Just Empty Gestures

Discussion in 'Legal' started by The Last Outlaw, Jun 20, 2021.

  1. The Last Outlaw

    The Last Outlaw Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2020
    Messages:
    173
    I have been seeing everywhere about Missouri and their new 2A law and the new suppressor law in Texas. IMO, these "laws" are just empty gestures by politicians. The Constitution plainly states that federal law takes precedence over state law. Seems like a waste of time and effort.
     
  2. DocRock

    DocRock member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2019
    Messages:
    3,109
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Yes. Empty gestures are a staple of the political arsenals of left and right; the preferred weapon of choice by most politicians.

    Yet, these empty gestures are not without peril. The suppressor law in TX is most dangerous because some numpties will believe it to be true. And then they will be astounded when arrested and tried in a federal court.

    Just as the empty gestures of the Left will have no impact on the illegal use of firearms but, as with the pistol braces ruling by ATF, will turn tens of thousands of law abiding citizens overnight into felons for the sole purpose of allowing Biden to pander to Bloomberg.
     
  3. Kevin Keith

    Kevin Keith Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2009
    Messages:
    285
    Location:
    South of Tulsa
    State laws bucking the feds are empty gestures, except when it involves the maryhoochie laws. The feds couldn't give less a hoot, but have a can or a 1/2" too short an OAL or barrel and it's the Supermax for you, buddy boy!
     
  4. pairof44sp

    pairof44sp Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2020
    Messages:
    788
    Fed law is only going to “take precedence” if the feds choose to pick up your case.

    Are the feds really going to file a misdemeanor weapons charge based on one line (“suspect said he did not have a carry permit for the pistol”) in a police report? If it’s slam dunk AND the guidelines call for major time, then maybe they will. But if it’s a gun charge — a slam dunk with guidelines that start at Zero months — then why would they bother?

    it’s nice to know there is nothing on the state books for the DA to jack you up on
     
  5. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    7,321
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    It's a totally symbolic gesture, but I still like it because it sends a message ( :neener: ) to the fedgov.

    But yea, as LAW it is pointless and DocRock and others who look askance at these laws are totally correct.
     
    Olon likes this.
  6. herrwalther

    herrwalther Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    6,821
    I prefer empty gestures to pitiful capitulation by supposedly pro-gun politicians any day.
     
    Yoda, Big_Al, danmc and 8 others like this.
  7. The Last Outlaw

    The Last Outlaw Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2020
    Messages:
    173
    Sure, that kind of case won't amount to anything, just like they let marijuana slide on the state level. I'm betting that they will be going after unregulated suppressors and Missouri residents flouting federal firearm laws. This is gonna get some law abiding folks in some trouble I predict.
     
  8. Doc Samson

    Doc Samson Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2013
    Messages:
    162
    Location:
    Almost NoVa
    Speaking of "picking and choosing" - Supreme Court, anyone? Mildly infuriating that they could put so much gun control out to pasture with the mildest of pro-2A rulings, yet will take on none of them.

    At least some states are trying to send a message, effective or not...
     
    jwamplerusa likes this.
  9. twarr1

    twarr1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    630
    Location:
    TX
    Abbott has his eye on the Whitehouse and Paxton has his eye on the TX governors mansion.
    I imagine the Feds are chomping at the bit to make an ‘example’ out of some poor stooge who thinks he can own a suppressor without a stamp. Or even worse, crosses a state line with it.
     
    The Last Outlaw and DocRock like this.
  10. 12Bravo20

    12Bravo20 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,209
    Location:
    Missouri
    Federal laws were originally meant to regulate interstate commerce and not intrastate commerce.

    And we also have the 10th Amendment which states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

    It will be interesting how these new laws play out. Especially considering how the marijuana laws are. There really is no difference. It is all in how the feds pick and choice what they want to enforce.
     
    RetiredUSNChief and danmc like this.
  11. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,217
    Location:
    WNY
    The intrastate argument has come and gone for the most part. Could Abbot demonstrate that a suppressor is made from materials all mined, refined and machined in TX?
     
    twarr1 likes this.
  12. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,510
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    Too late for that--this has already happened in Kansas.
    Several of these cases have already been brought--they tend to be fireflies, burning bright for a moment (in "our" community) then burn out to darkness.

    There's some use to these things.
    Basically the State is saying, the Federal rules are enough, this State will not impose more. This eliminates the hinky bits of per-state legislation, like MI and WA have for suppressors, just to name two.

    And, while presently, immediately, they are of little use to any one given firearm owner, these laws do inform District and Circuit Courts.

    Legally, this is probably more in the province of how the States interact with the Federal Government, and less about individual Citizens. Which will be frustrating to the individual.
     
  13. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    21,260
    My earlier question still remains: If rights not specifically given to the federal government belong to the states, why are any gun laws federal? Where does the Constitution say the federal government has the right to regulate the private firearms of individuals?
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  14. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,510
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    We are told it's by way of the Commerce Clause, and in the specific interest of the safety of the Public at large.

    Which leads off into all sorts of arguments, few of which are productive, excepting narrow one argued by constitutional scholars.
    Which is left behind in a quest to find a way to strike a uniform set of regulations across the several and varied States.
    None of which is much fodder for THR.
     
  15. bearcreek

    bearcreek Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,549
    Location:
    N Idaho
    It doesn't.
     
    old lady new shooter likes this.
  16. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,217
    Location:
    WNY
    To add to this. Make them from local materials. Have Abbot's administration and state representatives who signed up, then go to the range and use them. Civil Rights folks stood up like that - come on Greg.
     
    DoubleMag likes this.
  17. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    21,260
    That would be awesome actually.
     
    Roknstevo and DoubleMag like this.
  18. HankB

    HankB Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    5,266
    Location:
    Central Texas
    The Texas law is not entirely an empty gesture . . . with the Texas justice system not prosecuting for a suppressor violation, it's marginally less likely a case will come to the attention of the Feds for prosecution in a Federal court.

    It still seems to me that violating Federal law while trusting (hoping?) that State officials will keep the Feds in the dark about it is not a good strategy for staying out of prison.
     
    Olon and twarr1 like this.
  19. Craig_VA
    • Contributing Member

    Craig_VA Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    946
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Nope, not at all empty gestures, and not a waste of time. You are correct that US Constitution and US law do take precedence over state laws. However, that does not mean that state and local LEOs must at all times actively enforce those laws. They are free to sit back and let the Feds (FBI, DHS, SS, Park Rangers, ATF, PIC, etc.) take care of Federal law enforcement.

    If you doubt this, look at how marijuana cases are being handled. Quite a few states now have state laws allowing either medical use or even recreational use of pot (this include the District of Columbia!). Yet all of that weed sale and use remains illegal under Federal law. Yet no one complains that the local and state LEOs spend no time enforcing the Federal laws on marijuana.

    Craig
     
  20. dogtown tom

    dogtown tom Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    6,709
    Location:
    Plano, Texas
    Show us where a single one of these state firearm freedom laws has changed federal law. Until they do........classic empty gesture.


    Again, show where state and local LEO's activly enforce ANY federal law. They don't and never have. Sure, they can call ATF, FBI, DEA.....but state and local cops have never enforced federal law. Not their jurisdiction.

    And so what? It's not their job.
     
  21. bearcreek

    bearcreek Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,549
    Location:
    N Idaho
    Right. So it's not really an, "empty gesture" then for the state to make a law codifying that it's not their job.
     
  22. Terry G

    Terry G Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    730
    Location:
    Northwoods
    Wisconsin is doing the same. I'm NOT going to be a test case!
     
  23. dogtown tom

    dogtown tom Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    6,709
    Location:
    Plano, Texas
    It's an empty gesture because it was never their job. Ever. Not now, not ten years ago, not ever.
    The federal courts keep reminding state and local PD it isn't their job to arrest or detain illegal immigrants. Again, because it is not their job, nor jurisdiction to do so.
     
  24. Daryl

    Daryl Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    34
    Location:
    Lake Okeechobee Area, Florida
    The Federal Government was created my the STATES with the ratification of the Constitution. The first 10 amendments of the Constitution was ratified out of fear of federal government overreach for power. The 10th amendment says that the federal government only has the power granted to it by the states. Any power not given to the federal government by the States are retained by the states. So IF you follow the Constitution federal law does not automatically trump state law.
     
  25. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,595
    Location:
    CA,AZ,CA,TX
    If it weren't for the empty gestures of numerous states counting women votes, who knows how many more decades it would have taken the feds to get on board.

    If it wasn't for the empty gesture of 19 or so free states over the ~15 slave states, who knows how much longer the the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation would of taken.

    While currently tangibly worthless in fed court, the empty gestures have a way of building momentum to pressure the feds.
     
    old lady new shooter and Olon like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice