As progressives, rallied by the Obama administration, actively work to curb Americans’ gun rights, one state has raised it’s hand and said “Stop!”
Just last Friday, Idaho announced that it would neither enforce nor abide by federal gun laws. The move was made possible by a measure introduced in the state’s House and Senate and passed unanimously by both chambers.
The law could very well be one of the most serious challenges to the federal government’s anti-gun agenda. Per the wording of the bill, Idaho law enforcement officers would face up to $1,000 in fines as well as misdemeanor charges if they enforce federal gun laws. These punitive measures will likely go a long way in discouraging Idaho LEO’s from collaborating with feds trying to enforce gun laws in the state.
Naturally, the federal government, to say nothing of this virulently anti-gun administration, is not going to be happy about a state rejecting it’s statutes regarding gun ownership and usage. Indeed, after a similar law was passed in Kansas, former Attorney General Eric Holder, a true maven of the gun control lobby, wrote a letter to Governor Brownback threatening legal action against the state over it.
Let’s hope that Idaho is able stay strong if Obama and his goons try to stop them.
Turn to the next page for more info:
Federal Gun Legislation has already been written: see amendment #2
Fun to disagree with the Constitution by quoting the Constitution
Way to go idaho!
Black$#%&!@*needs to go
well, he wanted a war, and he just got one. With all the states banding together for one common cause, the feds are finished in this town!!!!!
He may think he’s god, but even obama doesn’t have the authority to negate the Constitution through an executive order. The states that stand against this petulant man-child are actually acting more constitutionally than the socialist-in-chief.
That is one state and maybe the majority will follow to send a message to that SOB in the white house
The term “regulated” actually means “equipped” if you bother to study your history.
John, I have to disagree. More than one person holding office has said just that. Hillary with her mandatory buy back program suggestion being one example. Right now there is an effort to take them a bit at a time since it will not work to try to legislate taking them all a once. The attack on personal ownership of weapons will be one of attrition as anything currently suggested will not change any outcome of criminals using illegally acquired weapons.
Please provide one factual example of where these could be purchased without a background check. Every weapon I have required a background check to purchase.