
Originally Posted by
JG007
I'm also discussing, not internet arguing, but I disagree. In AZ, or any similar state that has its own prohibited weapons, any state cop could arrest someone seen violating it.
You are presumed guilty for being in possession of an item that is prohibited by law.
Do you believe that all such state statutes are meaningless and when a local cop questions you about your sbr that is normally illegal under state law you are able to refuse just because there is an overlapping federal law (with exemptions)?
That would appear to be the same thing as telling a local cop they cannot detain you for possessing drugs that are illegal under state law because there are overlapping federal laws. *and federal exemptions.
Would you tell a cop that you are authorized under federal law to possess marijuana and consequently they should just take your word for it and the state law is meaningless?
Federal supremacy laws are not an either or issue
Here's the deal: the second you relay to that LEO that you have what is tantamount to federal permission to possess that thing, they have a fiduciary duty to check with the regulating agency IF they are going to investigate that item under a state statute violation.
As soon as i say i have a tax stamp, their investigation stops and they must then check with the ATF to verify. Lest they violate your rights and get sued.
Local and state LEOs further lack ANY training to verify the veracity or authenticity of an ATF tax stamp, ESPECIALLY a digital document. They, substantively, lack any ability to verify the document. So any enforcement which they perceive they are undertaking is false and easily dismissed in court.
This is the type of behavior that gets LEOs and agencies sued.
"That thing looks about as enjoyable as a bowl of exploding dicks." - Magic_Salad0892
"The body cannot go where the mind has not already been."
Bookmarks