See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com ... egins-atf-vs-the-constitution/
Published: Jul 24, 2009
Author: Bryce Shonka
Post Date: 2009-07-24 06:22:25 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 157
Comments: 9
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. Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders’ vision of constitutional government: “The letter says, in part, ‘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.’ That is precisely what I predicted the Federal Government’s response to the Tennessee act would be. As I told Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox News’s Glenn Beck Program on June 5, 2009, federal officials don’t care about a good historical argument concerning the meaning of the Constitution.” “Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter.” “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.” The Federal Government has regularly claimed that the commerce clause of the constitution, which gives DC authority to regulate commerce between the states, gives them authority to regulate or add prohibitions on items that never cross state lines. One notable use of the commerce clause in this manner can be found in the 2005 decision by the Supreme Court in ‘Gonzales vs. Raich’, where the court contended that consuming one’s locally grown marijuana for medical purposes affects the interstate market of marijuana, and hence that the federal government may regulate—and prohibit—such consumption. They used this claim, even though at the same time they made it clear that no legal market for marijuana exists. One key aspect of the ATF’s letter is that it was only sent out to existing Federal Firearms Licensees, those generally already in compliance with federal regulations - and who likely would not have participated in the TN Firearms Freedom act anyway, according to sources close to Tenth Amendment Center. Ultimately what the letter represents is another move in the chess match being played out between the states and the Federal Government, the resolution of which may not be seen for quite some time. 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 www.atf.gov/contact/field.htm. Carson W. Carroll, Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services)” If you enjoyed this post: Click Here to Get the Free Tenth Amendment Center Newsletter,
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
And the Constitution supersedes federal law which is un constitutional. This seems so simple. They sure like to play this game both ways when convenient.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
Dear Ada, The matter (10th amendment, State's rights, and the Natural Right of Self Preservation) is not so simple as expressed in this article. If one researches the fundamental "changes in state government Constitutions" manifested by Revision or full blown Constitution Conventions (mid 1960's to early 1970's), one will find that ALL STATE CONSTITUTION TERRITORIAL JURISDICTIONAL CLAIMS were removed (also references to State Sovereignty, Common Law etc.) from all modern American State Constitutions (no longer operating under Amendment 10 referred to as The New Order of Things by Authors on the subject matter of State Constitutional Conventions and Revisions). This redaction of Territorial Jurisdiction mitigated the Elephant in the Room problem (hinted at in this article) of State's & Federal Government's CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE (see http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/SeparationOfPowers.pdf">sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/SeparationOfPowers.pdf) for complete analysis on this subject matter). The fact of this condition precedent is that America has "two states that appear to occupy the same territorial space" at the same time (this phenomena is described by Constitutional Scholars as "the appearance of reality for reality itself"). One State (being Federal in nature operating outside the confines of the Constitution for United States of America (1887) ) and the other organic, Incorporated into the Union, recognized under Amendment 10, Republican in Nature, merely "hanging on a thread" as The Guarantee of a Republican form of Government clause as per Article 4, Section 4 to wit: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.” To complicate the matter further, we also have two classes of citizens in this country. One class functioning under Amendment Fourteen (subject to the jurisdiction thereof or a subject of the Federal Government) and the other being the original/organic Citizen of a State as per Article 4, Section. 2. to wit: “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” This referenced "Citizen of a State" Natural Right's may only be denied by way of Due Process of Law (he/she commits an Actual Crime as per Common Law (injures another Human Being), whereas as the Fourteenth Amendment subject is accountable to All 50 Titles of the U.S. Code (under the Incorporated Rights theory, his/hers only real right is to reside within a state.. all other rights come to being via Court Rulings and Civil Rights acts). A remedy to this above matter for Citizens of a State may be found in the Sovereigns Immunity Act of 1976 (so as not be persecuted by State or Federal Government’s operating under the theory of the New Federalism or Legislative Democracy verses a Constitutional Republic). I hope this sheds some light on this subject for you and others on this wonderful Freedom Loving Website. Warm Regards, Patrick Note: Additional study on the subject of State Citizen v Federal citizen (under amendment 14) and proper state jurisdiction v Federal jurisdiction may found in following two cases: The Slaughter-House cases (State Citizen v Federal citizen) at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaughter-House_Cases and www.lectlaw.com/files/case30.htm and Downs v Bidwell @ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downes_v._Bidwell and caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/sc...ourt=US&vol=182&invol=244
In effect, it’s (The Holacaust Inc.) become like a grotesque doll wielded by witch doctors, used to keep individuals from asking too many questions, from thinking for themselves and stepping out of line.
The illegal shadow government, it's puppets and minions, must be annihilated post haste. IMO
In the words of Dick Cheney, "So?" The Preamble to the Bill of Rights [This is a note to me from Dr. Linda Thompson of the American Justice Federation that I am passing along to everyone...email me with your comments ken] [to ken] Effective December 15, 1791 PREAMBLE The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution. The first ten amendments are "declaratory and restrictive clauses". This means they supersede all other parts of our Constitution and restrict the powers of our Constitution. There are people in this country that do not want you to know that these two sentences ever existed. For many years these words were "omitted" from copies of our Constitution. Public and private colleges alike have based their whole interpretation of our Constitution on the fraudulent version of this text. Those corrupt individuals have claimed that the amendments can be changed by the will of the people. By this line of reasoning the amendments are open to interpretation. This is a clever deception. The Bill of Rights is separate from the other amendments. The Bill of Rights is a declaration of restrictions to the powers of our Constitution. The Bill of Rights restricts the Constitution. The Constitution restricts the powers of government. The deception is that the government can interpret the all of the amendments and the Constitution itself. Without the presence of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights this may be a valid argument. End the deception. "...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
I give Thanks to your post.. in all of my 48 years, I have never come across this information before..
thank you, Patrick, for this clarification. it sure seems to me the "organic" states have been eradicated as has real law. there's nothing of substance left. it's all trickery and deception.
all this pretense about the 'CON'stitution etc is a bunch of hogwash and gobble-dee-gook. the following is a great book , i've read thru it before but just recently started reading the whole thing, i am about half way through it. very funny, informative, and interesting. a scathing expose on the 'law' and 'lawyers', congress, supreme court, etc. the author, who was taught by several SC 'justices' himself, says they are all bullshit artists who just want to feign authority over the masses. WOE UNTO YOU, LAWYERS! BY FRED RODELL Professor of Law, Yale University Written in 1939 http://w ww.constitution.org/lrev/rodell/woe_unto_you_lawyers.htm here is a great review of rodell's book http://100777.com/node/408
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. Thanks for the ping. Now all we need are a few hundred fathoms of good HEMPEN rope.
"I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
yep. that's pretty much what i said in "rationed" words in my post above yours. ;) btw, that book was written in 1939. we've been conned a very, very long time.
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.
#2. To: Ada (#0)
(Edited)
#3. To: PatrickHenry (#2)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#4. To: Ada (#0)
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.
You left off the MOST IMPORTANT PART of the Bill of Rights -- the PREAMBLE which tells SPECIFICALLY that the Bill of Rights was to make sure the government knew it was limited to the powers stated in the Constitution and if it didn't, the amendments were rights of the people the government couldn't screw with.
Our revisionist historians ALWAYS leave this off the Constitution!!!
Here's a copy!!!
Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
#5. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#4)
#6. To: PatrickHenry (#2)
#7. To: christine, rotara, lodwick, psusa, original_intent (#6)
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#8. To: Artisan (#7)
#9. To: Artisan, Cynicom (#7)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest