• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

National Preemption

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Ok eye95 while you pontificated your epistle in post one...a question arises

What is your specific perception of Nation Preemption?

Are you referring to National Reciprocity?

The reason i inquire, the Merriam definition of preemptive
  1. the right of purchasing before others
  2. a prior seizure or appropriation : a taking possession before others
3a) a doctrine in law according to which federal law supersedes state law when federal law is in conflict with a state law
3b) a doctrine in law according to which the legislation of a superior government (such as a state government) supersedes that of an inferior government (such as a municipal government) in conflicts of law
4) a policy of launching a preemptive attack in order to prevent a suspected imminent attack

So, doesn’t the second paragraph of Article VI already explicatedly mandate this which is known as the supremacy clause?

Therefore, if it is already the law of the land, what are you wanting to do with your tirades regarding national preemptive?

Unless, your thread was based off of definition #4.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Laws that infringe provide cover for cops protecting them from penalties. They can claim that they were acting in good faith, enforcing a law. The point of National Preemption is to get laws removed and to punish the passing of laws that inringe.

National Preemption will help hold cops accountable by removing laws that provide them cover.
___

Oh, and thanks for demonstrating civil disagreement. I gain a lot from discussions with you.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Laws that infringe provide cover for cops protecting them from penalties. They can claim that they were acting in good faith, enforcing a law. The point of National Preemption is to get laws removed and to punish the passing of laws that inringe.

National Preemption will help hold cops accountable by removing laws that provide them cover.
___

Oh, and thanks for demonstrating civil disagreement. I gain a lot from discussions with you.

Oh thank you, so much for your expression of appreciation.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Just so its clear to the entire world, that appreciation wasn’t (and never will be) directed at trolls. Not even our resident troll.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,265
Location
Kentucky
Laws that infringe provide cover for cops protecting them from penalties. They can claim that they were acting in good faith, enforcing a law. The point of National Preemption is to get laws removed and to punish the passing of laws that inringe.

National Preemption will help hold cops accountable by removing laws that provide them cover.
___

Oh, and thanks for demonstrating civil disagreement. I gain a lot from discussions with you.


OK. Let's say your law is passed today.

Its settled constitutional law , upheld at min 4 times by SCOTUS no state has to enforce or recognize a federal law.
Hence there can be no legal teeth put in your law

CA, NJ, NY, CT, etc tell the fed to go pound sand . We will NOT recognize others permits or your law.

Now. Whatcha gonna do? Spend umpteen billion to create a federal task force to go around stopping at every traffic stop so they can remind local LE its against federal law not to recognize other states permits?

Because that is all they could do. It would not be illegal for state LE to ignore that fed law.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Again, the law I propose does not ask any State to enforce anything, let alone a federal law. It prohibits behavior on their part and on the part of local governments and assigns penalties. If those governments participate in that behavior, they could be punished for having done so.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
The 2A prohibits government, yet various governments continue to infringe and are not held to account by the feds. If Heller is all that and a bag of chips then would not the feds have standing to act under "the authority granted" from Heller?
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,265
Location
Kentucky
Again, the law I propose does not ask any State to enforce anything, let alone a federal law. It prohibits behavior on their part and on the part of local governments and assigns penalties. If those governments participate in that behavior, they could be punished for having done so.

Again the fed cannot force the stated to do or NOT do diddly squat that isn't already in the COTUS. And other than another civil war the Fed cannot punish a state for not doing something it wants it too. Other than withold fed money.

What you are proposing isn't in Federal Authority to do. God help us all if it ever is.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Of course they can make State behavior against citizens illegal, and prefer criminal charges when State actors violate federal law.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Of course they can make State behavior against citizens illegal, and prefer criminal charges when State actors violate federal law.
Please cite one case where a state official was prosecuted and convicted for not enforcing a federal law. And if convicted, was not overturned.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,265
Location
Kentucky
Of course they can make State behavior against citizens illegal, and prefer criminal charges when State actors violate federal law.

Yep if the state is violating the COTUS, in theory at least.

Never heard of it being done.

Fed has to enforce its own decrees. States are free to ignore those decrees.
There's nothing to charge the state for as its constitutionally free to ignore laws made by congress.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
QI
Again, the law I propose does not ask any State to enforce anything, let alone a federal law. It prohibits behavior on their part and on the part of local governments and assigns penalties. If those governments participate in that behavior, they could be punished for having done so.

Prohibits what behaviour ?
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Please cite one case where a state official was prosecuted and convicted for not enforcing a federal law. And if convicted, was not overturned.
One last time, I have not once said that my proposal require state officials to enforce any federal law.

My proposal makes certain actions by the State and local governments illegal and assesses penalties.

You have simply picked up and repeated a mistaken talking point of another poster. I won’t waste my time on that point again.

It amazes me how disingenuously some around here try to debate.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
One last time, I have not once said that my proposal require state officials to enforce any federal law.

My proposal makes certain actions by the State and local governments illegal and assesses penalties.

You have simply picked up and repeated a mistaken talking point of another poster. I won’t waste my time on that point again.

It amazes me how disingenuously some around here try to debate.

Eye95 you insist on speaking in metaphors, e.g., certain actions by States are you specifically wishing wanting punished?

You lash out with outbursts individuals do not understand but more and more your behaviour is showing the erroneous messages are being communicated without specificities and when clarification is requested you get into a petulant snit!
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
......My proposal makes certain actions by the State and local governments illegal and assesses penalties.......
And, how do you propose to enforce the penalty???????
Are you going to sue, prosecute, of withhold funds? Can't sue to force a state to enforce federal law. Can't prosecute a state for not enforcing a federal law. And what federal funds do the states receive to carry out their conceal carry licensing program? I think the answer is none.

It is clear that you don't understand your own question.
 
Last edited:
Top