Interesting gun read here - Chicagoland Sportbikes
Chicagoland Sportbikes
 
Open Forum This forum is for all off-topic discussion.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 10:12 AM Thread Starter
C2M
ǝɹoɯʎuɐ ʞɔnɟ ɐ sǝʌıƃ oɥʍ
 
C2M's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crook county
Posts: 11,372
Location: Crook county
Sportbike: 636/ zzr600/ r6
Years Riding: Since 07
How you found us: bathroom stall
           
Interesting gun read here

Rather interested in seeing how it pans out

Copied from http://www.sportbikes.net/forums/ope...y-gun-law.html

The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law
Panama Legal

I mean REVOLUTIONARY. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.

Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.

Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.

Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.

Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

Text of the New Law

The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law
Panama Legal

I mean REVOLUTIONARY. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.

Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.

Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.

Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.

Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

Text of the New Law
HOUSE BILL NO. 246

INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the "Montana Firearms Freedom Act".

Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:

(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.

(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:

(1) "Borders of Montana" means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.

(2) "Firearms accessories" means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.

(3) "Generic and insignificant parts" includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.

(4) "Manufactured" means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana 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 product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:

(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;

(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words "Made in Montana" clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].

Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.

Read More Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law

Ron Paul Wins! | Campaign for Liberty at the Daily Paul | Blog

go time traveler style and go back in time, fuck his grandma, then shoot forward in time and then fuck his mom. Then return back to present state and call him a the product of two incest whores and hes your son and show video of you plowing the both members of his family. .
C2M is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 10:47 AM
Administrator
 
HDTony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Plainfield IL
Posts: 45,956
Location: Plainfield IL
Sportbike: A couple of pasta rockets
Years Riding: Since 1989
How you found us: In the beginning there was CLSB and Tony saw that it was good.
           
Send a message via AIM to HDTony
Frigin Awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!




HDTony.... Damn glad to meet you!

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.

- Ronald Reagan

AirTek Heating & Air inc.
HDTony is offline  
post #3 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 11:24 AM
Registered User
 
boilermaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NW IN
Posts: 223
Location: NW IN
Sportbike: 98 FZR 600
Years Riding: 5
How you found us: the interweb
 
I don't know if thats an old article, but I have been hearing about this for a few months now. Either way, that states got some balls. Hopefully Illinois will grow a pair and allow citizen carry in the city and suburbs. Rural areas are not enough.

98 FZR600R
boilermaker is offline  
post #4 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 11:28 AM
Registered User
 
iamnotgreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 12,529
Location: Chicago
Sportbike: 2003 Aprilia Mille R Colin Edwards / 01-02 Ninj ZX6r Tracktoy / 2003 SV650
Years Riding: 12
How you found us: some guy at the IBM credit union told me about it
           
Why does it repeat itself a quarter of the way down?

Oh and awesome. Now if only 52% of the states did that
iamnotgreg is offline  
post #5 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 11:32 AM
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 722
      
This type of act will not step one foot to being legal. Take ONE guess who has final say with the Intestate Commerce Clause: U.S. Supreme Court. Also known as the Federal judiciary system.

-Eric

Last edited by Caparzo12; 05-10-2009 at 11:35 AM.
Caparzo12 is offline  
post #6 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 12:08 PM
Failed rehab
 
Rob, Esq.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 14,908
Location: Indy
Sportbike: Striple
Years Riding: Dunno, awhile?
How you found us: DML
           
Send a message via AIM to Rob, Esq. Send a message via MSN to Rob, Esq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caparzo12 View Post
This type of act will not step one foot to being legal. Take ONE guess who has final say with the Intestate Commerce Clause: U.S. Supreme Court. Also known as the Federal judiciary system.

-Eric
Explain more, counselor.

Attorney-at-Law: Doing my part to contribute to the downfall of western society.
Rob, Esq. is offline  
post #7 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 12:23 PM Thread Starter
C2M
ǝɹoɯʎuɐ ʞɔnɟ ɐ sǝʌıƃ oɥʍ
 
C2M's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crook county
Posts: 11,372
Location: Crook county
Sportbike: 636/ zzr600/ r6
Years Riding: Since 07
How you found us: bathroom stall
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
Explain more, counselor.


Oh here we go another thread where rob discredits someone

go time traveler style and go back in time, fuck his grandma, then shoot forward in time and then fuck his mom. Then return back to present state and call him a the product of two incest whores and hes your son and show video of you plowing the both members of his family. .
C2M is offline  
post #8 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 12:29 PM
Failed rehab
 
Rob, Esq.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 14,908
Location: Indy
Sportbike: Striple
Years Riding: Dunno, awhile?
How you found us: DML
           
Send a message via AIM to Rob, Esq. Send a message via MSN to Rob, Esq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by C2M View Post


Oh here we go another thread where rob discredits someone


I just get a giggle when people think they know what they're talking about in my field. Just like the über-geeks would laugh and call me out if I started prattling like I knew WTF I was talking about on mysql and database sharding and server kernels.

Attorney-at-Law: Doing my part to contribute to the downfall of western society.
Rob, Esq. is offline  
post #9 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 12:38 PM
Sgt USMC
 
echo5romeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Vernon Hills, IL
Posts: 441
Location: Vernon Hills, IL
Sportbike: 2006 GSX-R 750
Years Riding: Apr 2007
How you found us: Google
           
wait... so, Montanians wanna go hunting with silencers? the size of the moose up there, u'd think the supressor is the least of their concerns... maybe fight for civilian use of claymores to take them beasts down... ?

"I and the Public know, what all schoolchildren learn
Those to whom evil is done, do evil in return"
W. H. Auden
echo5romeo is offline  
post #10 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 12:55 PM
Eat a bag o' dix!
 
trkyleg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,018
Location: Oklahoma
Sportbike: ratty one
Years Riding: a few days
How you found us: Uncle Bad Touch
           

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki047 View Post
As long as their tits are bigger than their dicks, im in.

-"You will meet your destiny on the road of avoidance."

-"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, and today is a gift. That is why we call it the present."

-"It's not considered premarital sex if you don't plan on getting married."
trkyleg is offline  
post #11 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 01:18 PM
161 Club; soon to be 129
 
poproxmimo3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: ChiCago
Posts: 801
Location: ChiCago
Sportbike: GSXR 600
Years Riding: Every Sunny Day
How you found us: I forgot
 
Send a message via AIM to poproxmimo3 Send a message via Yahoo to poproxmimo3
guns... moose.... gsxr.

This is going to be a long-term relationship
poproxmimo3 is offline  
post #12 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 02:46 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,558
Location: Chicago
Sportbike: 2012 Ducati M696
Years Riding: 4
How you found us: Google
           
Seems like an over reaction.
Trinitrogen is offline  
post #13 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 02:51 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 722
      
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post


I just get a giggle when people think they know what they're talking about in my field. Just like the über-geeks would laugh and call me out if I started prattling like I knew WTF I was talking about on mysql and database sharding and server kernels.
So, your saying that Congress can NOT legally shut something like this down under the commerce clause. See answering options.
1. Yes, then explain proving me wrong
2. No, proving me right by default

-Eric
Caparzo12 is offline  
post #14 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 02:52 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,558
Location: Chicago
Sportbike: 2012 Ducati M696
Years Riding: 4
How you found us: Google
           
What prompted this? I don't follow gun law legislation, what are they rebelling against?

Last edited by Trinitrogen; 05-10-2009 at 02:54 PM.
Trinitrogen is offline  
post #15 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 02:56 PM Thread Starter
C2M
ǝɹoɯʎuɐ ʞɔnɟ ɐ sǝʌıƃ oɥʍ
 
C2M's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crook county
Posts: 11,372
Location: Crook county
Sportbike: 636/ zzr600/ r6
Years Riding: Since 07
How you found us: bathroom stall
           
And let the games begin

go time traveler style and go back in time, fuck his grandma, then shoot forward in time and then fuck his mom. Then return back to present state and call him a the product of two incest whores and hes your son and show video of you plowing the both members of his family. .
C2M is offline  
post #16 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 03:23 PM
Slow Old Guy.
 
Wink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SS Barrington
Posts: 17,258
Location: SS Barrington
Sportbike: Inline Two Wheeled
Years Riding: Since the beginning of time
How you found us: Dan Ortega sent me
           
If that passes... ROAD Trip....!!!

===========
Great Quote - One would think that the Secret Service was smart enough to get serviced secretly.

MotoVid hasbeen
NESBA hasbeen

CCS neverbeen
WERA neverbeen
Wink is offline  
post #17 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 03:28 PM
Wisconsin FIB
 
TripleZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rosendale, WI
Posts: 2,241
Location: Rosendale, WI
Sportbike: Speed Triple 06 Blue
Years Riding: Since June 2002
How you found us: Pilotx1
           
You have to get your facts right first. Obama NEVER said he was going to ban guns. I see this legislation as a mute point, or at the most a grab for 15 minutes of fame by some Republicans.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...ets_obama.html

Last edited by TripleZ; 05-10-2009 at 03:32 PM.
TripleZ is offline  
post #18 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 03:50 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,558
Location: Chicago
Sportbike: 2012 Ducati M696
Years Riding: 4
How you found us: Google
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by TripleZ View Post
You have to get your facts right first. Obama NEVER said he was going to ban guns. I see this legislation as a mute point, or at the most a grab for 15 minutes of fame by some Republicans.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...ets_obama.html
Thats what I'm saying, why now? Or is this law "just in case" he bans everything.
Trinitrogen is offline  
post #19 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:00 PM
Failed rehab
 
Rob, Esq.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 14,908
Location: Indy
Sportbike: Striple
Years Riding: Dunno, awhile?
How you found us: DML
           
Send a message via AIM to Rob, Esq. Send a message via MSN to Rob, Esq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caparzo12 View Post
This type of act will not step one foot to being legal. Take ONE guess who has final say with the Intestate Commerce Clause: U.S. Supreme Court. Also known as the Federal judiciary system.

Quote:
So, your saying that Congress can NOT legally shut something like this down under the commerce clause. See answering options.
1. Yes, then explain proving me wrong
2. No, proving me right by default

-Eric

So, are you talking about Congress, or the Supreme Court?

Attorney-at-Law: Doing my part to contribute to the downfall of western society.
Rob, Esq. is offline  
post #20 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:14 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 722
      
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
So, are you talking about Congress, or the Supreme Court?
I'm not singling out either because can be heavily involved with something of this sort. e.g. Congress can't validate this law but then the Supreme Court rules that Congress indeed CAN validate(this is just an example of anything or vice versa). Or, in other words, Congress can't do something without a Supreme Court ruling which has happened in other commerce clause cases specifically international ones.

-Eric
Caparzo12 is offline  
post #21 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:16 PM
Failed rehab
 
Rob, Esq.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 14,908
Location: Indy
Sportbike: Striple
Years Riding: Dunno, awhile?
How you found us: DML
           
Send a message via AIM to Rob, Esq. Send a message via MSN to Rob, Esq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caparzo12 View Post
I'm not singling out either because can be heavily involved with something of this sort. e.g. Congress can't validate this law but then the Supreme Court rules that Congress indeed CAN validate(this is just an example of anything or vice versa). Or, in other words, Congress can't do something without a Supreme Court ruling which has happened in other commerce clause cases specifically international ones.

-Eric
Wat?

Now you're really talking out of your ass.

BTW, you specifically mentioned the Supreme Court in the first post, then you change it to Congress, and now its a little bit of both?

Let's start again. Please explain, counselor, specifically why this law is not "legal" Cite some case authority, too.

Attorney-at-Law: Doing my part to contribute to the downfall of western society.

Last edited by Rob, Esq.; 05-10-2009 at 04:19 PM.
Rob, Esq. is offline  
post #22 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:21 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 722
      
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
Wat?

Now you're really talking out of your ass.
And you are not answering anything I asked. Also known as beating around the bush. Just for fun I Wikiepedia's commerce clause then such used a simple word search of "supreme court" within the definition. What do you know. Look what comes up

"In Gibbons v Ogden, the Court struck down New York's attempt to grant a steamboat monopoly to Robert Fulton, which he had then ultimately franchised to Ogden. Ogden claimed that river traffic was not "commerce" under the Commerce Clause and further that Congress could not interfere with New York State's grant of an exclusive monopoly within its own borders. Ogden's assertion was untenable: he contended that New York could control river traffic within New York all the way to the border with New Jersey, that New Jersey could control river traffic within New Jersey all the way to the border with New York, leaving Congress with the power to control the traffic as it crossed the state line.

Thus, Ogden contended, Congress could not invalidate his monopoly as long as he only transported passengers within New York. The Supreme Court, however, found that Congress could invalidate his monopoly since it was operational on an interstate channel of navigation.

In its decision, the Court assumed that interstate commerce required movement of the subject of regulation across state borders. The decision contains the following principles, some of which have since been altered by subsequent decisions: 1. Commerce is "intercourse, all its branches, and is regulated by prescribing rules for carrying on that intercourse." 2. Commerce among the states cannot stop at the external boundary-line of each state, but may be introduced into the interior... Comprehensive as the word "among" is, it may very properly be restricted to that commerce which concerns more states than one." 3. The Commerce power is the power to regulate, that is "to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed" which "may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution."

Additionally, the Marshall Court limited the extent of federal maritime and admiralty jurisdiction to tidewaters in The Steamboat Thomas Jefferson."

Back to the original question. Can the powers of the federal system(whether it's Congress then goes to the Supreme court) under the Commerce Clause shut this down? It's yes or no.

-Eric
Caparzo12 is offline  
post #23 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:24 PM Thread Starter
C2M
ǝɹoɯʎuɐ ʞɔnɟ ɐ sǝʌıƃ oɥʍ
 
C2M's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crook county
Posts: 11,372
Location: Crook county
Sportbike: 636/ zzr600/ r6
Years Riding: Since 07
How you found us: bathroom stall
           
CAP how many crashed threads in the last two weeks and abuse from rob is it going to take before you learn

go time traveler style and go back in time, fuck his grandma, then shoot forward in time and then fuck his mom. Then return back to present state and call him a the product of two incest whores and hes your son and show video of you plowing the both members of his family. .
C2M is offline  
post #24 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:28 PM
Failed rehab
 
Rob, Esq.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 14,908
Location: Indy
Sportbike: Striple
Years Riding: Dunno, awhile?
How you found us: DML
           
Send a message via AIM to Rob, Esq. Send a message via MSN to Rob, Esq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caparzo12 View Post
And you are not answering anything I asked. Also known as beating around the bush. Just for fun I Wikiepedia's commerce clause then such used a simple word search of "supreme court" within the definition. What do you know. Look what comes up

"In Gibbons v Ogden, the Court struck down New York's attempt to grant a steamboat monopoly to Robert Fulton, which he had then ultimately franchised to Ogden. Ogden claimed that river traffic was not "commerce" under the Commerce Clause and further that Congress could not interfere with New York State's grant of an exclusive monopoly within its own borders. Ogden's assertion was untenable: he contended that New York could control river traffic within New York all the way to the border with New Jersey, that New Jersey could control river traffic within New Jersey all the way to the border with New York, leaving Congress with the power to control the traffic as it crossed the state line.

Thus, Ogden contended, Congress could not invalidate his monopoly as long as he only transported passengers within New York. The Supreme Court, however, found that Congress could invalidate his monopoly since it was operational on an interstate channel of navigation.

In its decision, the Court assumed that interstate commerce required movement of the subject of regulation across state borders. The decision contains the following principles, some of which have since been altered by subsequent decisions: 1. Commerce is "intercourse, all its branches, and is regulated by prescribing rules for carrying on that intercourse." 2. Commerce among the states cannot stop at the external boundary-line of each state, but may be introduced into the interior... Comprehensive as the word "among" is, it may very properly be restricted to that commerce which concerns more states than one." 3. The Commerce power is the power to regulate, that is "to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed" which "may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution."

Additionally, the Marshall Court limited the extent of federal maritime and admiralty jurisdiction to tidewaters in The Steamboat Thomas Jefferson."

Back to the original question. Can the powers of the federal system(whether it's Congress then goes to the Supreme court) under the Commerce Clause shut this down? It's yes or no.

-Eric

Look, instant lawyer! Just add internet!


But, since you're an expert, Please explain Federal Preemption doctrine, and how it effected the outcome of that case.

You're the one making legal assertions at the outset of the thread. So back it up counselor.

Attorney-at-Law: Doing my part to contribute to the downfall of western society.
Rob, Esq. is offline  
post #25 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:29 PM Thread Starter
C2M
ǝɹoɯʎuɐ ʞɔnɟ ɐ sǝʌıƃ oɥʍ
 
C2M's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crook county
Posts: 11,372
Location: Crook county
Sportbike: 636/ zzr600/ r6
Years Riding: Since 07
How you found us: bathroom stall
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
Look, instant lawyer! Just add internet!


But, since you're an expert, Please explain Federal Preemption doctrine, and how it effected the outcome of that case.

You're the one making legal assertions at the outset of the thread. So back it up counselor.
Rob ill trade you rep

go time traveler style and go back in time, fuck his grandma, then shoot forward in time and then fuck his mom. Then return back to present state and call him a the product of two incest whores and hes your son and show video of you plowing the both members of his family. .
C2M is offline  
post #26 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:30 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 722
      
This is also beating around the bush. I honestly want just a YES or NO answer. I never claimed to be expert law knowledge. Basics at best, which this is very basic well known law. CAN THE COMMERCE CLAUSE RULE DOWN THIS TYPE OF LAW SITUATION LEGALLY BY MEANS OF CONGRESS AND/OR SUPREME COURT?

-Eric
Caparzo12 is offline  
post #27 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:37 PM
Failed rehab
 
Rob, Esq.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 14,908
Location: Indy
Sportbike: Striple
Years Riding: Dunno, awhile?
How you found us: DML
           
Send a message via AIM to Rob, Esq. Send a message via MSN to Rob, Esq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caparzo12 View Post
This is also beating around the bush. I honestly want just a YES or NO answer. I never claimed to be expert law knowledge. Basics at best, which this is very basic well known law. CAN THE COMMERCE CLAUSE RULE DOWN THIS TYPE OF LAW SITUATION LEGALLY BY MEANS OF CONGRESS AND/OR SUPREME COURT?

-Eric
Huh?
Do you mean can the SCOTUS/CONGRESS invalidate this law by means of the commerce clause?

Attorney-at-Law: Doing my part to contribute to the downfall of western society.
Rob, Esq. is offline  
post #28 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:37 PM Thread Starter
C2M
ǝɹoɯʎuɐ ʞɔnɟ ɐ sǝʌıƃ oɥʍ
 
C2M's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crook county
Posts: 11,372
Location: Crook county
Sportbike: 636/ zzr600/ r6
Years Riding: Since 07
How you found us: bathroom stall
           

go time traveler style and go back in time, fuck his grandma, then shoot forward in time and then fuck his mom. Then return back to present state and call him a the product of two incest whores and hes your son and show video of you plowing the both members of his family. .
C2M is offline  
post #29 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:41 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 722
      
Quote:
Originally Posted by C2M View Post
CAP how many crashed threads in the last two weeks and abuse from rob is it going to take before you learn
What's the best thing about forums? That people think that authority comes with high posts. You are siding with Rob solely because you know him and that he JUST passed his bar exam. Making accusation against me as if I don't know anything without knowing anything about me. This is called band wagon jumping. You side with the biggest and best of whatever the subject is. I almost picture you as a midget yelling at me while Rob is the one of said importance. So, as of right now. You're a midget with little man syndrome. Hello midget with little man syndrome! I'll give you positive rep just for this.

-Eric
Caparzo12 is offline  
post #30 of 66 (permalink) Old 05-10-2009, 04:44 PM
Failed rehab
 
Rob, Esq.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 14,908
Location: Indy
Sportbike: Striple
Years Riding: Dunno, awhile?
How you found us: DML
           
Send a message via AIM to Rob, Esq. Send a message via MSN to Rob, Esq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caparzo12 View Post
What's the best thing about forums? That people think that authority comes with high posts. You are siding with Rob solely because you know him and that he JUST passed his bar exam. Making accusation against me as if I don't know anything without knowing anything about me. This is called band wagon jumping. You side with the biggest and best of whatever the subject is. I almost picture you as a midget yelling at me while Rob is the one of said importance. So, as of right now. You're a midget with little man syndrome. Hello midget with little man syndrome! I'll give you positive rep just for this.

-Eric
Dude, relax. There's no need to be a dick. Its just the internet.

Attorney-at-Law: Doing my part to contribute to the downfall of western society.
Rob, Esq. is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Chicagoland Sportbikes forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome