Bullitthead
Active Member
Bottom line is that federal law supersedes state law and the ATF doesn't play games. Play with your right to own a gun at your own risk because a felony conviction for an illegal suppressor will cost you that right.
I think its still a Federal crime to posses pot but they sell it in a lot of states Feds aint coming after em .I don't think that will exempt us from federal law and I'm not going to be the test case. I seem to recall this was done in other states, anyone recall how it turned out?
Federal law doesn't supercede state law..Bottom line is that federal law supersedes state law and the ATF doesn't play games. Play with your right to own a gun at your own risk because a felony conviction for an illegal suppressor will cost you that right.
Federal law doesn't supercede state law..
There is this inconvenient document called the constitution that makes this point very clear.
If I'd didn't, we'd all be California by now..
Supremacy Clause (Article VI Clause 2) of the constitution states that federal law supersedes state law whether we like it or not.Federal law doesn't supercede state law..
There is this inconvenient document called the constitution that makes this point very clear.
If I'd didn't, we'd all be California by now..
Unfortunately this is correct. State law can be MORE stringent but it cannot be LESS stringent than Federal law. The only recourse is for a State to take it to Supreme Court for constitutional ruling.Supremacy Clause (Article VI Clause 2) of the constitution states that federal law supersedes state law whether we like it or not.
Then why hasn't the Feds gone after all the states that legalized pot? It is a very "wishy-washy" line................Unfortunately this is correct. State law can be MORE stringent but it cannot be LESS stringent than Federal law. The only recourse is for a State to take it to Supreme Court for constitutional ruling.
Load up boys!!I guess States are pushing back on an over-reaching Central goverment. This will be interesting going forward.
According to a lawyer friend it doesn't require a sacrificial patriot to test the law. Just patience while it goes through the legal process. It should be evaluated by the higher courts upon request to see if it has merit and whether or not it will protect citizens. This seems strange for something that the Constitution was clear about not being infringed.Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed two bills this week that will allow Lone Star State residents to carry handguns without a permit and loosen regulations surrounding suppressors.
The Republican signed permitless carry legislation on Wednesday after it cleared the state Senate in early May by an 18-13 vote and the state House with an 84-56 vote. The law, which implements what is commonly referred to as "constitutional carry," allows Texans over 21 to carry their firearms if they're not precluded from owning weapons due to prior criminal history.
The second bill, which Abbott signed on Tuesday, according to the state Legislature's webpage, exempts Texas-made suppressors, also known as silencers, from the National Firearms Act, a body of laws that in part require gun owners to register NFA items, including suppressors and short-barreled rifles, with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives before paying a $200 tax.
Bill:
Texas adopts permitless gun carry and loosens suppressor laws
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed two bills this week that will allow Lone Star State residents to carry handguns without a permit and loosen regulations surrounding suppressors.news.yahoo.com