• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Let us please,not get caught up in National Resprosity again.

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
One more time in case you missed it the first time.

https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/05/23/anti-commandeering-an-overview-of-five-major-supreme-court-cases/

This is old settled constitutional law. 1842 in fact.

My credibility is fine. Your only the third person I ever conversed with that did not know this since Trump came to office because of sanctuary cities cropping up.

Now please research this yourself as I've cited plenty.
I don’t care a whit about the current discussion. I was merely reacting to someone asking for a cite, and you not subsequently providing one. That you provided it earlier, but did not reference it in response to the request, is telling—and erodes your credibility.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
844
Location
Kentucky
I don’t care a whit about the current discussion. I was merely reacting to someone asking for a cite, and you not subsequently providing one. That you provided it earlier, but did not reference it in response to the request, is telling—and erodes your credibility.
He got it his cite before he asked for it and even Quoted it himself.

Jeez.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
“That you provided it earlier, but did not reference it in response to the request is telling—and erodes your credibility.”

You missed that part. Or just flat-out ignored it.

Anyway, I made my point. Jeez. Carry on.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
844
Location
Kentucky
“That you provided it earlier, but did not reference it in response to the request is telling—and erodes your credibility.”

You missed that part. Or just flat-out ignored it.

Anyway, I made my point. Jeez. Carry on.
Why would I or you reference it when the person that requested it QUOTED it?
I'm happy you feel you made some point. Whew lol.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
844
Location
Kentucky
Is it your aim to exchange information, help educate, and learn something new? Or are you just here to waste my time like some fifth-grader spoiling for a fight?

No fight simply stating the fact that the Fed cannot force a state to enforce or recognize federal law, in order to educate some who are mistaken on that score.

But those who think it can be forced on states that won't recognize or enforce it need to understand that that is not in the Feds power to do. Never has been.

And originally to point out National Reciprocity is a smoke screen that the Fed cannot force any states to recognize if they do not wish too. That it was used to get Fix NICs to the Senate where it was dropped and Fix NICs passed.

And it will probably be used at some point to do the same with some other anti gun tripe.
 
Top