The Tenther Grapevine
Prefiled in the South Carolina by State Senators Lee Bright and Danny Verdin is Senate Bill 249 (S0249), the Firearms Freedom Act (FFA). The bill states that:
A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in South Carolina and that remains within the borders of South Carolina is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
Since 2009, 8 states have passed similar legislation as law – Montana, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming, South Dakota, Idaho, Alaska and Arizona. And, here at the Tenth Amendment Center we expect to see at least a dozen other states consider Firearms Freedom Acts in 2011.
The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate Interstate Commerce between the states, and 18 USC 922 makes it unlawful for any person not licensed as a manufacturer or dealer in firearms to engage in the business of manufacturing or dealing in firearms. Collectively, the Interstate Commerce Clause and 18 USC 922 are used by the federal goverenment as a means to regulate, control and often-times ban, firearms.
The South Carolina Firearms Freedom Act addresses this by exempting firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition manufactured and retained in the state from all federal firearm control laws including registration, as firearms that meet these criteria cannot be regulated by the federal government because they have not traveled in interstate commerce.
“Basically, we’re saying if the gun is made here, South Carolina is going to say what kind of regulations apply,” Bright said. “We feel that South Carolinians should be able to determine how to protect themselves — not the federal government — which is why most people have firearms.”
*******
CLICK HERE to view the Tenth Amendment Center’s model legislation, the Intrastate Commerce Act, which takes the FFA principle to its full extent – all goods grown and made in state are under state, not federal, purview.
CLICK HERE to view the Tenth Amendment Center’s Firearms Freedom Act Legislative Tracking Page
CLICK HERE to view the Tenth Amendment Center’s printable Firearms Freedom Act Brochure (pdf)
*******
Michael Boldin [send him email] is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center. He was raised in Milwaukee, WI, and currently resides in Los Angeles, CA. Follow him on twitter - @michaelboldin - and visit his personal blog - www.michaelboldin.com
If you enjoyed this post:
Click Here to Get the Free Tenth Amendment Center Newsletter,
no thanks.
This is a fight that's long overdue. The interstate commerce clause has been used by the Feds too broadly and they've beaten us over the head with it. It's about time someone took a stand. I'm surprised too that Texas isn't on the list.
I do not see the word "firearms" used anywhere in the Constitution for the United States. Please find it in the Constitution? "firearms" is, I believe ,a Federal Corporation as in the Federal Government created term. We all own arms as described in the Constitution. One is regulated to death and the other is our right to own and travel with for use as defense against threats meaning our govt. if it treads on our unalienable rights. See 28 USC 3002 for definition of United States (Federal Govt)
For all of you who want to know more about the United States Federal Corporation I suggest you might want to google 28 USC 3002 and read paragraph 15.
Traveling with a firearm you own lawfully is not doing commerce unless you aim (no pun intended) to sell said firearm in another state. Our Constitution is very clear on the right of the people to bear arms regardless of where they live. It's just as clear on our right to freely travel which is why licenses to do so are also in violation of our Constitution.
You are absolutely right... the Constitution states "arms", not specifically firearms nor does it exclude firearms. The federal dictionary is the only "living document" they have. It changes at their whim regularly.
great point! commerce is a very specific action and while they can regulate transportation involved in that commerce, simply carrying something is definitely NOT commercial activity.
The Constitution does not give the federal government the right to regulate commerce "within" the states. It clearly uses the word "AMONG", NOT "WITHIN". The idea that among means within is a standard progressive re-definition of words in the English language. Montana has passed a similar law and they do take it quite literally that the word is "AMONG".
a similar bill was introduced into the texas house(hb i45)on 11/16/10
So what do you do with the firearms if you move to another state? I suspect you would need a Federal sticker to cross a state line, or have the weapons confiscated. The Law, as described is very confusing, and I still think it is better to vote out the trash in Washington, replace the Supreme Court with true Constitutional judges, then have those real judges set the record straight on the combat weapons we are to own. The people should be able to transport these weapons freely, yet the Law mentioned, states that these weapons must remain in that state. For permanent people, that would work, but not for people who must move for economic reasons.
I still think it is better to vote out the trash in Washington, replace the Supreme Court with true Constitutional judges, then have those real judges set the record straight on the combat weapons we are to own.
how is that working so far?
the law is simple - the state tells the feds to butt out. Other states should do the same. When enough do it, the feds WILL butt out.
I hope you join us.
Traveling with a firearm you own lawfully is not doing commerce unless you aim (no pun intended) to sell said firearm in another state. Our Constitution is very clear on the right of the people to bear arms regardless of where they live. It's just as clear on our right to freely travel which is why licenses to do so are also in violation of our Constitution.
It was FDR and the "New Deal" in 1933 which began the fall of our Common Law Constitutional court system. As the federal corporation which has no jurisdiction outside D.C. except by consent began to overstep its bounds and intrude on the states with federal entitlement programs etc., it's Admiralty courts began to overrun and eventually replaced the lawful judicial branch of our government. Today we only have Admiralty courts, evidenced by the flags with gold braid in the courtroom. This judicial system is based solely on commerce, not justice. This is why our Supreme Court routinely violates the Constitution, it is operating under the Law of the Sea not the Law of the Land! Nothing will change until we re-instate our county grand juries and Common Law courts in every state. That's when the people TAKE BACK THE COUNTRY.
All true and good Point about Admiralty Law. The removal of Common Law from our judicial system is unconstitutional. Restoration must be brought to the forefront of our effort to reclaim freedom. Removal of Supreme Court Justices will be difficult.
And how about those who live in small states or along state borders. I live in Gettysburg PA 1 hour travel puts me in 4 states. This is my gun i should be able to carry it with me to protect me wherever I go.
This would seem to clarify the definition of standard firearm which you are already allowed to make under federal law.
I am shocked that Texas isn't on the list yet.
Would this include class 3 weapons?
Tenther Radio Archives
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Subscribe to entries
Subscribe to comments
All content © 2012 by Tenth Amendment Center Blog
Time for South Carolina to secede again!!!
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like