Check out this bill. Texas is flexing a little of its muscle and telling the federal government that firearms and ammo made in Texas, and that stay in Texas, are not subject to federal regulation. It looks like "Made in Texas" should be stamped to the receiver or central part of the firearm in order to fall within the parameters of the new bill. Thought you Texas Appleseeders would be interested in this little piece of legislation.
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/HB01863I.htm
Goes to the Interstate Commerce Provisions of the Constitution. If it is not traded or shipped outside the state, the US Government has no authority.
WT,
Montana has done same - way to go Tejas!
Self-reliance and Limited Government - just a couple of the great traditions we all share as Americans.
Be sure to wright your reps and insist that they vote for it.
PH
Interesting.
Is this part of a movement of seccession?
I will be reading more on this subject.
Quote from: cannonman61 on April 23, 2009, 06:38:35 PM
Interesting.
Is this part of a movement of seccession?
I will be reading more on this subject.
Not part of a secessionist movement. Just drawing the line in the dirt for the FedGov, saying this is our responsibility and that is yours- stay with yours.
We already have AK and AR15 receivers manufactured right here in Houston. :~
If it happens, maybe LRB will see fit to immigrate, I mean move.
Quote from: Sir Not Appearing In This Film on April 23, 2009, 07:28:58 PM
We already have AK and AR15 receivers manufactured right here in Houston. :~
If it happens, maybe LRB will see fit to immigrate, I mean move.
Who in Houston makes the AR15 receivers?
Quote from: Texian on April 23, 2009, 07:31:37 PM
Quote from: Sir Not Appearing In This Film on April 23, 2009, 07:28:58 PM
We already have AK and AR15 receivers manufactured right here in Houston. :~
If it happens, maybe LRB will see fit to immigrate, I mean move.
Who in Houston makes the AR15 receivers?
High Standard
http://www.highstandard.com/
Until last November, High Standard receivers could be had at local shows for $95. They seem to go for $145 stripped now.
I suspect they are forged elsewhere and machined at High Standard's facility near 290 and 610 Loop.
Larue Tactical also makes lower receivers, but you have to buy one of their hoity-toity Stealth upper receiver assemblies in order to purchase a lower from them.
http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=248
Quote from: WestTx on April 23, 2009, 06:26:14 PM
Goes to the Interstate Commerce Provisions of the Constitution. If it is not traded or shipped outside the state, the US Government has no authority.
Except that past SCOTUS cases have held that as long as the item 'might be' used in interstate commerce, then the commerce clause applies. See my favorite case to hate (other than US v Miller): Wickard v Filburn, 317 US 111, (1942) in which the court held that a farmer paid by the agriculture adjustment act and who grew 12 acres of wheat in excess of his allotment, which he withdrew for personal use, was otherwise affecting interstate commerce because of his decreased personal demand for wheat.
This was THE case which allowed subsequent federal regulation of almost everything in our lives.
OMG, it was under FDR! Heavens to Murgatroid, could we actually have an anti-gun president use a new deal policy to claim that local gun manufacturers could be regulated by Congress because of the detrimental impact of their local sales on interstate commerce. Yes we can.
Quote from: BlueFeather on April 23, 2009, 08:18:51 PM
Quote from: WestTx on April 23, 2009, 06:26:14 PM
Goes to the Interstate Commerce Provisions of the Constitution. If it is not traded or shipped outside the state, the US Government has no authority.
Except that past SCOTUS cases have held that as long as the item 'might be' used in interstate commerce, then the commerce clause applies. See my favorite case to hate (other than US v Miller): Wickard v Filburn, 317 US 111, (1942) in which the court held that a farmer paid by the agriculture adjustment act and who grew 12 acres of wheat in excess of his allotment, which he withdrew for personal use, was otherwise affecting interstate commerce because of his decreased personal demand for wheat.
This was THE case which allowed subsequent federal regulation of almost everything in our lives.
OMG, it was under FDR! Heavens to Murgatroid, could we actually have an anti-gun president use a new deal policy to claim that local gun manufacturers could be regulated by Congress because of the detrimental impact of their local sales on interstate commerce. Yes we can.
:)But that is for those unfortunate ones who pay attention to SCOTUS. If we the people say it doesn't apply, who will argue? ^-^
Quote from: BlueFeather on April 23, 2009, 08:18:51 PM
Quote from: WestTx on April 23, 2009, 06:26:14 PM
Goes to the Interstate Commerce Provisions of the Constitution. If it is not traded or shipped outside the state, the US Government has no authority.
Except that past SCOTUS cases have held that as long as the item 'might be' used in interstate commerce, then the commerce clause applies.
Absolutely true, which is why this bill is before the Texas legislature. Obviously, some Texas legislators, our governor (and many Texans for that matter) don't agree that the federal government should have the ability to regulate everything that "might be" used in interstate commerce. Texas certainly appears to be telling the federal government to back off, at least with regard to firearms "Made in Texas". It is my understanding that several other states have passed or are considering similar legislation with regard to firearms -- for some reason Montana comes to mind on this point.
Who's going to be the test case? I think John or Kay should give it a go. After all, congress critters rarely (never, by law?) do time for crimes that would put the rest of us away.
Quote from: Texian on April 23, 2009, 05:34:16 PM
Check out this bill. Texas is flexing a little of its muscle and telling the federal government that firearms and ammo made in Texas, and that stay in Texas, are not subject to federal regulation. It looks like "Made in Texas" should be stamped to the receiver or central part of the firearm in order to fall within the parameters of the new bill. Thought you Texas Appleseeders would be interested in this little piece of legislation.
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/HB01863I.htm
Damnation, I can't believe it! http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/HB01863I.htm
TEXIANS!!!!! LET'S ROLL!!!!!!
Let's hit the iron while its hot!HAMMER DOWN!
Get to work TX Appleseenders, pronto!!!
Spread the word far and wide, emails, phone calls, facebook, etc.
Rick Perry and Kay Hutchinson are gonna go head to head for TX Governor, as it appears thus far.
I'd send any person campaigning for the governor of TEXAS advice to support this bill.
Send them personally signed letters especially, and also emails, phone calls etc.
Spread the word far and wide.
LET'S MAKE THIS HAPPEN!!!
The time is ripe to pass such a bill.
Do it!
Please.
Thanks,
Brett
Quote from: Texian on April 23, 2009, 05:34:16 PM
Check out this bill. Texas is flexing a little of its muscle and telling the federal government that firearms and ammo made in Texas, and that stay in Texas, are not subject to federal regulation. It looks like "Made in Texas" should be stamped to the receiver or central part of the firearm in order to fall within the parameters of the new bill. Thought you Texas Appleseeders would be interested in this little piece of legislation.
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/HB01863I.htm
Wow, if I read that thing right it appears that suppressors (aka silencers), which are currently regulated as NFA weapons, could be manufactured and used within the state of Texas with no federal regulation! It specifically stated that a sound suppressor was included in the definition of "firearm accessory". That's pretty amazing!
Now if only that pesky two shots with one trigger pull statement weren't in there...
Seems like none of you have ever read about a little thing called Wickard vs Filburn.
If it MIGHT keep something else from being sold in TX that could have come across a state line, it is INTERSTATE COMMERCE adn they can regulate it. So say the Supremes >:D
http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1942/1942_59/
Sam
Quote from: SamD on April 24, 2009, 01:08:01 AM
Seems like none of you have ever read about a little thing called Wickard vs Filburn.
If it MIGHT keep something else from being sold in TX that could have come across a state line, it is INTERSTATE COMMERCE adn they can regulate it. So say the Supremes >:D
http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1942/1942_59/
Sam
That case has to be the biggest judicial travesty in the history of this nation. No surprise that it occurred in a time period where a huge push toward socialism had been occurring.
Off topic response.
I don't see an improtant subject like this as a distraction at all. At least our state government is not pleased with the status quo. However, FunFaler is right about this not being Appleseed related.
I believe Voortrekker has most of us on e-mail. Brett if you don't mind, would you start an e-mail so we can brainstorm elsewhere. We can't let this go without being heard.
Mark
Quote from: funfaler on April 24, 2009, 01:59:26 AM
must have a good plan, to be spending time on these distractions....
Who lit the fuse on your tampon? :'(
This is the most discussion we have had on this sub-forum in weeks and you slam the door shut on us?
I dont consider this a distraction and find it very relevant to my interests as it coincides with my understanding of the appleseed project.
Please try to give us some room to breath. Thank you
Quote from: sardoodledom on April 24, 2009, 04:07:40 PM
Quote from: funfaler on April 24, 2009, 01:59:26 AM
must have a good plan, to be spending time on these distractions....
I dont consider this a distraction and find it very relevant to my interests as it coincides with my understanding of the appleseed project.
Please try to give us some room to breath. Thank you
I agree with you.
I've recently had my interest in participating in and promoting the Appleseed Project rejuvenated. I attended the latest AS in my area. I also went to my local tea party for no other reason than to hand out Appleseed information and talk to people about the program. But it is posts like funfaler's above that make me feel like dropping Appleseed like a hot potato. You know Appleseed isn't the only pro-freedom organization that needs as much help as it can get. Most of those other organizations don't feel the need to direct every conversation and effort of it's members towards topics it deems proper. These "shame on you" posts are getting out of hand.
This topic is of interest to most everyone here but... this is a working site. Discussing things like this is not working to promote Appleseed. The goal is that with AS we can avoid the states every needing to take such action.
If everyone talked about everything and anything the working part of this forum would get lost in the clutter. There are many excellent web forums to chat this stuff, and you can promote AS while there with a simple sig line and some references to upcoming shoots.
If you would up and drop AS over being asked to work while here it makes be wonder. Alot of people, including myself, have posted off topic been reminded of the mission and continued on.
PS: I am interested enough in topics like this to be eyeballing Realtor.com, but it is still not AS.
Quote from: SamD on April 24, 2009, 01:08:01 AM
Seems like none of you have ever read about a little thing called Wickard vs Filburn.
If it MIGHT keep something else from being sold in TX that could have come across a state line, it is INTERSTATE COMMERCE adn they can regulate it. So say the Supremes >:D
http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1942/1942_59/
Sam
Think we have read Wickard. That was a 1942 case. This is 2009 and a state has now formally exercised rights under the 9th and 10th Amendments. Puts a whole new spin on things.
But, let's lock this down and move this discussion to emails.