The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar
PUCKER
Senior Member
Posts: 1565
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:05 pm
Location: Grapevine, TX

The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by PUCKER »

My apologies if this has been previously posted.

Not sounding good for States Rights - I'm wondering how this will turn out, what kind of action the folks in TN will take?

--

From:
http://www.gundigest.com/article/gunrig ... stitution/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution
July 20, 2009
Summary
“This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t suit them.”

A line was drawn in the sand last week - a response by the Federal Government to the State of Tennessee and their assertion of sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.

(Editor’s note: A similar response was sent to Montana Firearms licenses on 07-16-09 as well)

Part of a series of moves by states seeking to utilize the Tenth Amendment as a limit on Federal Power, the Tennessee State Senate approved Senate Bill 1610 (SB1610), the Tennesse Firearms Freedom Act, by a vote of 22-7. The House companion bill, HB1796 previously passed the House by a vote of 87-1.

Governor Breseden allowed the bill to become law without signing.

The law states that “federal laws and regulations do not apply to personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition that is manufactured in Tennessee and remains in Tennessee. The limitation on federal law and regulation stated in this bill applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured using basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported into this state.”

At the time of passage through the TN House and Senate, Judiciary Chairman Mae Beavers had this to say-

“Be it the federal government mandating changes in order for states to receive federal funds or the federal government telling us how to regulate commerce contained completely within this state – enough is enough. Our founders fought too hard to ensure states’ sovereignty and I am sick and tired of activist federal officials and judges sticking their noses where they don’t belong.”

The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to ‘all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees’ in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature. ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that ‘Federal law supersedes the Act’, and thus the ATF considers it meaningless. Read more

Source: tenthamendmentcenter

The ATF Letter to Tennessee Firearm Dealers:

Below is the full text of the letter sent last week by the ATF:

U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives

Assistant Director

OPEN LETTER TO ALL TENNESSEE
FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES

The purpose of this letter is to provide guidance on your obligations as a Federal firearms licensee (”FFL”). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (”ATF”) is dedicated to your success in meeting your requirements as a Federal firearms licensee. The following guidance is intended to assist you in accomplishing this goal.

The passage of the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, H.B. 1796, 106th Leg. (Tenn. 2009) 1796 (”Act”), effective June 19, 2009, has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. The Act purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition manufactured in the State, and which remain in the State, from most Federal firearms laws and regulations. However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.

As you may know, Federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain within the same state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. The information required must be recorded in the licensee’s records not later than the seventh day following the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. Firearms transaction records and NICS background checks must be conducted prior to disposition of firearms to unlicensed persons. These, as well as other Federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunition have crossed state lines.

If you have any questions regarding the Federal firearms laws and regulations, please contact your local ATF office. ATF works closely with the firearms industry and appreciates the important role the industry plays in combating violent crime. A listing of ATF office phone numbers can be found at http://www.atf.gov/contact/field.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Carson W. Carroll, Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services)”
User avatar
roberts
Banned
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:24 pm

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by roberts »

The Constitution, including the Tenth Amendment, is only binding on the legitimate government of the United States. It has no weight for a pretendership run by enemies of the Constitution.
THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS NOT ABOUT DUCK HUNTING
User avatar
TheArmedFarmer
Senior Member
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Grapevine

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by TheArmedFarmer »

Well said, roberts. I've been watching these heroic Firearms Freedom Act legislations and am thrilled to see the ATF being made to show their hand. This should be a wake up call for more people.
Life member: NRA, THSC, HSLDA.
User avatar
Purplehood
Senior Member
Posts: 4638
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by Purplehood »

Perhaps in lieu of a Republican or Democrat party we need a Constitution-party. I guess that would simply be Libertarianism taken to an extreme.
Life NRA
USMC 76-93
USAR 99-07 (Retired)
OEF 06-07
User avatar
TheArmedFarmer
Senior Member
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Grapevine

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by TheArmedFarmer »

Here's a good start:

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Life member: NRA, THSC, HSLDA.
wheelgun1958
Senior Member
Posts: 1153
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:40 pm
Location: Flo, TX

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by wheelgun1958 »

Frost
Senior Member
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:36 am
Location: Houston

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by Frost »

There is no possible language on a piece of paper that will restrain politicians and bureaucrats.
It can happen here.
bdickens
Senior Member
Posts: 2807
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:36 am
Location: Houston

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by bdickens »

Arms will, however.
Byron Dickens
User avatar
TheArmedFarmer
Senior Member
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Grapevine

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by TheArmedFarmer »

bdickens wrote:Arms will, however.
+1
Richard Henry Lee in The Pennsylvania Gazette on Feb. 20, 1788 wrote:Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.
Life member: NRA, THSC, HSLDA.
User avatar
snorri
Senior Member
Posts: 398
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by snorri »

bdickens wrote:Arms will, however.
That's the true motivation behind gun control.
minatur innocentibus qui parcit nocentibus

RED FLAG LAWS ARE HATE CRIMES
KD5NRH
Senior Member
Posts: 3119
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:25 am
Location: Stephenville TX

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by KD5NRH »

PUCKER wrote:Not sounding good for States Rights - I'm wondering how this will turn out, what kind of action the folks in TN will take?
Well, the upshot is that you don't need an FFL dealer to set themselves up for trouble. In this economy, if NRA/GOA/SAF/JPFO/etc. would get on board to defend them, there should be some failing machine shop out there with little or nothing left to lose, that could crank out some breakover shotguns and single-shot .22s for sale directly to the public with nothing more than a state ID and state background check.

It wouldn't even be that much of a stretch for a good machine shop to turn out something that the state itself would be interested in; AR-15 equivalents or pump shotguns for their state police.

For that matter, what if they decide to equip the Tennessee State Guard with their own shop and start having them crank out weaponry for the state? Can you imagine the fallout if BATFE raided that?
User avatar
GaryAdrian
Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by GaryAdrian »

I believe that the Feds are so entrenched in the State's business that it will take secession to undo it.
2.6% of Texas land is owned by the Federal Government.
Currently, our government owns over 30 percent of land in the United States and over 45 percent of California. The Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 will give the Feds even more power to grab land. What will that do to our hunting rights?
We are moving toward being the USSA where the folks in DC becomes our Overseers. Gov. Perry talks about standing up the the Federal Government, but I don't think he has much chance to do anything.
They simply own too much and we let them.
It's all bluster and meat. It's an election year and though I like Perry, I don't know how far he "can" go. I am very surprised that they let us have so much by the way of our second amendment and I fear that if the continue to win major battles and control our economy and our banks. I do believe Dianne Feinstein when she say she will wait for the right time get our guns even though she herself had a Concealed Weapons permit and actively carried a .38 caliber Smith & Wesson revolver for her personal safety,though in 2000 that she had voluntarily relinquished both the concealed weapons permit and the firearm.
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here.",Feinstein said on CBS-TV's 60 Minutes on February 5, 1995. This year she told ABC's 60 mintes, "I'll pick the time and the place, no question about it." We will hear from her again very soon.

Tennessee and Montana will hear from the Feds and drop their "Made In" laws. President Obama's upcoming "regulatory czar" Harvard professor Cass Sunstein will push a radical animal rights agenda, including new restrictions on agriculture and even hunting. I'm afraid that States Rights is just a dream today. We've allowed Washington too much power. :cryin
NRA Life Member
Texas State Rifle Association
NRA-Certified Firearms Instructor
bdickens
Senior Member
Posts: 2807
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:36 am
Location: Houston

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by bdickens »

Have you heard about all these "tea parties" accross the nation? Someone with even a passing familiararity with US history will understand that the phrase "tea party" is loaded with meaning and it doesn't refer to anything genteel at all. More and more people are getting more and more fed up with continued and expanding goventment encroachment. The tea parties are a very hopeful sign; people who would not normally ever considered protesting against the government are getting out in force.

I believe there is a revolution brewing. I only hope that it takes place at the ballot box instead of with the cartridge box.
Byron Dickens
User avatar
GaryAdrian
Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by GaryAdrian »

bdickens wrote:Have you heard about all these "tea parties" accross the nation? Someone with even a passing familiararity with US history will understand that the phrase "tea party" is loaded with meaning and it doesn't refer to anything genteel at all. More and more people are getting more and more fed up with continued and expanding goventment encroachment. The tea parties are a very hopeful sign; people who would not normally ever considered protesting against the government are getting out in force.

I believe there is a revolution brewing. I only hope that it takes place at the ballot box instead of with the cartridge box.
Yes Sir, sure have. Been to a couple.
But your right, it maybe a cartridge box.
NRA Life Member
Texas State Rifle Association
NRA-Certified Firearms Instructor
User avatar
Trinitite
Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 5:23 pm

Re: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Post by Trinitite »

bdickens wrote:Arms will, however.
You can skip the second step if you want to send a message.
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”