Missouri Bill rejecting Federal gun control.

Federal authority is defined and limited by the Constitution. This legislation specifically delineates that when Federal authority is used in violation and excess of the Constitution, it is unlawful and void.

If California tries to ban guns, that would also explicitly be in violation of the constitution, and similarly null and void.

Adding to what he said, for a laarrgggee part of the 20th century G men were looked down upon and interlopers, bootlickers and pretentious morons who only muddled up real police work. A large reason for that, has to do with the fact that municipal and county politics reigned supreme for something like 80% of our existence as a nation. We're only now seeing machinery from DC large enough to challenge the old school party bosses (A lot of that has to do with the Federal Governments century spanning war on the mafia and its after effects) and hilariously a lot of that is basically just The local party boss goes to Washington instead of Mister Smith. McConnell is probably the best current example of that and LBJ and Gingrich were stellar examples of that in the prior century.

That fight meant Federal Law Enforcement officers often times were on the receiving end of an ass whoop'n from Local Sheriffs and its partially what necessitated shit like the national guard being sent into the South or in 2006 when a city of Miami Police literally got into a WACO style siege with the FBI and Miami Dade Police and Hialeah Police refused any call to go help them out. And why the LAPD and the NYPD essentially operate like the private militias of their respective Mayors.

Opening the Ball on this, is going to be a return to form for the US, but its a return to form that is an odd contraction because it both vanished long before anyone here was born and yet operates out in the open and is still very prevalent.

This is just the first time the Good ol'boys/City bosses are acting against the whims of DC in a very, very long time.

Or to quote a Harlem Gangster "I warned the Bureau, tak'n on NYPD was gonna put 'em in a whole world of shit"

That can is already open, and lying there empty. The worms are all on the loose in the desert and happily making spice.
This particular can of worms having been opened in the sixteen hundreds no less, we've already got one hell of a spice surplus.

Sanctuary cities have been mentioned by others - and if the Dems in California's big cities start making declarations like that, all the rural counties will give them the one finger salute.
"Only law enforcement people may carry, you say? Then in my capacity as sheriff I hereby deputize the entire male population of this town!"

Conversely - when the courts make pro-2A rulings, the police force in blue strongholds often just ignore that, and go right on treating Carrying While Black as a shoot-on-sight offence.

Judges ruling that shooting CPS agents is justified, Police Chief's flat out warning Federal agents that they'll be fired on if they attempted to enforce Obama era policies and Justice Moore repeatedly telling the US Supreme Court to eat a bag of dicks...etc

This has been happening for quite awhile, the only difference is now it's "official".
 
Last edited:
There is no "active impeding" of federal immigration officers, they are simply not entitled to free assistance from state and local law enforcement.
Oh, there's plenty of active impediment going on behind the scenes. For several years, I've heard of illegal immigrants getting off with murder, because certain courts in Oregon would rather see a rapist go free than hand him over to ICE. And the Oregon state legislature also voted to make drivers licenses available to illegal immigrants even after the people of Oregon voted 60-40 to discontinue that program in a referendum.

Oregon and Washington state are both in a race with California to see who can be the friendliest to illegal aliens, and they're catching up quick.
 
Oh, there's plenty of active impediment going on behind the scenes. For several years, I've heard of illegal immigrants getting off with murder, because certain courts in Oregon would rather see a rapist go free than hand him over to ICE.

Can you cite a few of these cases?


And the Oregon state legislature also voted to make drivers licenses available to illegal immigrants even after the people of Oregon voted 60-40 to discontinue that program in a referendum.

Just to clarify, the previous law you're talking about is different from the new one; the legislature does not actually have the power to disregard a referendum.

The previous law, SB 833, was passed in 2013 and vetoed by citizens' referendum (Ballot Measure 88) in 2014.

The new law, HB 2015, with different conditions, was passed in 2019. Sufficient voter signatures were gathered for a referendum challenge, but the secretary of state (a Republican, actually) threw them out because the legislature had invoked emergency authority to pass the new law, which changes the procedural requirements for a referendum challenge.

(To be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong, just providing additional details about what went down.)
 
Can you cite a few of these cases?
I'll need to do some digging, because I'm mostly hear them on the radio.


Just to clarify, the previous law you're talking about is different from the new one; the legislature does not actually have the power to disregard a referendum.
Right. So they votes in a slightly different law that accomplishes the same thing and slapped an Emergency Measure label on it to make sure that the voters can't overturn it. Someone once shared a list of Oregon emergency measures that have been passed in the past decade, I'll see if I can dig it up.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top