Navigation

Tag Archives | Firearms Freedom Act

Virginia Firearms Freedom Act to Be Heard By Senate Committee this Week

By on February 24, 2010 in Firearms Freedom Act, Nullification, Sovereignty Movement, State Sovereignty 0

Got an email blast over the weekend from Campaign for Liberty’s Donna Holt about the status of HB69 (Virginia Firearms Freedom Act).

Looks like

Delegate Carrico’s HB69 has been assigned to the Senate Courts of Justice Committee.

The Senate Courts of Justice Committee meets on Mondays and Wednesdays. The bill is not on the docket for Monday but could come up as soon as Wednesday, February, 24 at 2PM in Senate Room “A” of the General Assembly building.

We need all hands on deck. If this bill is not reported out of committee, it dies and will not go to the floor for a vote. We have come too far to give up now.  Please contact the members of this committee and urge them to support HB69.

Here is a list of the members of that committee:

Senator Henry L. Marsh III (D) – Chairman
Senator Richard L. Saslaw (D)
Senator Frederick M. Quayle (R)
Senator Thomas K. Norment, Jr. (R)
Senator Janet D. Howell (D)
Senator L. Louise Lucas (D)
Senator John S. Edwards (D)
Senator W. Roscoe Reynolds (D)
Senator Linda T. Puller (D)
Senator Mark D. Obenshain (R)
Senator Ryan T. McDougle (R)
Senator R. Creigh Deeds (D)
Senator Robert Hurt (R) – Co-patron
Senator A. Donald McEachin (D)
Senator J. Chapman Petersen (D)

Donna was even kind enough to include a suggested script for residents of Virginia:

Dear Senator _________________,

On January 18, 2010 I was one of approximately 2400 citizens who came to the state capitol to lobby and rally for support of Delegate Bill Carrico’s HB69, the Virginia Firearms Freedom Act.

Opponents argue that the bill would empower terrorists, gangs or criminals to engineer super weapons with daunting powers. The truth is that such weapons requires the use of a desensitized bursting charge with the use of chemicals (TNT, Trinitrophenol, RDX…) with a fuse (set with delay to explode inside the target) and HB69 does not allow federal deregulation of high-powered super weapons.

The Virginia Firearms Freedom Act is about much more than firearms. It is a bill that will redefine the federal government’s over-reaching use of the commerce clause to regulate even intrastate commerce.

Will you vote “yes” to report HB69 out of the committee in defense of the 2nd amendment rights of the citizens of Virginia. This legislation will effectively reassert our state’s rights under the 10th amendment putting commerce within the borders of the Commonwealth back in the control of the state?

Sincerely,

(Your name)

Please help us keep the Tenth Amendment’s win streak alive in Virginia.

Continue Reading

Standing up for the 2nd, 9th and 10th in Utah

By on December 30, 2009 in Nullification, Sovereignty Movement 2

Sen. Margaret Dayton (R – Orem) is the sponsor of S.B. 11, Utah-State Made Firearms Protection Act. In a recent email she stated, “My Firearms Freedom Act passed out of Interim Committee in Nov – and I anticipate that it will go directly to the floor when the Legislature convenes in January. I am pleased to sponsor this bill as it promotes the 2nd, 9th, and 10th amendments.” We are pleased to support your efforts in sponsoring this bill Sen. Dayton, we believe it is always right to defend those you represent while upholding your oath. In short, I believe you are right.

Sen. Dayton’s bill is among the growing movement of states claiming some form of a Firearms Freedom Act. There is action in Texas, Tennessee (whom the ATF wrote a letter against already), Florida, Pennsylvania, Alaska, Michigan, Montana, and South Carolina. All have state legislatures who are all willing to take a 2nd, 9th, and 10th Amendment stand for their citizens. All these states also have representatives who are not so willing, as does Utah.

According to Brandon Loomis’s recent Salt Lake Tribune article, Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck (D-Salt Lake City) “questioned why Utah would invite its own lawsuit before seeing how Montana’s law fares in court.” I am so glad Rep. Chavez-Houck is not in the military standing as an ally in the face of oncoming enemy troops. It would be the same as asking why go into the fight before we know if the allies get whooped. Whether or not Montana’s law (which led the charge) gets upheld or denied in a lawsuit does not make federal usurpation of Constitutional powers right. In short, I believe you are wrong Rep. Chavez-Houck.

However, you are not wrong alone. There are many who either will not stand with other states or who believe the Supreme Court’s bad precedent regarding the ‘Commerce Clause’ is actually good. The claws of the federal government grew in 1942 when Wickard v. Filburn was settled by the Stone Court.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE

Continue Reading

Health Care Freedom in Virginia

By on November 13, 2009 in Nullification, Sovereignty Movement 11

The Campaign for Liberty has stepped to the plate big time in Virginia, getting out ahead of the feds and finding a sponsor for the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act, to be introduced in 2010.

The Act reads, in part:

Neither the Governor nor the Department of Health, the Department of Public Welfare or any other Commonwealth agency shall participate in the compliance with any Federal law, regulation or policy that would compromise the freedom of choice in health care of any resident of this Commonwealth.

Man, just copying and pasting that feels great. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Is THAT All You’ve Got?

By on October 8, 2009 in Activism 1

I was scanning the ‘nets and found some interesting responses to MT’s Firearms Freedom Act that I thought I would share.

“How much is Al Qaeda paying this “Grass roots movement” to try to make an ‘end run’ on the US Governments Constitutional rights? (Yes, I said what I meant).  I do not believe that ‘Most Montanans’ feel they way Al Qaedas paid stooges do.  Bin Laden knows that the only way to “defeat Freedom of thought” is to divide the USA and conquer from within like he is doing in the Mideast.. “

Hurry everybody, to your designated ‘Al Qaeda’ meeting points.

“Is the Constitution an idol to worship? I hate to play the role of anarchist, but to kill is also breaking a law set forth thousands of years ago, by the true parchment of law. Guns are only made for killing. In the hands of laymen and criminals, they are deadly for anybody, not just to the true enemy, like Al Qaeda or insurgents. Civilians owning guns is vigilant and treacherous.”

Before I could generate the thought myself, I read the next post which summed up my response perfectly.
Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Firearms Freedom in Arkansas

By on October 7, 2009 in Nullification 0

Writes Gary Marbut from FirearmsFreedomAct.com:

I spoke on the phone this morning with Rep. Bryan King of Arkansas who has triggered an “interim study” to begin the percolation that will end with a Firearms Freedom Act being filed.

I’ve posted MSSA’s recent news release about the filing of our federal lawsuit to validate the principles of the MFFA, and a copy of the Complaint we filed.

Click here to keep track of all current 10th Amendment legislation in states around the country.

Continue Reading

ATF: All Your Amendment are Belong to Us

By on September 24, 2009 in Firearms Freedom Act 7

As far as the ATF is concerned, the words in the Constitution don’t mean what the Founders said they mean.  They mean what the 9 unelected judges on the Supreme Court say they mean.  Well, until they change their mind, that is.

This year, Montana and Tennessee passed the “Firearms Freedom Act” – which under state law exempts firearms, parts and ammunition from federal regulation under the “interstate commerce clause” as long as they’re made in state, and sold in state.  That is, as long as they never enter interstate commerce.

The ATF sent a stern letter to all license holders in both states this year – stating their position that the state law is invalid.    Yesterday, a report in the Memphis Commercial Appeal gives us a little more insight into the ATF’s position:

But ATF Nashville Special Agent-in-Charge James M. Cavanaugh said several U.S. Supreme Court rulings have upheld the federal gun laws. “The Constitution says the Supreme Court interprets the law. The ATF hasn’t ruled this, the Supreme Court has, and we’re a law enforcement agency.”

But wait, there’s more.

“It’s analogous to a speed limit. If the speed limit on the interstate is set at 70, a city along the interstate can’t come along and say there is no speed limit on the interstate through our city. The highway patrol could still enforce the speed limit,” he said.

Seems to me that this ATF thug thinks that state and federal government have the same relationship as city and state government.    Or, maybe he thinks of states as just big counties – and he’s part of the nationwide law enforcement.  Either way, they certainly don’t believe that the 10th Amendment reserves powers “to the States respectively, or to the People.”

My big question is this – I wonder, does the ATF swear an oath to the Constitution, or to the Supreme Court?  And more importantly, who in this country is sovereign – we the People, or the Court?

If it’s the latter, we might as well call them the American Mullahs – an unelected dictatorship.

Continue Reading