Need some help from the more learned...

Yeah, I was offended when I saw the Florida Constitution's POS version of the RKBA.
I get the whole "state sovereignty from federal regulation" crap, but didn't every state, when joining the Union, accept the US constitution as the 1 and only overriding law of everything, including their own Constitutions?

I know it's a moot point because every local, state, and federal body has tried or succeeded in infringing our rights, but...
technically, doesn't the US constitution supercede anything the Florida state constitution says? If something's different between them, didn't FL have to accept that the US constitution overrides their own where they differ?

~*'Phoenix'*~ said:

Yeah, I was offended when I saw the Florida Constitution's POS version of the RKBA.
I get the whole "state sovereignty from federal regulation" crap, but didn't every state, when joining the Union, accept the US constitution as the 1 and only overriding law of everything, including their own Constitutions?

I know it's a moot point because every local, state, and federal body has tried or succeeded in infringing our rights, but...
technically, doesn't the US constitution supercede anything the Florida state constitution says? If something's different between them, didn't FL have to accept that the US constitution overrides their own where they differ?

Click to expand...

I think the Chicago, IL case proved that one. JMHO

~*'Phoenix'*~ said:

Yeah, I was offended when I saw the Florida Constitution's POS version of the RKBA.
I get the whole "state sovereignty from federal regulation" crap, but didn't every state, when joining the Union, accept the US constitution as the 1 and only overriding law of everything, including their own Constitutions?

I know it's a moot point because every local, state, and federal body has tried or succeeded in infringing our rights, but...
technically, doesn't the US constitution supercede anything the Florida state constitution says? If something's different between them, didn't FL have to accept that the US constitution overrides their own where they differ?

Click to expand...

Short answer, No.

The US Constitution was meant to place limits on the Federal Government and respect States' rights. Yes, Federal law trumps state law in most cases, but there is a huge difference with respect to 'rights' vs. 'laws'.

SCOTUS has only ruled 3 times on the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution in its history, Mitchell, Heller, and McDonald...none of which ruled against any specific State law.

Careful what you wish for...FL just passed a law stating we could not be forced to purchase health care...want the Fed to overrule that, too?

rvrctyrngr said:

Short answer, No.

Careful what you wish for...FL just passed a law stating we could not be forced to purchase health care...want the Fed to overrule that, too?

Click to expand...

OK I don’t want to piss you off like I did some others on here so I’m just asking.. I'm not a law student so take my question with grain of salt..
Health care isn’t addressed in the US Constitution. RKBA is. Rights vs. Laws?

firedog said:

OK I don’t want to piss you off like I did some others on here so I’m just asking.. I'm not a law student so take my question with grain of salt..
Health care isn’t addressed in the US Constitution. RKBA is. Rights vs. Laws?

Click to expand...

Not ******* me off at all.

You're absolutely right. Health Care isn't addressed in the constitution, yet the US Congress passed a law mandating that everyone must purchase it.

You have the right to keep and bear arms...but not in NYC because of the law....not without a license in FL because of the law...Your license from FL is not valid in California because of the law...making sense yet?

Governments have shown that they can pass any damn law they want, even those infringing on your rights, or completely nullifying them. Until such laws are overturned by a court, right or wrong, they are still 'laws' regardless of your 'rights'.

rvrctyrngr said:

Short answer, No.

The US Constitution was meant to place limits on the Federal Government and respect States' rights. Yes, Federal law trumps state law in most cases, but there is a huge difference with respect to 'rights' vs. 'laws'.

SCOTUS has only ruled 3 times on the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution in its history, Mitchell, Heller, and McDonald...none of which ruled against any specific State law.

Careful what you wish for...FL just passed a law stating we could not be forced to purchase health care...want the Fed to overrule that, too?

Click to expand...

Honestly? Not sure you want my answer to that question :monkey.
Bring on the flames... If paying mandatory health insurance (which the Feds passed as though they had full sovereignty) gets me Open Carry (which the state has banned as though they had full sovereignty), I'd call me and the Feds even.

brboyer said:

One may, intentionally or accidentally, openly display a concealed firearm as long as it's 'Brief' - I'm sure the courts will wrestle with this for a while.

It is only illegal to openly display a firearm if done in an intentionally angry or threatening manner. - Which is stupid because we already have a law that covers that.

We are thus saddled, again, with crappy statutory language at the hands of our friends in Tallahassee.

Click to expand...

Law crafted by a failed lawyer who now holds the power to legislate....