| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29331
Location: La La Land
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm disgusted by this Gilroy shooter but I'm not surprised. I think that's where my anger and frustration comes from.
The same thing could easily happen again next weekend. And I'd be stuck saying the same thing. I'm disgusted but not surprised.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Last edited by kikanga on Mon Jul 29, 2019 6:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52656
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerjoshua wrote: | | Huey Lewis & The News wrote: | shooter was a maga incel teen
whoops |
I’ve got a feeling it was more incel and less Maga. There’s a documentary on the incel kid that shot up Santa Barbra, this feels very similar. |
But then there's that whole "Might Makes Right" reference in his Instagram. He may be a disgruntled teen who can't get laid, but he is invoking the racially divisive rhetoric that our POtuS is not so subtly nurturing, which can't be ignored - particularly in this current environment.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you to those who donated! Her father is a serious Laker fan BTW. And she’s had a rough road where it seems she was finally seeing daylight. And now this. She looks like she’s going to be OK, but may carry the bullet with her.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Omar Little wrote: | For those interested, my friend's daughter is uninsured and looking at massive bills. If you'd like to help, here is the gofundme:
LINK |
I truly think someone should call Shawn Keck, President of the 2019 Gilroy Garlic Festival, and express your situation and ask him if there is any way you can reach out to people in his circle who may have the financial means and a desire to help the survivors of this tragedy. Donations are tax deductible etc..
Maybe some pay it forward types are standing by wishing they knew how to help
Even local media would like to hear this story and spotlight the daughter and what she is now facing..
Anything to help her and her child move through this without being crippled physically and financially.. please  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17879
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16155
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Why not put the onus on the lawmakers to require background checks for all gun sales?
| Quote: |
What You Need to Know about Background Checks for Guns
There are several ways to buy guns in the US. You can buy them from a licensed retail outlet, a gun show, online, and through a private sale.
Background checks are only required if you purchase a gun through a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL), which includes retailers (anyone from Walmart to mom and pop shops) and some individuals. You do not need to undergo a background check if you buy a gun online, through a gun show, or through some private sales. You can check the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to see FFLs in your state.
Many states also have additional laws about gun background checks, so be sure to check them before purchasing a gun.
https://www.criminalwatchdog.com/faq/background-checks-for-guns |
| Quote: | A San Francisco Chronicle report finds the shooter had no criminal record, and he circumvented California’s strict gun laws by obtaining his WASR 10 legally in neighboring Nevada.
What would’ve prevented the shooting — or at the least made its outcome less devastating — would have been keeping a military-style weapon out of the shooter’s hands to begin with. But as my colleague German Lopez explained, the episode illustrates the limit of what states can do on their own in the realm of gun control laws:
The problem ... lies in federal and other states’ laws. As long as those are weaker, there’s going to be a limit to how well any stricter gun laws can work at the state level — for the simple reason that someone can always freely travel across the border to obtain a gun, whether for personal use or to sell to others. (This is illegal trafficking under federal law, but because other states’ laws are so weak, to the point they might not even require any sort of paper trail to complete a gun purchase, it’s really difficult to enforce the federal law.)
The real solution, then, lies in changes to federal law. Only Congress and the president can set a baseline, such as universal background checks, an assault weapons ban, and requiring a license to buy and own a firearm, that all states will have to follow.
https://www.vox.com/2019/7/31/20747505/gilroy-california-shooting-wasr-10-ak-47-trump-good-guy-with-gun-myth |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
^^ Guarantee you Russia/IRA/GRU
Pay the NRA and others to make sure Americans are guaranteed the right to buy
Weapons of mass destruction |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Wasn’t the gun legally purchased in NV or something?
Last I remember reading, maybe there’s been an update on that since. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52656
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Wasn’t the gun legally purchased in NV or something?
Last I remember reading, maybe there’s been an update on that since. |
Yes, the gun was obtained fully legally in NV.
On Monday, Gilroy Police Chief Scot Smithee confirmed the 19-year-old shooter used a WASR 10, a derivative of an AK-47, bought in Nevada. The gun is banned in California, as part of the state’s assault weapons ban. But the shooter was able to get the semiautomatic rifle anyway — in a different state — before taking it to California.
It turns out this happens frequently: Facing California’s tough gun laws — among the toughest in the country — people who want to obtain the weapons and carry out deadly shootings can just get them from neighboring states, like Arizona and Nevada, with much weaker laws.
LINK
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Wasn’t the gun legally purchased in NV or something?
Last I remember reading, maybe there’s been an update on that since. |
Yes, the gun was obtained fully legally in NV.
On Monday, Gilroy Police Chief Scot Smithee confirmed the 19-year-old shooter used a WASR 10, a derivative of an AK-47, bought in Nevada. The gun is banned in California, as part of the state’s assault weapons ban. But the shooter was able to get the semiautomatic rifle anyway — in a different state — before taking it to California.
It turns out this happens frequently: Facing California’s tough gun laws — among the toughest in the country — people who want to obtain the weapons and carry out deadly shootings can just get them from neighboring states, like Arizona and Nevada, with much weaker laws.
LINK |
Ahh yeah, thanks. That’s what I thought which is why I’m surprised folks want to charge the gun seller with accessory unless there is information out there the gun seller was in on the attack.
It sort of makes it moot to go through all the legislative effort on a state level if a 4 hr drive can get you around that.
Frankly, I’m surprised a non-resident of a state can purchase weapons in that state. Maybe they shouldnt allow that.
In either case, don’t really see the point of charging the gun seller with accessory. How does that make any sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52656
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: |
Frankly, I’m surprised a non-resident of a state can purchase weapons in that state. Maybe they shouldnt allow that. |
Not even "maybe".
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17879
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Wasn’t the gun legally purchased in NV or something?
Last I remember reading, maybe there’s been an update on that since. |
Ah from the post I thought it was bought illegally. Thanks for the correction. It should be illegal to sell a gun banned in CA to a CA resident though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17879
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: |
Ahh yeah, thanks. That’s what I thought which is why I’m surprised folks want to charge the gun seller with accessory unless there is information out there the gun seller was in on the attack.
It sort of makes it moot to go through all the legislative effort on a state level if a 4 hr drive can get you around that.
Frankly, I’m surprised a non-resident of a state can purchase weapons in that state. Maybe they shouldnt allow that.
In either case, don’t really see the point of charging the gun seller with accessory. How does that make any sense? |
If you are selling a gun illegally then you should be liable. Reading into it more I can see the argument against it being accessory but it should still be illegal in some capacity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52656
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Wasn’t the gun legally purchased in NV or something?
Last I remember reading, maybe there’s been an update on that since. |
Ah from the post I thought it was bought illegally. Thanks for the correction. It should be illegal to sell a gun banned in CA to a CA resident though. |
It’s simpler than that. States should only be allowed to sell to residents of their state. OR, vendors should be required to report to the ATF and purchaser’s state when they purchase a weapon and it should be a federal crime to transport a banned weapon into the other state (if it isn’t already).
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Wasn’t the gun legally purchased in NV or something?
Last I remember reading, maybe there’s been an update on that since. |
Ah from the post I thought it was bought illegally. Thanks for the correction. It should be illegal to sell a gun banned in CA to a CA resident though. |
Hmmm, that seems way too complicated for sellers to have to know the laws of every state.
Why not just make it like DMR said? Make it a federal law/rule that for guns, sellers are restricted to selling to legal residents of the state in which it is sold.
Way simpler, accomplishes the same thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16155
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
Well then should NV be required to report to CA that a CA resident just came in and bought a firearm that is illegal in CA.. or even the wording is not possible.. CA didn't outlaw the ownership of the gun they outlawed the ability to purchase it in CA??
Just searched
| Quote: |
It is also illegal to sell any type of firearm to someone under age 21 in California, except for police, members of the military and holders of hunting licenses. That age limit formerly applied only to handguns, mirroring federal law, but was extended to rifles and shotguns this year under legislation prompted by recent school shootings.
And when a California resident buys a gun in another state, federal law requires the dealer to follow the buyer’s home-state law.
|
The difference between California gun laws and federal guns laws? Plenty
It seems Firearms are controlled under "Home State Law"?
Which from my understanding means a buyer shows their out of state ID then the sale must conform to that states purchase laws. This would mean that the Gun Seller broke the law? Selling assault weapons to a California ID carrying person?
Looks like he probably used a NV ID to purchase it and then illegally brought it into CA.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16155
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ContagiousInspiration wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
Well then should NV be required to report to CA that a CA resident just came in and bought a firearm that is illegal in CA.. or even the wording is not possible.. CA didn't outlaw the ownership of the gun they outlawed the ability to purchase it in CA??
Just searched
| Quote: |
It is also illegal to sell any type of firearm to someone under age 21 in California, except for police, members of the military and holders of hunting licenses. That age limit formerly applied only to handguns, mirroring federal law, but was extended to rifles and shotguns this year under legislation prompted by recent school shootings.
And when a California resident buys a gun in another state, federal law requires the dealer to follow the buyer’s home-state law.
|
The difference between California gun laws and federal guns laws? Plenty
It seems Firearms are controlled under "Home State Law"?
Which from my understanding means a buyer shows their out of state ID then the sale must conform to that states purchase laws. This would mean that the Gun Seller broke the law? Selling assault weapons to a California ID carrying person?
Looks like he probably used a NV ID to purchase it and then illegally brought it into CA.. |
Yeah, it was reported that the gun was purchased legally, which means no violation of any federal nor state laws.
Unless you are disputing the accuracy of that report?
1) Federal laws only applies to licensed gun dealers. Unlicensed gun dealers don't have to follow federal gun laws. Who doesn't require a license? People who occasionally sell on Craigslist.
So this shooter could have bought this gun from someone in Nevada on Craigslist and it would be perfectly legal.
Last edited by LongBeachPoly on Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52656
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that it isn't interstate commerce since the transaction is taking place within the state of purchase. Additionally, there are plenty of restrictions in place about what can be purchased out of state and shipped to restricted states.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
Nah, there are lots of laws restricting commerce across state lines. There isn’t any constitutional provision that residents of one state can purchase anything from another.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16155
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Omar Little wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
Nah, there are lots of laws restricting commerce across state lines. There isn’t any constitutional provision that residents of one state can purchase anything from another. |
Yeah, restriction on interstate commerce is a Constitutional federal power.
A state restricting interstate commerce can be a violation of the federal government's interstate commerce powers.
So, the federal gun law says - any licensed gun dealer (licensed by the federal government) - must abide by federal laws. This is a restriction on interstate gun sales.
A similar state law restricting interstate gun sales could be in violation of the federal government's interstate commerce powers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 30698
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | tox wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Whoever sold him the gun should be charged as an accessory to murder, simple as that. If you sell a gun without doing a background check through the proper means, that should be your liability. |
Wasn’t the gun legally purchased in NV or something?
Last I remember reading, maybe there’s been an update on that since. |
Ah from the post I thought it was bought illegally. Thanks for the correction. It should be illegal to sell a gun banned in CA to a CA resident though. |
It’s simpler than that. States should only be allowed to sell to residents of their state. OR, vendors should be required to report to the ATF and purchaser’s state when they purchase a weapon and it should be a federal crime to transport a banned weapon into the other state (if it isn’t already). |
It's unfortunately not as far as I'm aware. It was years ago but I know of people that would buy guns that were phased out in CA from AZ and would private party sell the piece back in CA. Don't ask me how that's legal.
_________________
KOBE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16155
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that it isn't interstate commerce since the transaction is taking place within the state of purchase. Additionally, there are plenty of restrictions in place about what can be purchased out of state and shipped to restricted states. |
Yeah, pretty much all transactions take place within a state. You can violate interstate commerce laws when you have different laws for different residents of different states.
For example, if you are a resident of CA, you can get low cost tuition to our CSUs and UCs. Out of state residents pay a higher cost until they establish residency within our state.
This has been challenged in the past as a violation of interstate commerce. It was upheld because residents that live here pay higher taxes so their kids should be allowed to reap the benefits of lower tuition cost even though it does restrict interstate commerce (of education).
| Quote: | The Commerce Clause assures a large measure of equal treatment by the states to citizens of other states. Since it usually forbids discrimination adverse to the flow of interstate commerce and favorable to intrastate or local commerce, the clause in effect prevents a state from discriminating in favor of its own locality and against other states.
Naturally, citizens of other states are the principal beneficiaries of that kind of protection. Thus, the Commerce Clause forbids a state from discriminating against consumers in other states for the purpose of giving local consumers a preferential right to purchase the products of the state. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Omar Little wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I would immediately require any purchaser of said guns to have LOCAL ID and/or Residency
If I were Newsom I would call the Governor of Nevada and get to work on it immediately. At least ban all Californians from using their California ID to purchase these guns in neighboring states.
ASAP... Proof no NRA pockets near sending tots and pears |
That might be unconstitutional due to a violation of interstate commerce. |
Nah, there are lots of laws restricting commerce across state lines. There isn’t any constitutional provision that residents of one state can purchase anything from another. |
Yeah, restriction on interstate commerce is a Constitutional federal power.
A state restricting interstate commerce can be a violation of the federal government's interstate commerce powers.
So, the federal gun law says - any licensed gun dealer (licensed by the federal government) - must abide by federal laws. This is a restriction on interstate gun sales.
A similar state law restricting interstate gun sales could be in violation of the federal government's interstate commerce powers. |
I think you’re conflating a couple things, but either way, states already can restrict things from other states. Try telling Oklahoma that you bought your pot legally in Colorado.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
