Alaska follows suit...

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

goon

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
7,394
Legislation has been introduced in the Alaska legislature to help protect the rights of law-abiding citizens from Federal infringements, should they come to pass.
I'm just passing this along to help spread some encouragement. Keep writing letters and emails. Keep calling your representatives. Keep standing up for your rights in person and in online discussions. Send a donation to the NRA, GOA, or another Second Amendment protection group.
But don't hang your head in despair and don't quit.
You're not alone. Stay in the fight. As long as you stand, others will stand with you.

Linked article:

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/artic...t-restrict-gun-ownership-says-alaska-lawmaker

The full text of the bill can be seen here:

http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_bill_text.asp?hsid=HB0069A&session=28
 
Well said. Even if you're not a member of that state, send the author of the Bill some encouragement. I did to the Congressman who authored the Bill in Wyoming. And there's nothing stopping you from donating now or at reelection time to another state's representative.

Keep a running list of politicians who are helping and hurting us so come reelection we can get rid of them or help them stay in office.
 
This is great im going to tell my dad about this (he is a VT state senator) and see if we can get something like this to come through too
 
Even though the Supremacy Clause may render this kind of legislation unenforcable, it at least makes our voices heard. Maybe if half the states in the nation pass this type of legislation, Congress will hear our voices and consider alternatives that don't include depriving us of our basic liberties and right to self-defense.
 
To 'Bigdipper', are you being serious? is his last name Sanders or Leahy? I'm frustrated here in VT with what has been going on w/ Burlington, Barre city councel memebers. We have a very popular gun show comming up in Barre and they are enforcing obscure town ordinances to prevent private sales. Unpreccedented, prior to this. The "assault weapon" is a very bad, bad word now here in VT.
 
Keep writing letters. Spend $26 on a roll of stamps and use them all.
Keep making your voices heard boys and girls.

If you won't even speak up or take ten minutes to write a letter and mail it, then you don't deserve the rights you have as an American anyhow.

Honor those who fought to ensure that you always have those rights, and use your First Amendment rights to voice your protests.
We have the system in place to oppose this... now use it!
 
Last edited:
Good, but remember these have to be passed before the fed will take them seriously. They'll need our support to get passed and signed.
 
xio2 said:
uh, this won;t work. Federal laws supercede state laws, guys. That's right in the Constitution.
Click to expand...
That may be true but if local LE and goverment are not willing to help the feds, which is what these laws do. Then the fed laws are unenforcable. So compliance is kind of......optional.
 
Just a misdemeanor? Wyoming and another state were 2 or 4 years in prison and a felony.
I'm waiting for Arizona to announce the death penalty or deportation for federal agents trying to enforce it lol.

xio2 said:
uh, this won;t work. Federal laws supercede state laws, guys. That's right in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

So is the Second Amendment, but they seem to be ignoring that too. Constitution > Federal Law
 
It may not stand in court. There is the Supremacy Clause, but laws like this if we can get them passed draw attention to the issue and they make it known that the rest of us don't want to be ruled by politicians in Chicago and NYC.

And as noted, there is that pesky Second Amendment. This kind of law brings attention to infringements on it.
Which is more binding - the US Constitution or some legislation?
 
Even though the Supremacy Clause may render this kind of legislation unenforcable,
Click to expand...

It still creates a bad situation for the feds trying to enforce federal law. Even if they can't actually be arrested and charged, they'll have no local help.

That, and Alaska or Texas really could secede fairly easily. They have the resources to stand alone (and AK certainly has the geographic isolation)
 
MachIVshooter said:
It still creates a bad situation for the feds trying to enforce federal law. Even if they can't actually be arrested and charged, they'll have no local help.

That, and Alaska or Texas really could secede fairly easily. They have the resources to stand alone (and AK certainly has the geographic isolation)
Click to expand...
In addition, Alaska has legal ground, as (per international law and the statehood process etc...)
It was NEVER given the opportunity to have the 3 way vote on statehood, the option to become a full state, remain a territory OR GAIN INDEPENDENCE so, much like the independent countries that were included in the US (California and Texas) there is a technical reason to sue for independence. As for the rest, economy is dependent of federal money for infrastructure development (part of what fed money is actually for...)

There was legitimate concern on the part of the 'not progun' side (cause being an anti is a deathknell in AK politics) on the possibility of the Troopers being in the position to be jailed for enforcing state law, and escalating that would happen. Caught a rerun of the debate, gist is, it puts federal LE in a difficult position, OK, the DEA/FBI is helping on X case, but then they have the guy on gun charges and the troopers block the case.... OR troopers get called to DEFEND a person breaking federal law...

THIS IS THE STUFF THE CIVIL WAR WAS FOUGHT OVER
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top