 degree water flooding our lungs just before we die.
  
  Report this comment
- SocialistSlayer
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:22pm
  Bite the Hand That Feeds Them ??? Last time I looked it was the citizens that pay the Bills !! The only thing the Federal Government does is take !
  
  Report this comment
- lefty5005
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:24pm
  The Federal govt is more dependent on the states and if you read the Constitution the Fed govt does not exist without the states. This could come to a head someday if a Federal officer tries to confiscate a handgun but if this is done it would be done by local law enforcement who know that that dog don’t hunt. They don’t want to die and will disobey the order. The only way handguns, rifles or whatever could be confiscated is if it is done through full military force by our military and if it comes to that we already have civil war anyway. There would be a military coup d’etat before the military would do that. Generals would not obey the order from the civilian leadership, hence coup d’etat.
  
  Report this comment
- kahieb
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:36pm
  Wonderful, an Obama boot licker…
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:38pm
  The Observant Student is invited to note the Premise and Logic of NeMind.
  
  One should not stand up for one’s GOD Endowed, UNalienable, Individual Rights because THEN Nanny Sammy will take away your goodies and make you go to bed without supper.
  Oh gee, I want to get my share from the FedSow so I shouldn’t say anything about the Abrogation of My Constitutional Rights.
  The Thoughtful Student will reflect on NeMind’s World View here vis a vis The 3rd Reich.
  
  Report this comment
- nocalifornia
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:47pm
  Since those “freedom loving” Virginians are also Freedom Loving Americans whats your point? People like yourself forget we get our freedoms from God not the state and the federal government works for us.
  
  Report this comment
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:48pm
  It all boils down to force in the end. Ink on paper does not mean crap. Ultimately the bullets will have to fly and a winner or winners will be decided.
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:48pm
  OZ
  Kudos and ditto. Well put sir, well put.
  
  Report this comment
- A_CALL_TO_CONSCIENCE
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:01pm
  Well if they do listen to those laws I’m moving!
  
  Report this comment
- fastfacts
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:18pm
  Every red state and some blue states are doing the same thing but did you know that AK has had this law in play for years. AK State government has always stood for our rights.
  
  Did you see the video of Obama in 2008 claiming the government has the right to limit our 2nd amendment rights: http://www.thedailycandidate.com/video/2013/jan/obama_gun_confiscation.html
  
  Report this comment
- mikem1969
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:58pm
  Many other states are preparing to do the same.
  
  Report this comment
- Fat Hubie
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 4:35pm
  Atta boy, use the economic power of the US government to force constitutional violations.
  BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY , right Mr.Ayers. You may not understand “infringement” , but you can be taught “inalienable”.
  
  Report this comment
- onjeffriv
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 7:09pm
  Without the NOVA government influence VA would be run by Virginians. Now we have people who don’t even speak english deciding federal elections.
  
  Report this comment
- PoleSitter
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 7:44pm
  “Wihtout (sic) the government (sic) virginia (sic) would be broke so i (sic) hope they bite the hand that feeds them”… so what exactly are you saying? That Virginia should do =what= because so many Eastern Virginians work for/with the Federal Government? Your statement is one of anger based upon a visceral response to something you didn’t like. Don’t will ill on others simply because you disagree. It doesn’t elevate the conversation.
  
  Report this comment
- dmerwin
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 8:04pm
  30 states with Republican Governors. One Eric Holder. It would take years and years to try each case to it’s conclusion. Find one sympathetic federal judge to grant a stay and then on to the Supreme Court.
  
  Report this comment
- Shenandoahvalleyminuteman
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 8:31pm
  Nevermind, you are a repulsive hack job. Get a life you liberal washout. I’m a virginian and we have a governor who is a real patriot. A bit more than I can say about you. Va get a ton of federal money because of the military presence. It just so happens that the Atlantic fleet is stationed in our waters not to mention our many air force bases. You just keep on flapping your jaws and if the $hit hits the fan yull be wishing you was the shenandoahvalleyminuteman. Boooo
  
  Report this comment
- Servant Of YHVH
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 9:47pm
  “Then again, the absence of teeth may be what makes the bill passable in the first place.”
  
  The absence of teeth is what makes it totally worthless if it’s passed or not. They might as well save a few buck and drop the entire thing if they word it this way.
  
  Report this comment
- NotAGolfer
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 10:15pm
  If we didn’t have to send all our money to the Federal government to squander on idiot schemes–so they can take most of it to support their bureaucracy, then make us come begging for a small bit back in the form of grants and subsidies–we’d be a MUCH richer State. Limit the Feds focus to national defense, interstate highways, and printing currency (with better rules). That’s about all they can and should handle. Let the States then compete, and learn from one another’s successes and failures, to offer citizens the best economies possible.
  
  Report this comment
beer4me
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:42pm
Oklahoma’s

The “Oklahoma 2nd Amendment Preservation Act” is now working its way through the Oklahoma legislature.

Introduced by state senator Nathan Dahm, this legislation puts Oklahoma shoulder-to-shoulder with Wyoming and Texas by putting federal gun-grabbers in check.

The language of the legislation is clear: “Federal acts, laws, orders, rules, regulations, bans or registration requirements regarding firearms constitute an infringement on the individual right [to keep and bear arms] in the Constitution of the United States…and are hereby declared to be invalid in the State of Oklahoma.”

The legislation mentions the “intent” of America’s “Founders” and the Constitution’s “ratifiers,” and sets forth the punishment for trying to enforce new gun control measures:

Any official, agent, or employee of the United States government or any employee of a corporation providing services to the United States government that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this act shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction…shall be punished by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections not to exceed five (5) years.

After reading this legislation, only one word comes to mind–FREEDOM.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SlaveToTruth
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:10pm
  I think the state legislatures have a better way to fight gun control. The National Guard is the well regulated militia of each state and the U.S. military has got their hooks into them. But, we have a large group of armed citizens I’ll call the unregulated militia. Oklahoma and other states should allow all unregulated militia to sign up officially.
  
  Once you have your official unregulated militia, make them unpaid members of the government of Oklahoma. Then purchase through state agencies: high capacity magazines, bullets, AR 15s, and even better fully automatic weapons. Allow the unregulated militia to have any damn firearm, magazine or bullet they want, all they have to do is buy it from the Oklahoma unregulated militia agency. Since all these gun control laws exempt “government officials” we simply make all citizens of the state government officials.
  
  Report this comment
Metallicat
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:36pm
Senator Joe Manchin is a weasel faced liar and traitor to the people of WV.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Bonnieblue2A
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:05pm
  Indeed. Are the people of WV going to initiate a recall?
  
  Report this comment
- Soggy
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:12pm
  Isn’t “weasel faced liar and traitor” synomous with Democratic Senator?
  
  Report this comment
Saff SGT
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:36pm
The teeth in this law is in the hands of the citizen who gets attacked bt a Goveerment agent for Obama infringing on 2nd amendment rights. The constitution syas not to be infringed, so folks have every right to protect their rights any way they can. Show me in the Bill of rights where it says AR 15s cant be owned or used… then we will talk a little maybe.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ares338
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:36pm
Way to go Virginia. I’m a Virginian by birth and a Texan by choice. The best of both worlds.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
BlackCrow
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:31pm
This is all ink on paper until a governor or an elected sheriff throws the first federal bureaucrat in jail for attempting to enforce some federal dictate. Then and only then all hell is going to break loose.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
mw747
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:27pm
There is hope now we need the change. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4RuWK2Ww-4 ..
Sheriffs standing TALL.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The-Monk
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:26pm
FYI…. Supah_Patriot is none other than EtchySketchy/Pork_Anvil…..

Got ya sucker!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
phillyatheist
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:25pm
at what point do these bills become sedition? maybe after they are passed? if i were the attorney general i’d prosecute. there’s no place for this kind of talk, unless someone wants a new civil war. first it was the secessionists, not it’s the nullificationers. the republican party has gone off the rails. as bad as they are in DC they are even worse at the state level.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Saff SGT
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:32pm
  go to red China and live Lefty
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:33pm
  The 10th Amendment is not sedition.
  
  Of course you’d prosecute. You cannot harbor the thought of some escaping your grasp, and the notion of dissent to authority is anathema to your indoctrination.
  
  Lots of us are dissenting now, and states are following suit. What are you and your kind going to do when we ignore you into oblivion? When states by and large tell you to pound sand? Going to send in your bureaucrats against entire states? Hardly.
  
  You’re being neutered. Get used to it.
  
  Report this comment
- Helen Hyde
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:42pm
  Are you stupid? I guess if you are an athiest liberal you must be.
  This country is a Constitutional Republic. That means that the supreme law is the Constitution. The fruit of the day elected party does not have the right to change that just because they feel like it.
  All attacks on the 2nd Amendment or other Constitutionally given rights by the fed gubmit needs to be
  defended against by the states and the people.
  If you were the attorney general you probably would have given automatic weapons to the drug cartels just like the traitorous filthy bastard holder did.
  
  If you like gun control so much, go where they already have it.
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:44pm
  GHOST – is there some State Army that i’m unaware of? or are your militias going to take on the US gov’t?
  
  all of these protests/stupid bills are just angry rhetoric. no one is takin’ yer guns. some simple common sense regulations is not grounds for nullification. you people just keep seeming crazier and crazier.
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:51pm
  HELEN – it isn’t up to the state gov’t to decide what is constitutional and what isn’t. that’s what the supreme court is for. i’d ask if you’re stupid but “fed gubmit” tells me all i need to know.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:56pm
  It’s called the 10th amendment. Sorry buddy, but the states have more power than the feds. You need to sit down and shut up, adults are talking.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:58pm
  Philly, you’re about to see the militias soon enough… I can’t wait to see you p*ss yourself when you do. :)
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:00pm
  001 – adults are talking? as most adults know, the civil war kinda settled the argument about state’s rights. you want to go down that road again be my guest – i’d love for there to be fewer rednecks in the country.
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:00pm
  State Army = Virginia National Guard. Those are State Armies.
  
  Aside from that, private gun owners or even a fraction of them out number the government forces by a vast margin. Virginia also leads the States in the number of ACTUAL private machine guns (not just the weapons you hoplophobic pants wetting fascists think are machine guns). Also, can you be so sure that the US Army would fire on American Citizens? If you are so sure, then how crazy is it that we would be willing to arm against a military force so eager to shoot its own people? Your arguments seem to be: “We’re not fascists! You’re all crazy.. but if you stand up to us, we fascists will easily murder you!”
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:01pm
  @Philly
  
  I love the use of boilerplate, repetitive talking points. I say this in hopes that those mentoring you can give you a nice raise as you progress up the hierarchy.
  
  There is no “common sense legislation”. The bill being preferred right now will fail. It likely doesn’t even have the votes in the Senate, let alone the House where it is guaranteed a quick death. Period. That leaves executive orders, which hold no sway over the states nor state law. If they manage to shove the bill through by graft and corruption it will be unconstitutional by definition, as “common sense legislation” is an infringement. It’s about banning certain firearms from production and sale in order to make them not available to us, and about banning how we choose to make our firearm effective, which are infringements. Those will be ignored and disobeyed. People will make magazines in their basements, and reload and sell the ammo under the table, and there’s nothing you can do. We will not comply with any of your “common sense legislation”. You are thwarted.
  
  Non-conformity and dissent really seems to have thrown you for a loop. How fun! :)
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:02pm
  @Philly
  
  Cite to me specifically where in the Constitution that SCOTUS is granted the power to determine the Constitutionality of any law. The exact citation please.
  
  Report this comment
- Bonnieblue2A
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:08pm
  Excuse me for interrupting your hate rant and game of race card, but, it is not Republicans pushing nullification; rather, it is the Libertarians and the Constitutional Conservatives. You remember, those folks the GOP wouldn’t allow be seated or speak at their convention.
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:09pm
  001 – i’m a gun owner myself, so i suppose i’ll be ready. not that it would ever get that far.
  
  no, i don’t believe that the feds will fire on civilians, unless they are taking fire themselves. likely any force would be isolated and contained. they’d wait it out and it would, hopefully, end peacefully.
  
  GHOST – i’m not a constitutional atty so i don’t have that at my disposal. suffice it to say that the SCOTUS sets the ultimate law of the land on important constitutional issues where grey areas exist. many amendments are either vague or don’t contour to the modern america we live in. even free speech has limits, and Scalia set limits on the 2nd, which is why you can’t buy an aircraft carrier or carry a bazooka.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:11pm
  The civil war “settled” nothing. There are no settled questions in the human experience, if you think there are, then you are a poor judge of history and humanity. That however would explain why you’re such a statist.
  
  You’ve got entire states saying “no” and more jumping on board. The military is comprised of many people from those states who won’t sit idle and watch their kin shot by the likes of you. You want to see mass defections and us “rednecks” acquiring fearsome weaponry through defections? Just try to order compliance on the states.
  
  I find your death wish to “rednecks” typical of your kind. You’re nothing if not intolerant, bloodthirsty and historically predictable.
  
  Snip snip snip goes your castration. And the goal was so close wasn’t it? That has to be disheartening for you to see. If you want to become even more depressed, visit any pro-liberty site. Make sure you have plenty of alcohol…you’re going to need it to drown your sorrows, friend. ;)
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:21pm
  GHOST – i’ll agree with you on one point – Congress won’t pass much of anything on this. maybe background checks. and i don’t think that Obama will use executive orders to accomplish his goals.
  
  i’m just curious – where are all these defectionists going to go? most countries don’t allow the types of weaponry that we do in the US. you should consider yourself lucky. and i won’t visit those sites you refer to. being here is scary enough.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:34pm
  Defectionists? You misunderstand. We’re not defecting (what a Soviet term, where did you pick it up pray tell?), we’re dissenting. And if you come to our states to try and enforce the laws, we’re going to slam your arse in jail for a spell, and fine you a lot of money. We’re not going anywhere; you are, and where you’re going is “the hell out of our states as soon as you’re released from prison”. Get it yet?
  
  Oh, and for the record, SCOTUS has no constitutional authority granted to determine the constitutionality of a law. Look it up. ;)
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:43pm
  GHOST – you used the word defection, i just parroted it. if i misunderstood your reasoning my bad i guess.
  
  i’d love for you to cite where your constitutional interpretations come from. why should i have to do all the work?
  
  Report this comment
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:54pm
  Philly,
  Ultimately it is force and bloodshed that determines the law of the land. 9 old goats in the tank for the feds do not impress me one bit. If you are on their side, then get your ass over there and stand with them.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:57pm
  @Philly
  
  Nice try there guy. You made a positive claim that SCOTUS makes final determination of Constitutionality. I asked you to back up your claim. You reneged on your own logic, claiming that you’re not a Constitutional lawyer. I don’t have to back up anything you claimed, you do, and you can’t, because the truth is that there is no power granted to SCOTUS in the Constitution to do this. If you think that there is, then the onus is on YOU to prove it, which you can’t, since nobody can, since it’s not there. Why would I have to logically back up any of your positive claims? That makes no sense whatsoever.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:58pm
  Good catch on “defection”, I did say it first, my mistake on that.
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:06pm
  GHOST – how’s this?
  
  Section 2 of Article Three of the United States Constitution outlines the jurisdiction of the federal courts of the United States:
  
  The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:12pm
  That’s appellate law, SCOTUS, it doesn’t grant final determination on Constitutionality. They can rule all day long, but if the States come together and say “Sorry, you’re wrong” via a formal CC, tough noogies to SCOTUS. They are not the last word.
  
  Here’s a hint. We have an Amendment process. If we want something to be Constitutional that is not, we can Amend the Constitution, which grants the People via the States at large the ultimate determiners as to the Constitutionality of any question.
  
  The citation you’re stumbling to find where SCOTUS granted itself this unfound power is in Marbury v. Madison (1803). You’re welcome. :)
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:19pm
  GHOST – see, now you’re interpreting what it means and what it doesn’t. i’m not arguing with whether or not the SCOTUS can make amendments themselves, just that they uphold or don’t uphold various challenges to those amendments that currently exist. and this really is the crux of the matter.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:24pm
  Why no, I’m not interpreting anything, I’m stating simple fact.
  
  But of course, we’re on a diversion now, which is fine. I’m just happy to let you know that SCOTUS doesn’t determine what rights I have or don’t have, no government body does, since rights are Natural and are inherent in our being, and governments are only instituted to safeguard the already pre-existing rights. Even if SCOTUS thinks it does, it draws that conclusion from Marbury v. Madison (1803), not from the Constitution proper. Ask one of them, they’ll tell you the same.
  
  End of the day, the States are populated with countless individuals that are not going to comply, to the point that states they live in are offering up laws preventing the enforcement of laws that deny us the exercise of our rights. There is no compromise on this. You people have had your day, and it’s over, and you have nobody to blame but your own naked ambition. We are giving nothing, and taking everything. Not one more inch will you get from us.
  
  Sorry. :)
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:30pm
  And to be clear, by rights I mean those defined in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution specifically, sorry for the lack of clarity on that.
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:30pm
  that’s fine. i’m done here for now. good luck with the overthrowing the government thing.
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:34pm
  And one last thing PA,
  What makes you think the american military will side with an Unconstitutional president….Who the he77 you thinki makes up the men and women in our armed forces….kenyans?
  Talking with soldiers from bases in my areas I’ve found most remember their oath upon offical becoming soldiers…and just to clue you in THEY PLAN ON KEEPING IT. Against enemies foriegn of domestic….who exactly would be the enemy of the Constitution the people who believe in it or those attacking from positions of power….. Obama would polarise himself from the U.S.gvernment and find himself in a military prison if he pushed it.
  
  Report this comment
- republitarian
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 4:18pm
  Always a pleasure to see Ghost at work. Thanks for being a good sport, Philly. But no one is trying to overthrow the government. We’re just trying to keep the beast in check.
  
  Report this comment
- kettererbg
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 7:44pm
  Do not confuse civil war with revolution. This time it is not North and South. It is the 50 States versus Washington. And we have the Constitution on our side. They have Owebowma and his executive orders. Excuse me, un-Constitutional executive orders. So, GFYS.
  
  Report this comment
- phillyatheist
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 7:55pm
  REPUB – no problem. i hope i held my own.
  
  Report this comment
- copatriots
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 10:29am
  Not really, PA. Your position is always defending the indefensible. Hmmmmm……..
  
  The bigger question is……why do you never learn from these exchanges and yet always return for more?
  
  Report this comment
TH30PH1LUS
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:24pm
Stand firm for Liberty, Virginia!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 00100111
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:59pm
  VA also has a pretty decent size state defense force. I wonder if out of staters can enlist too.
  
  Report this comment
BODYBAG
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:08pm
“Mike McHugh of the Virginia Gun Owners Coalition told the committee. “I think we’re coming to a point in this country where the states are going to have to finally decide – and I hope it doesn’t end up like years ago – that we’re going to have to face down Barack Obama’s federal plantation.”

With all due respect Mr McHugh, there are MANY of us who hope EXACTLY THAT.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TSUNAMI_22
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:26pm
  I agree. Embrace it and we will survive mind, body, and most importantly…..soul.
  
  We can either die on our feet, or our knees. It’s everyone’s individual choice.
  
  Report this comment
- Saff SGT
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:41pm
  yes mant states will follow
  
  Report this comment
Taurnil
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:07pm
I think this is only fair. After all Obama directed the Immigration Department to ignore calls from Arizona about immigration requests.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
19RANDY59
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:04pm
Politicians are spineless, liars, continuously posturing for their own agendas. This bill does no more than a smoke grinder. The 2nd amendment is a tool, and will not work on it’s own. You have to pick it up, and use it.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
showmerancher
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:04pm
Here’s the summary of the Missouri version, Senate Bill 150:

SB 150 – This act declares as unenforceable any federal law or executive order that is more restrictive than the law in effect on December 31, 2012, which bans or restricts the possession of a semiautomatic firearm or any ammunition feeding device or requires the registration of any firearm, ammunition feeding device, or firearm accessory.

In addition, this act makes it a crime for an officer, agent, or employee of the federal, state or local government, or a licensed firearms dealer, from enforcing a law or order declared unenforceable by this act when the firearm, ammunition feeding device, or accessory at issue is manufactured in the state, or possessed in the state, and remains exclusively in the state.

It is a Class D felony if the person committing the crime is a federal officer, agent, or employee and it is a Class A misdemeanor if the person is a state or local officer, agent, or employee, or a licensed firearms dealer.

This act also allows a person charged with violating a federal law or executive order declared unenforceable by this act to request the attorney general to defend the person against the charge
.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:07pm
  Awesome!
  
  Report this comment
Chuck7884
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:04pm
They have that Right because Federal laws are not ratified by the states.in orde to do so the have to add it to the Constitution Just like they did with Prohibition.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:02pm
Good to see more people making a stand against Obama’s madness and blatant gun-grab policies. We need to push further to ensure his policies are halted completely.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
civilwarcometh
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:00pm
Work place violence?http://weaselzippers.us/2013/01/28/jihadi-work-accident-caught-on-tape-islamist-rebel-in-syria-killed-when-rpg-misfires/

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- MN NICE
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:34pm
  That’ll wreck your day, eh?!?
  
  Looked like muhamed has as much rpg skill as bohama has shotgun skills…
  
  Report this comment
- donttreadonryan
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:19pm
  Well that about made my day. Holy ****.
  
  Report this comment
- donttreadonryan
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:29pm
  Not sure what this has to do with Virginia. That said. Holy moley. That dude got messed up. Allah ackbar hahaha.
  
  Report this comment
- Helen Hyde
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 4:32pm
  Not sure what this has to do with Virginia,but that guy got to go MEAT allah,.
  HAHAHAHAHAHA
  
  Report this comment
moreteaplease
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:00pm
Well, at least it’s something, a start. I guess I’ll stay here for now. I still like what Texas is doing better though.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:09pm
  Texas is purple and moving quickly to blue. Don’t be fooled by Beck’s advocacy. I don’t think me means harm, but he moved there from NYC. You could move from NYC to Stalingrad in the 1950′s and find Stalingrad to be a haven of freedom compared to your former home. I honestly wish Beck or somebody on his staff would tell him to get some perspective and live in Texas a few years before going out and claiming it to be a near Utopia of liberty. It is not. I like Texas, but I’ve lived in far freer states. Hell, when it comes to firearms, Ohio is a bastion of liberty compared to Texas (you can’t open carry in Texas, and if you print while CC they’ll nab you, whereas open carry in Ohio is no big deal and unrestricted and unregulated by law).
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:22pm
  Same in Missouri, Missouri has one of the freest firearms environment in the “Union”. Open carry allowed, CCW with permit, and a wickedly victim friendly castle doctrine (that even applies to your car). Most police forces are educated in the firearms laws and few hassles for open carry (granted it will depend on which municipality you are in, St Louis County and KC might be a little more on edge being they are Blue Fascist centers). Just need to get a right to work law enacted and eliminate the income tax for a sales tax and MO will be set to grow exponentially.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:44pm
  @Cavallo
  
  Open carry was always a sketchy issue for me in Missouri. Unfortunately there is no state pre-emption on firearms laws, so one still has to check every local ordinance one passes through in order to know if you’re good or not. I found it easier to simply conceal carry when I rode through there last summer on my motorcycle. Went back to open carry once I hit Iowa. Local ordinances scare the crap out of me, as you never know them and are still held accountable to them. If you don’t have one yet, start a movement for state pre-emption of all local firearms ordinances. Life becomes a breeze if you can get that, open carry wise.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:03pm
  GoJ is correct. Texas is not as free as people think. I grew up there. All the big cities and their suburbs may as well be police states, just more polite police but they’ll still curb stomp you if you look sideways. CC is barely legal, after 3 months of application waiting time and expensive application you get your CHL. Sure you can carry concealed with permission from the state. Don’t even think about Open Carry, and if you print while CCing, it’s game over. There are many freer states than TX. Wyoming and Montana come to mind first and I hope to be able to move to one in a few years. Darn wife has to be convinced though.
  
  Report this comment
normbal
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:58pm
Maryland, where I live currently, is about to debate proposals from Governor O’Malley which would make “ex post facto” law banning ownership/sale/possession of firearms I currently own, legally, registered with the state (those Form 77Rs actually get scanned into the State Police computers I found out first hand a few years ago). This will have the effect of making me a de facto felon.

I have several choices in response to this unconstitutional action. Move my firearms out of the state, sell them – either choice leaving me and my family nearly defenseless to the growing hordes of democrat voters and violent criminals (forgive the redundancy) – or, move my medical practice out of the state.

This state is draining our savings, increasing property/sales/oil/cell phone/cable and every other tax imaginable during a time of recession, forcing many out with a “millionaire’s tax,” and now this. I gave up working one day a week because our joint tax – Federal/State/property – bill is so high we lose the income from that extra day.

Virginia was looking promising enough, Tennessee almost as much. If this bill passes, and Maryland makes me a criminal by fiat, we’re outta here.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Fubared
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:13pm
  Being just south of you, I feel your pain. The Peeps Republic of Merryland flat out sucks. And that is indeed a shame. Beautiful coast, mountains a few hours away, and the history of DC right there- but they have to screw that up. Sad. You will be welcomed to the south…
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:16pm
  I think you should be gone already. Contribute your efforts and taxes to a State and municipality that doesn’t hate you. Find a local with more affordable property values as well. You might see a good profit in selling your house and might even be able to afford a larger more stately home in a more freedom loving area of the country.
  
  Report this comment
- happ77
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:50pm
  I moved from CT to NC, brand new house twice the size
  for 60% of what I sold my house for. Property taxes
  1 third, gas 50 cents less per gallon, nice people.
  We could use more doctors.
  
  Report this comment
- happ77
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:52pm
  And the Sherriffs down here advocate gettin a CC.
  
  Report this comment
JoeE71
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:51pm
Utah did something similar to this too. It happened right after Wyoming. The states that don’t do this can be rest assured no liberty loving, hard working people will move to their states. I am looking at you New York, Illinois, and California.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RaydocX
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:49pm
i suspect it’s a farce, but there’s a photo of a virginia sign alerting criminals to the 200,000+ militia armed and ready to stand up to them in the state, whereas neighboring DC and Maryland have been disarmed for their convenience….

Nice to see not all of the East coast is lost, and that Montana won’t be standing alone… am hoping to see our state make a similar strong statement…

then again, we have no forces of evil attacking CC locally, and ample cases where it’s come in handy…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
subic
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:47pm
In other words, the gun grabbers can kiss our azzes! Keep pushing back, DO NOT let up!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Cavallo
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:47pm
Put some teeth in it, .. you can make it a misdemeanor if you want, but also include immediate termination of employment. It would mean that no ATF, FBI, or DEA agent could enforce gun laws in the Commonwealth of Virgina and receive personnel support, or jail support if it includes any new application of federal firearms regulations. It essentially makes sure that the feds are on their own. Although even without “teeth” the statute might be a defacto removal of the sovereignty protection against lawsuits, if cops aid the ATF or FBI.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Navyguy62
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:45pm
People used to laugh when they heard ‘the South shall rise again…’

Keep in mind people, the War of Northern Aggression was NOT primarily about slavery, it was much more concerned with States Rights.

Well now we have our chance… Will the South Rise again or not?!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:58pm
  Wyoming and Utah ain’t the south, brother. ;)
  
  We’ll see what comes of this, I have high hopes that more states follow the example. The control freaks scream and sneer “This question was settled in the 19th century!”, but they’re wrong. Further, if most states follow suit that essentially puts the kibosh on Federal power in ways that the South could never do back in the day.
  
  In Ohio they’re simply not going to even consider firearms as a relevant factor in any of these event, and the AG has stated such many times in the media.
  
  Report this comment
- Saff SGT
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:38pm
  well in this case the North is with the south to save the 2nd amend…
  
  Report this comment
Fubared
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:41pm
Whoooeeeee! Take that NoVa.
On a side note…Some appear to be above the laws already in place.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/27/illegal-guns-david-brock-media-matters/

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:48pm
  Of course. The State’s agents and propagandists are exempt from the laws the rest of us serfs are prosecuted and enslaved with.
  
  Report this comment

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.