Printable View
It just proves that Anthony, Ginsberg, Sotomayor and Kagan have no business on the court. Bad as McCain or W were in their own ways, neither of them would have appointed Kagan, Sotomayor, or Ginsberg. Those who say there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats need to consider this case and the ruling.
Signed. Kagan's comments had my blood boiling and I had to throw away the reply I wrote. Both her and Sotomayor throw their gender and ethnicity around like weapons, I can't stand it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter
Fundamentally there was no intent to straw purchase as the first buyer knew he would have to transfer via FFL. Someone above stated that the cops had to get him for something after the original charge didn't stick and that's what I'm thinking.
I know plenty of people who get friends and family an employee discount at a store they work at. Unfortunately you have to treat guns different in the eyes of USSC.
Or they looked at is as a valid law was being broken. Does not mean they thought it was a good law, just a valid law.
You are pretty much correct. We LEO's will contact the ATF and they will do the legwork described above. Once we have the information on the original buyer, it is up to us to do the legwork and go from buyer to buyer, if that is possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by GunsRBadMMMMKay
seems to me it would not be valid, at least based on the following (can't remember/find the original case this opinion came out of).....Quote:
Originally Posted by merl
"The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.
No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it"
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Its time to just get rid of background checks altogether. Any citizen of the US should be able to obtain any type of firearm with only proof of citizenship.
Funny.. Its kinda like that but without all the subpoenas and oversight. But I won't belabor it since I have posted about it in the past.Quote:
Originally Posted by GunsRBadMMMMKay
More to the point, the ruling today basically allows the ATF to write laws.
They did it with rifle caliber pistols etc. Nothing new. I know a few times imports were held up @ customs curing the mid 90's just because. They insisted on a visual exam of EVERY rifle and parts kit entering the country. Most orders were held up 6-8 months.Quote:
Originally Posted by asmo
But before they never had a real SCOTUS ruling to stand on.. After today all bets are off. The BATFE can make up any rule they want, regarding possession and sale, and enforce it any way they want -- all with the full backing of the SCOTUS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo
I await the coming 'interpretation' letters...