Suppressors Owners! Options If State Bans Them?

[Bret]

Legal precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Any law that violates the Constitution is void. MisterHelix, in order to help protect your rights, it's critical that you understand how to defend them. Reading the Constitution is the easiest place to start. While it's not an easy read, it's not too difficult to understand because it was written in plain English so that everyone could understand. There was nothing hidden inside it that people were not aware of 200 years ago, but people now can figure out. It's not to be reinterpreted as time goes by and society evolves. If people want to change the Constitution, it includes an amendment process.

[MisterHelix]

Legal precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Any law that violates the Constitution is void. MisterHelix, in order to help protect your rights, it's critical that you understand how to defend them. Reading the Constitution is the easiest place to start. While it's not an easy read, it's not too difficult to understand because it was written in plain English so that everyone could understand. There was nothing hidden inside it that people were not aware of 200 years ago, but people now can figure out. It's not to be reinterpreted as time goes by and society evolves. If people want to change the Constitution, it includes an amendment process.

Sure thing. I read it through frequently, and when I do, I find things like the "ex post facto" thing, and say hmmm.

Then I'm told it doesn't mean what I think it means.

It seems to me like a bunch of stuff done at the federal and state level is unconstitutional, but it seems like there's always a reason why they can do it. National Security and Interstate commerce seem to be the most popular excuses.

[msr]

So a certain city in Illinois banned assault type rifles and high capacity magazines today with a 30 day limit to sell, remove, or forfeit said items allowing confiscation if not forfeited. If say a citizen in that city owned an ar-15 sbr with a federal tax stamp what happens then. If Nebraska bans suppressors and you have federal permission to own that suppressor, I guess state/city law trumps federal law?

[medicman816]

In general, with NFA, state/city law does trump federal law. There was a poster on another site who did a form 1 for a moltov cocktail and was denied because it was illegal in his state (posted a picture of the denied form 1 with reason being illegal by statute or something). You cannot own a NFA item in states where they are illegal. You would probably also be denied a form 20 into a state if the item was illegal there, also.

The same would hold true if one suddenly became a prohibited person. You have the stamp, but cannot legally possess the item.

I guess the question will be answered by the law, if and when it is written, i.e. grandfathered, time limit to dispose, keep but not transfer, etc. I think we have to keep in mind that at one point everything was legal until one day it wasn't. Laws restrict things, not allow them. If there is no law against it, it is legal.

[msr]

I feel many citizens of this country will loose their second amendment rights to this new form of gun control. Cities will jump on the band wagon.

[Bret]

That's why getting a statewide gun law preemption passed is so important. If we didn't have that in Georgia, then there would be some cities, towns and even counties that have gun control. As it is, they can't pass any gun related laws because Georgia has a preemption law.

[joeg26er]

Several Florida legislators/ politicos are trying to get rid of Florida's preemption laws / rewrite the Florida state constitution

[Hmac]

Legal precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Any law that violates the Constitution is void. MisterHelix, in order to help protect your rights, it's critical that you understand how to defend them. Reading the Constitution is the easiest place to start. While it's not an easy read, it's not too difficult to understand because it was written in plain English so that everyone could understand. There was nothing hidden inside it that people were not aware of 200 years ago, but people now can figure out. It's not to be reinterpreted as time goes by and society evolves. If people want to change the Constitution, it includes an amendment process.

Different people, different judges, interpret the Constitution differently. The Constitution may not say what you think it says.

[Bret]

Different people, different judges, interpret the Constitution differently. The Constitution may not say what you think it says.

More often, they just do want they want and disregard what it says simply because it doesn't fit their agenda. Anyone who has half a bit of intellectual honesty knows that the 2nd Amendment protects our right to keep and bear firearms. If they still don't fully understand what it means by simply reading it, then they can dive in to history and remove all doubt. Those who choose to ignore what's plainly written (2nd, 9th, 10th Amendments, etc.) and find what's not written (right to abortion, prohibition against death penalty, gay marriage, etc.) are simply tyrants at heart.

[pod]

I'd really like to know why people who propose gun control cannot be charged with treason?