Pennsylvania Firearms Freedom Act

[ungawa]

States need to rebel if the Obama agenda goes through. Our Commonwealth needs to rebel. We need to bring this issue up again regardless. Obviously, considering recent events, it can no longer be ignored.

Made in PA, stays in PA, F-U ATF.

[God's Country]

I agee 100%
If the fed wants to push their power then the states need to push back twice as hard.

Unfortunately the states have become the largest of the welfare recipients.
They’re too scared to do anything. Corbett’s a loser, and our local reps don’t have any balls either because they all have their hands out.

I ‘m not sure it can be done….not in Pa.

Please prove me wrong.

[GeneCC]

States need to rebel if the Obama agenda goes through. Our Commonwealth needs to rebel. We need to bring this issue up again regardless. Obviously, considering recent events, it can no longer be ignored.

Made in PA, stays in PA, F-U ATF.

The Montana Solution!! Even if the Federal Government stomps all over us the law can serve as a "Sense of the State'. It's a useful gesture that says, "We reject your Elitism and 'we know what's best for you' attitude.

Yes, by all means.... not as a rebellion but as an expression that the long term prospects for "Gun control" are not positive. That we will over turn this foolishness at the ballot box and get on with our lives living in Dignity and Freedom.

[ungawa]

It's not a useful gesture. If it becomes the law of this Commonwealth, I will follow it and i will ignore contradicting federal laws.

[thefirstndsecond]

Sign me up!

[mikelets456]

I was wondering this as well. Have all the states given up their rights? My goodness, I'm surprised they're all adhering to Obamacare, AWB (if implemented), etc.

If states give up their rights then there is no sense of being called "The United States Of America". It simply would be a country with one centralized form of government...completely against what this Nation was founded on. At least 40 years ago or so, if you did not like a states rules you could simply leave. Pretty soon, they'll all be the same...they are selling out our freedom for Federal Government's cash or "pork".

I really belief we have crossed the line in the sand 30 years ago... I just hope it's not too late to get it back!

[WhiteFeather]

States need to rebel if the Obama agenda goes through. Our Commonwealth needs to rebel. We need to bring this issue up again regardless. Obviously, considering recent events, it can no longer be ignored.

Made in PA, stays in PA, F-U ATF.

Here is the thread to the 2011-2012 session

Following in Montana'a Footprints? HB 752

http://forum.pafoa.org/pennsylvania-...-hb-752-a.html




For someone unfamiliar with the concept of please take some time to read the Firearms Freedom Act thread and view education links so you having a working understanding of teh concept.

Expect this to be re introduced in the 2013-2014 session

Whether FFA moves or gets a vote or even gets a public hearing that choice is up to you to support the concept and bug the Reps to action.

MAKE NO MISTAKE the Anti-gun people will be contacting the Reps endlessly, now that a window of opportunity has been pried open to further their cause of disarming US.

Thanks to apparently a devil worshiper that murdered the innocence children in a Conn. gun free school.




'I am the devil': Former classmate reveals school gunman had 'online devil worshiping page'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ntingPage=true

[brsims]

So I cruised through part of the bill, and one part in particular really stood out to me:

Applicability.--This section shall apply to a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition that is manufactured in Pennsylvania from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer accessories or ammunition, and their importation into Pennsylvania and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition manufactured in Pennsylvania shall not subject the firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition to Federal regulation.

Am I the only one who sees an additional benefit for the Commonwealth, here? Specifically the introduction of more jobs within the Commonwealth as manufacturers open shops and factories here in PA in order to comply with PA law and maintain sales?

Or have I gone completely loopy?

[OldSchoolPC]

Below is my understanding. Usually, I write in a much more "factual" manner. Below are just my opinions, and some my be ignorant.

Powers not expressly granted to the federal government are reserved for the states. The feds seems to think that means that if they pass a federal law, it's binding, PERIOD. Federal law takes precedence. Sure, states can make a law that isn't a federal law, but they just can't ignore it (says federal government). This, isn't the case. At least, that's not how it's supposed to be.

Local government, gets power from the State, which gets power from the constitution which is by the people. State, gets power from the constitution by the people, just like the federal government does. So, a state can make preemption laws on it's own localities, cuz localities get power from the state. But since the state get's power from the constitution by the people, it seems to me that it CAN ignore federal law, assuming that the federal law oversteps the authority granted to it by the people via the constitution. Why? Because federal law can't actually pre-empt the state, unless it has that constitutional authority.

For example, the State can't be like "Yeah, we're gonna use "Pennsylvania Deutschmarks" as currency. No, Federal government is in charge of currency. I'd just like to know where in the constitution that is says that the Feds OR the State, can regulate (infringe) on gun rights within the boundaries set forth by the SCOTUS...

That's a "RIGHT" reserved for the people. Frankly, that's what a right is. Something reserved for the people specifically. The people, reserve is unto themselves and do not afford the government authority over it. Thus, a "right".

But of course, the Supreme Court likes to be like "Yeah well, we think this federal law is a good idea anyway sooooo.... screw you Pennsylvania. No contradictory laws for you."

[brsims]

Below is my understanding. Usually, I write in a much more "factual" manner. Below are just my opinions, and some my be ignorant.

Powers not expressly granted to the federal government are reserved for the states. The feds seems to think that means that if they pass a federal law, it's binding, PERIOD. Federal law takes precedence. Sure, states can make a law that isn't a federal law, but they just can't ignore it (says federal government). This, isn't the case. At least, that's not how it's supposed to be.

Local government, gets power from the State, which gets power from the constitution which is by the people. State, gets power from the constitution by the people, just like the federal government does. So, a state can make preemption laws on it's own localities, cuz localities get power from the state. But since the state get's power from the constitution by the people, it seems to me that it CAN ignore federal law, assuming that the federal law oversteps the authority granted to it by the people via the constitution. Why? Because federal law can't actually pre-empt the state, unless it has that constitutional authority.

For example, the State can't be like "Yeah, we're gonna use "Pennsylvania Deutschmarks" as currency. No, Federal government is in charge of currency. I'd just like to know where in the constitution that is says that the Feds OR the State, can regulate (infringe) on gun rights within the boundaries set forth by the SCOTUS...

That's a "RIGHT" reserved for the people. Frankly, that's what a right is. Something reserved for the people specifically. The people, reserve is unto themselves and do not afford the government authority over it. Thus, a "right".

But of course, the Supreme Court likes to be like "Yeah well, we think this federal law is a good idea anyway sooooo.... screw you Pennsylvania. No contradictory laws for you."

Would that such a decision on the part of the Supreme Court be followed by PA saying "screw you, Supreme Court. We do what we want!"