Outside Federal Jurisdiction

There are some fellas online that I’m very fond of popping in on. Pino is one of my favourites because he tends to bitch slap me……in italics, nonetheless. This is Pino’s latest post and I am reblogging it here.  Enjoy.

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.

We’re seeing more and more of this:

With gun rights coming under fire across the border in New York State, the Susquehanna County commissioners spoke out by resolution Wednesday in favor of the Second Amendment.

Republican Commissioner Michael Giangrieco said the issues in New York prompted him to address the matter on a county level.

He proposed a resolution stating that “any federal act, bill, law, rule or executive order that in any way infringes on our Second Amendment rights by attempting to reduce the private ownership of any firearm, magazine or ammunition shall be unenforceable in Susquehanna County.”

So, it occurred to me, “Can the federal government regulate guns at all? And if so, how does it derive that power?”

I couldn’t find anything that expressly authorized the federal government to regulate guns but had a sneaking suspicion I would find the authority somewhere else. And then I found this:

Congress derives its power to regulate firearms in the Commerce Clause, in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, of the U.S. Constitution. Under the Commerce Clause, Congress may regulate commercial activity between the states and commerce with foreign countries. In reviewing federal legislation enacted pursuant to the Commerce Clause, the U.S. Supreme Court has given Congress tremendous leeway. Congress may enact criminal statutes regarding firearms if the activity at issue relates to interstate transactions, affects interstate commerce, or is such that control is necessary and proper to carry out the intent of the Commerce Clause.

Ahh yes, the Commerce Clause. The Clause that effectively ended state’s rights and allowed the federal government massive power over those states. In fact, the landmark case establishing such leeway seems to make Montana’s effort to try and skirt federal gun regulations by manufacturing and selling guns within the state outside federal control. Remember, that case found that a farmer didn’t have the right to grow and use wheat on his own farm as he saw fit.

My feel is that it was never meant that the federal government could regulate firearms in general, that it be left to the states. But that the states and local governments COULD regulate those weapons asTHEY saw fit.

Oh, Pino can be found on Tarheelred.com where he will happily kick your tail in Italics…..

18 thoughts on “Outside Federal Jurisdiction

  1. Madison directly addresses the purpose of the Commerce clause. Just look it up. You’ll find you are correct: it was NEVER intended to allow Congress to act in any way outside its enumerated powers.

  2. This is why I was so pissed that the repubs wouldn’t fight sotomayer, and kagan’s nominations. We are setting up a fight over the 10th amendment. I’m glad some states are re-reading it, and understand it. But how much backbone do they have to enforce it?
    They won’t get much help from the Supreme court nowadays!

  3. The Preamble to the Bill of Rights says within it… thus.. :

    ” Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday 4 March, 1789.

    The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, ( IN ORDER TO PREVENT MISCONSTRUCTION OR ABUSE OF IT POWERS,) that FURTHER declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added : And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will BEST ENSURE THE BENEFICENT ENDS OF ITS INSTITUTION. ”

    And the 2nd Amendment says…..” A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a FREE STATE, the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”

    There is nothing in the Stated intent of the Bill of Rights nor the VERY CLEAR wording of the 2nd Amendment that even implys that our right or Intent shouild be or even CAN BE subjugated u and/or regulated under the “Commerce Clause.”

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.