WY law makers trying to do the right thing. I hope they get it done.

Florida Sportsman

Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Senior Member WaterEngineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    16,469

    WY law makers trying to do the right thing. I hope they get it done.

    As I said in yesterday's thread. G.C. is a states rights issue and the federal government should keep hands off.

    Text as reported by Wyoming's K2 news:

    Several Wyoming lawmakers are proposing legislation designed to protect gun-owners from any potential federal firearm ban. The “Firearms Protection Act” bill, introduced this week, would make any federal law banning semi-automatic firearms or limiting the size of gun magazines unenforceable within the state’s boundaries. Anyone trying to enforce a federal gun ban could face felony charges under the proposal. It also includes a provision allowing the Wyoming Attorney General’s office to defend any state resident against any federal firearm ban.

    http://k2radio.com/wyoming-lawmakers...n-legislation/
    "I'm not a physicist." ~ ac2020

    "It's a shame PACs cannot simply lie and get away with it." ~ SWFL

  2. #2
    Senior Member razorreilly09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Telluride
    Posts
    8,406
    I believe i could live in Jackson Hole
    "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another."
    "An it harm none, do as ye will."
    "The mind is everything. What you think you become."

  3. #3
    Senior Member WaterEngineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    16,469
    razor:

    You can't afford to live in Jackson. Cost of living there is stupid. I had an engineering firm there who wanted to hire me but could pay me a wage to live there.

    Jackson = bring you own money.

    Now back on point.
    "I'm not a physicist." ~ ac2020

    "It's a shame PACs cannot simply lie and get away with it." ~ SWFL

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    தமிழ்
    Posts
    6,483
    Every time I go to Wyoming fishing I stop by this place. They are awesome.

    http://www.wyomingflyfishing.com/

  5. #5
    Senior Member WaterEngineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    16,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Conchy Cracker View Post
    Every time I go to Wyoming fishing I stop by this place. They are awesome.

    http://www.wyomingflyfishing.com/
    I've been to that place a few times. You are right. Good people.

    I don't fish Alcova (Grey Reef) much as it is not my favorite spot on the North Platte but it can turn on and be red hot. I have been lucky enough to catch it twice like that.

    Of more interest to me is that you go there. It is not a spot there the out-of-towners, so to speak, would go when they go fishing in WY.
    "I'm not a physicist." ~ ac2020

    "It's a shame PACs cannot simply lie and get away with it." ~ SWFL

  6. #6
    Senior Member FLDXT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    S FL
    Posts
    1,804
    Jackson Hole has to be one of the prettiest places on Earth, granted I haven't been around to much, but Jackson Hole was stunning to an ole FL boy, and by the look of things WY is looking better and better.

  7. #7
    Senior Member WaterEngineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    16,469
    Quote Originally Posted by FLDXT View Post
    Jackson Hole has to be one of the prettiest places on Earth, granted I haven't been around to much, but Jackson Hole was stunning to an ole FL boy, and by the look of things WY is looking better and better.
    WY is one of the more fantastic places on this rock, with J-Hole (which is different than Jackson, by the way) being right up there at the top of the heap for pretty.

    Actually, WY has lots of pretty places, they are just all separated by butt ugly places.

    I be the "ole FL boy" wouldn't be thinking too much of J-Hole >> http://www.weather.com/weather/right...se+WY+USWY0122
    "I'm not a physicist." ~ ac2020

    "It's a shame PACs cannot simply lie and get away with it." ~ SWFL

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Gainesville, Fl
    Posts
    11,397
    Quote Originally Posted by WaterEngineer View Post
    As I said in yesterday's thread. G.C. is a states rights issue and the federal government should keep hands off.

    Text as reported by Wyoming's K2 news:

    Several Wyoming lawmakers are proposing legislation designed to protect gun-owners from any potential federal firearm ban. The “Firearms Protection Act” bill, introduced this week, would make any federal law banning semi-automatic firearms or limiting the size of gun magazines unenforceable within the state’s boundaries. Anyone trying to enforce a federal gun ban could face felony charges under the proposal. It also includes a provision allowing the Wyoming Attorney General’s office to defend any state resident against any federal firearm ban.

    http://k2radio.com/wyoming-lawmakers...n-legislation/
    It is a state issue as long as the gun is manufactured and sold in the same state. Once it crosses a state line it becomes a Federal issue. Wyoming can do what it wants, but Wyoming get $1.16 back from the feds for every dollar it's citizens pays in federal taxes. I doubt the law would last long when the feds cut off federal support.

    I am against gun control of any kind. But laws like this are just politics and aren't worth the time it took to write. They do it to appease the voters and make a name for themselves.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    USA, USA, USA
    Posts
    7,507
    Yes it is a states issue. Utah has a law already on the books that any weapon manufactured in the state and sold in the state is not subject to federal laws, ammo too. There is also a written law making open carry legal and with a CWP you can carry any public place except a court of law and the secure area of an international airport. Yes that includes schools and the capitol building. The official gun of the state is the Browning model 1911 .45, in honor of Browning Arms, Morgan UT.

    SALT LAKE CITY — The first of more than a dozen bills aimed at asserting Utah's sovereign rights received Gov. Gary Herbert's signature Friday with assurance that he can keep the state out of costly litigation that may follow.

    The statute created by SB11 (le.utah.gov/~2010/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0011.htm), sponsored by Sen. Margaret Dayton, R-Orem, exempts guns and ammunition manufactured and sold in Utah from federal firearms regulations and challenges current constitutional interpretation of interstate commerce.

    Herbert, who received the bill last Tuesday, said the decision came after careful review of the potential fallout from the controversial legislation.

    "There are times when the state needs to push back against continued encroachment from the federal government. Sending the message that we will stand up for a proper balance between the state and federal government is a good thing," he said. "But in these challenging economic times, when Utah families continue to struggle and our Legislature must account for every dollar it spends, we must also be thoughtful about the cost of that message."

    Making the bill law likely moves the state into direct conflict with federal law, and a legal review by legislative attorneys warned that Dayton's proposal would likely be found unconstitutional.

    The governor said consultation with Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and others assured him that the state can take a hard line on wholly controlling issues of intrastate commerce without incurring budget-busting legal expenses.

    "I am satisfied that Utah can stand confidently with other states that are taking a stand against the federal government's overreach in this area," Herbert said. "The attorney general has assured me that, should a legal challenge be filed against the state, his office can take a variety of actions to ensure the defense of this legislation will have a minimal cost to the people of Utah."

    The bill's sponsor said when she introduced the bill that it was her intent to challenge the status quo with the proposal and on Friday lauded Herbert for signing off on it.

    "I am delighted," Dayton said. "I'm very pleased to stand with a governor who realizes we're one of many players in the pushback on federal overreach."

    She said lawmakers in other states have been monitoring SB11's progression in Utah and waiting to see what action Herbert would take once it reached his desk.

    "There's been other states watching us," Herbert said. "They're saying if Utah can't do it, should we be doing it?"

    Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins, R-Plain City, was more demonstrative in his reaction to Herbert signing the bill.

    "Yes!" he hollered, pumping his fist in the air. "He kind of kept us guessing on that one."

    Dayton's bill was modeled after a new law adopted in Montana last year, the so-called Firearms Freedom Act, which is currently being litigated in federal district court in Missoula, Mont. The action was brought against the federal government by a group of private plaintiffs who have asserted that current interpretation of constitutional law, as it regards to the Interstate Commerce Clause, is incorrect. The federal government has filed a motion to dismiss the matter, which is awaiting a hearing. Tennessee is the only other state that has adopted a similar law.

    And, while the nuts and bolts of implementing Dayton's statute have not been ironed out, such as how to track the guns, ammunition and gun accessories that would be exempted under the statute, even without legal action the new law is likely headed for some other hurdles.

    Even before the Montana law was enacted last October, the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms sent a letter to all Montana firearms licensees warning them that federal rules still apply, regardless of the new state law. The letter stated that because the Firearms Freedom 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."

    The letter goes on to outline that the record keeping and National Instant Criminal Background Check required under federal law would still apply in Montana

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •