Will the Feds step in and tell states no?

[Austin]

State law can be more restrictive than federal law. I dont see how the feds are involved.

 

[UATKP]

USA today, claims Texas is already allowing it, Michigan already allows it but as the is currently written you must carry the firearm in the open. They just sent another bill to the governors desk and he vetoed it. He wants the current law to be changed so they you can still carry in schools but it must be concealed.

It is up to the School Administration in the State of Texas. If the Superintendent and School Board allows it, that is all that is required. In the case of Harold, Texas School, the Super ( Mr.Thweat) wrote his "Guardian Plan" and in his plan, They (1) must have a Texas CHL; (2) training in situation diffusement (sp); (3) Loaded with ammo that is less likely to ricochet down the hallway; (4) individual approval of the board.

Last night I watched a blurb on TV showing Governor Perry stating that he wanted CHL holders in Texas to be, "able to carry everywhere they go in Texas", which would leave no gun free zones in the State.

Edit: I didn't see the rest of the posts before I answered about Superintendent Thweat, at Harold, TX.
Austin, the feds are involved, because of the Gun-Free-Zones act of 1990/95... not sure of the year.

 

[S&W645]

Me thinks the antis may have stirred up a hornets nest and are not getting the results they want. Anywhere but Bloomyville and on HuffPost that is.

 

[NavyLCDR]

State law can be more restrictive than federal law. I dont see how the feds are involved.

The Federal government could ban anyone from carrying any firearm that has moved in or affected interstate commerce in a school. Then it would be against Federal law for a teacher to carry in a school, regardless of if there was a state law that allowed it or not. Just like marijuana is legal to possess in Washington now by state law, but still a crime violating Federal law.

 

[Stan45]

That is where the local sheriff steps in and says I'm the law here, Feds step away.

 

[Itstjs]

About damn time.

 

[S&W645]

The Federal government could ban anyone from carrying any firearm that has moved in or affected interstate commerce in a school. Then it would be against Federal law for a teacher to carry in a school, regardless of if there was a state law that allowed it or not. Just like marijuana is legal to possess in Washington now by state law, but still a crime violating Federal law.

Which would set up a fight between the states and the Feds as the 2nd Amendment says the Feds can pass no laws that infringe on gun rights.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Which would set up a fight between the states and the Feds as the 2nd Amendment says the Feds can pass no laws that infringe on gun rights.

You mean like the Federal law against carrying on post office property? You mean like the Federal law against carrying in Federal facilities? You mean like the 1000' Federal School Zone prohibition that makes it illegal for me to carry a loaded firearm within 1000' of a school in any state other than Washington, where my CPL is from? You mean like the Federal law that used to exist to prohibit carrying loaded firearms in National Parks that was not repealed due to the 2nd Amendment but was repealed as an amendment to a credit card law that the President wanted? You mean like the Federal prohibition that prohibits the mentally ill from possessing firearms? Or those convicted of a MISDEMEANOR crime of domestic violence?

 

[Austin]

The Federal government could ban anyone from carrying any firearm that has moved in or affected interstate commerce in a school. Then it would be against Federal law for a teacher to carry in a school, regardless of if there was a state law that allowed it or not. Just like marijuana is legal to possess in Washington now by state law, but still a crime violating Federal law.

So all you gotta do is find a gun company that manufactures in your own state?

 

[NavyLCDR]

So all you gotta do is find a gun company that manufactures in your own state?

Nope. Supreme Court fixed that "loophole" in Wickard v. Filburn . You could even make your own firearm and it would not be exempt from Federal government regulation. The Supreme Court ruled that even if it is made inside the same state, the fact that you bought it or made it in state means that you did NOT buy it from an out-of-state source; and, therefore, had an affect on interstate commerce. Because of the abuse of the interstate commerce clause the Federal government can regulate anything and everything.

 

[gejoslin]

Nope. Supreme Court fixed that "loophole" in Wickard v. Filburn . You could even make your own firearm and it would not be exempt from Federal government regulation. The Supreme Court ruled that even if it is made inside the same state, the fact that you bought it or made it in state means that you did NOT buy it from an out-of-state source; and, therefore, had an affect on interstate commerce. Because of the abuse of the interstate commerce clause the Federal government can regulate anything and everything.

Just a question. How about made from bar steel and flat stock steel. Milled and turned in house by the end user?

 

[NavyLCDR]

Just a question. How about made from bar steel and flat stock steel. Milled and turned in house by the end user?

Did you read Wickard v. Filburn?!? I'm sorry, just realized I didn't proved a link.

From the syllabus:
Wickard v. Filburn

6. A factor of such volume and variability as wheat grown for home consumption would have a substantial influence on price conditions on the wheat market, both because such wheat, with rising prices, may flow into the market and check price increases and, because, though never marketed, it supplies the need of the grower which would otherwise be satisfied by his purchases in the open market.

and from the opinion:

The distinction between a direct and an indirect effect turns not upon the magnitude of either the cause or the effect, but entirely upon the manner in which the effect has been brought about. . . . the matter of degree has no bearing upon the question here, since that question is not what is the extent of the local activity or condition, or the extent of the effect produced upon interstate commerce? but what is the relation between the activity or condition and the effect?

You could mine the iron ore on your land, using home built equipment, forge the ore into steel, and make your own firearm from it and the Federal government could regulate it, according to the Supreme Court, under the interstate commerce clause because, due to the fact that you did everything from/on your own land, you did not buy it from and out-of-state source, and thus affected interstate commerce.

 

[gejoslin]

Did you read Wickard v. Filburn?!? I'm sorry, just realized I didn't proved a link.

From the syllabus:
Wickard v. Filburn



and from the opinion:


You could mine the iron ore on your land, using home built equipment, forge the ore into steel, and make your own firearm from it and the Federal government could regulate it, according to the Supreme Court, under the interstate commerce clause because, due to the fact that you did everything from/on your own land, you did not buy it from and out-of-state source, and thus affected interstate commerce.

Dang, Navy! I'm surprised we are even allowed to have our vegetable gardens.

 

[Oldgrunt]

Dang, Navy! I'm surprised we are even allowed to have our vegetable gardens.

Haven't you read where one state out west is requiring people to register their gardens? Planning for natonal food shortages?

 

[vernsimpson]

The Federal government could ban anyone from carrying any firearm that has moved in or affected interstate commerce in a school. Then it would be against Federal law for a teacher to carry in a school, regardless of if there was a state law that allowed it or not. Just like marijuana is legal to possess in Washington now by state law, but still a crime violating Federal law.

The Feds would most likely say that they will not fund any school or school district and states that allows guns in the schools. That how they made the states follow their guide lines for the speed limits. Its a safe bet the Feds will do something with obummer in office!!!!

 

[UATKP]

The Federal government could ban anyone from carrying any firearm that has moved in or affected interstate commerce in a school. Then it would be against Federal law for a teacher to carry in a school, regardless of if there was a state law that allowed it or not. Just like marijuana is legal to possess in Washington now by state law, but still a crime violating Federal law.

I agree, whole-heartedly. They will do anything they can to disarm America... even to the point of allowing these school shootings to continue...
The only thing that the states can legally do is to nullify every federal law that does not conform to the Constitution of the Republic. We need our State Governments to nullify every federal firearm law.
And we also need more Sheriffs with gonads, that will arrest any federal officer or any person that assists said federal officer attempting to enforce an illegal federal law.
And we need to tell the feds to take their money and shove it. Texas is one state that can do without fed funding, because we send them more than they return to us.

 

[S&W645]

I agree, whole-heartedly. They will do anything they can to disarm America... even to the point of allowing these school shootings to continue...
The only thing that the states can legally do is to nullify every federal law that does not conform to the Constitution of the Republic. We need our State Governments to nullify every federal firearm law.
And we also need more Sheriffs with gonads, that will arrest any federal officer or any person that assists said federal officer attempting to enforce an illegal federal law.
And we need to tell the feds to take their money and shove it. Texas is one state that can do without fed funding, because we send them more than they return to us.

Florida is in the same boat. $.97 back on every $1.00 sent.

 

[schadenfreude]

The city of Chicago has police officers in their schools- not many shootings occur inside those halls, but the streets are a different story.

 

[ezkl2230]

Michigan for one. The legislature passed a law requiring teachers to carry in school - or at least that's what I read. I then read about an hour ago that after the legislature passed the law, the governor refused to sign it.

Um, no on one, yes on the other.

SB 59 would have allowed anyone with a CPL to CC on school property (actually, in all pistol free zones); it would have done away with legal OC on school property, which is currently legal. There is not now, nor has there ever been, legislation being considered in Michigan to require teachers to carry.

So yes, Snyder, the now out-of-the-closet Bloomer, did veto SB 59, but no, there has never been legislation being considered in Michigan to require teachers to carry.

Gov. Snyder - the out-of-the-closet Bloomer.
Link Removed

 

[dcselby1]

Michigan for one. The legislature passed a law requiring teachers to carry in school - or at least that's what I read. I then read about an hour ago that after the legislature passed the law, the governor refused to sign it.

There was NO law passed requiring teachers to be armed. There was a law passed that would ALLOW CCW in gun free zones, including schools provided the permit holder received additional training. This WAS vetoed by Governor Snyder.