The Florida legislature will consider a bill that would prohibit any state agency from cooperating with enforcement of any federal gun laws – past, present or future.
Rep. Dan Eagle (R-Cape Coral) introduced HB733 on Monday. The Second Amendment Preservation Act declares that no agent of the state or its political subdivisions may participate with or assist federal agents in the enforcement of federal firearms laws, or provide material support of any kind to federal agents in the enforcement of these laws. State agents and/or contractors who knowingly participate in or provide support for the enforcement of federal firearms laws would be subject to dismissal.
“The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution expressly provides that all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. Time and time again, Florida has proven that we have the best solutions to our own issues, whether it be healthcare, education, or our balanced budget, which is accomplished without raising taxes. When it comes to protecting our fundamental Second Amendment rights guaranteed by the Constitution, I believe it is best left to be handled by Floridians for Floridians,” Eagle said.
The legislation would not attempt to stop federal agents from enforcing gun laws, but would pull the plug on any state cooperation, leaving enforcement in the hands of a federal government incapable of enforcing its laws.
Florida Tenth Amendment Center outreach director Francisco Rodriguez said the proposed act would make it very difficult for the federal government to enforce its gun laws.
“The federal government relies on state and local assistance for almost everything. One source I read indicated that state or local police assist in seven out of every 10 ATF raids. That’s a lot of help that will disappear in the blink of an eye,” he said. “Now imagine if 20 or 30 states followed suit. It would make it virtually impossible for the feds to violate the Second Amendment.”
Such a tactic is an extremely effective way to stop a federal government busting at the seams. Even the National Governors Association admitted the same recently when they sent out a press release noting that “States are partners with the federal government in implementing most federal programs.” That means states can create impediments to enforcing and implementing “most federal programs” including those which impose upon the right to keep and bear arms.
James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” advised this very tactic. Madison supplied the blueprint for resisting federal power in Federalist 46. He outlined several steps that states can take to effective stop “an unwarrantable measure,” or “even a warrantable measure” of the federal government. Anticipating the anti-commandeering doctrine, Madison called for “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” as a method of resistance.
Judge Andrew Napolitano last year urged states to introduce and pass this type of legislation specifically, saying that a single state passing such a law would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible to enforce.”
The bill rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce a federal act or program The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. US serves as the cornerstone.
Montana sheriff Jay Printz and Arizona sheriff Richard Mack sued the federal government over provisions in the 1993 Brady Gun Bill that required chief law enforcement officers in each county to administer background checks. The Supreme Court majority held the feds could not force compliance by state officers.
“The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case-by-case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”
Mack has since called working at the state and local level the key to fighting tyranny.
Florida Tenth Amendment Center state coordinator Andrew Nappi said Rep. Eagle first became interested in this bill almost a year ago and called to discuss the model legislation.
“The timing last year just could not be worked out. But Representative Eagle said he would not forget about this bill and he didn’t. He remained true to his word, and we began working with him on this last fall,” Nappi said. “This is a substantial attempt to push back against federal actions violating the Second Amendment. Representative Eagle has not only kept his word by sponsoring the bill this year, he set an example for others who say they support the Second Amendment, but stop short of taking action.”
Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center indicate a Senate version of the bill will likely be introduced in the coming weeks.
In Florida, take action to support HB733 HERE
All other states, take action to get your state on board, and protect the 2nd Amendment HERE
Harry, Rich's view notwithstanding, I understood our objectives to be exactly as you stated in your original manifesto, and as you reiterated above. One point Jim Sherwood made, which I heartily support, is we can completely negate the need to go to DC if we can convince the 'anti-constitutional cabal' to capitulate before May 16. That will require a very strong campaign exposing their crimes and conspiracies and demanding, through whatever medium we can use, their resignations. I know that's more than we can realistically expect, but if nothing else, it will soften our target for the DC campaign, and it may help turn the tide of public support.
I am surprised we are not getting more recognition from Rush, Sean, Laura, Herman, and other higher-profile talk shows. I've seen nothing on Fox, either. What efforts are we making to get our message into those venues? Is there a concerted campaign to get mention or comments on local talk shows? Do we have an outreach program for churches? Have we made a deal with VistaPrint to supply banners, of our design, for people who will to purchase them, and post them on their property, on overpasses, on their motor homes, commercial trucks, etc? We could also make a bulk buy of yards signs, tee shirts, hats, etc. It seems there are so many things we could do to get our word out that would not cost the organization money, but could actually generate income to be put into funding logistical support for the DC campaign.
Can we issue a barrage of press releases that includes our list of demands, reports our numbers and supporting organizations, focuses on some of the more egregious assaults on our liberty, charges high level officials of gross neglect of their duties, violations of their Oath of Office, list their high crimes and misdemeanors, point out their appearances of impropriety; anything we can do to gain public attention? OAS should be on the lips of every American, whether good or bad, pro or con, and it is our job to put it there.
Terry.......to you second paragraph
First...we are always looking for patriots that have connections with any of the sources your list....and yes we have been reaching out to all of them.....We have a prayer warrior team, Rev Alan Coffey is leading reaching out to churches, Black Robe Regiment, et al' I have been on the radio with following, some of which have also been guests on Fox News: Patriot Nation Mark Hoffman, Mel Moss Show, The Pete Santilli Show, The Take With Charles Butler, The Rusty Humphries Show, Full Contact with Erik Rush, JJ McCartney Show, PP Simmons Show, Dr James Manning, Post and Email Interview, and others......
You will also not we have a tab of OAS Flyers, available to anyone........you know what they say, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink"
The OAS operation is not supposed to take people by the hand and do everything for them....it is not a catered event...folks have got to take the bull by the horns.
We also have press releases at our Tab at the top of the page.....we'll do more of them Our PR person has me scheduled for 21 more radio shows............everyone can call in to local radio stations, write letters to editors, set up local marches advertising OAS......on and on......no one person or group cannot do it all............
Texas and Harry, since I don't get any of the shows you mention in my area, I wasn't aware of them. I am forwarding your press releases to our two local papers and have talked to the editor of American Patriot News about doing a series of articles and press releases; one in each edition, leading up to the May 16 gathering in DC. Printed bi-weekly, APN is distributed in more than half the counties in Florida and in 12 to 15 other states.
Of course, if you'd rather handle these tasks, I am happy to forward the contact info. I will get you copies of everything that gets printed, for your records.
As chairman of our local group, I have dedicated my next four County Tea Party Meetings to OAS, recruiting, promoting and organizing. I am trying to get other county chairs in my area to do the same.
On the press release front, I understand the challenge to get items published if they look like puff pieces. If we can create 'news' around a release, it will garner much greater attention.
Since you didn't address my suggestion of ways to raise money to help support the people who go to DC, I presume it is a non-issue for you. But there will be things necessary to keep us there: port-a-potties, water, access to emergency medical care. You know DC is not going to be able to support those things, and it is in our best interest to provide some sanitary facilities and basic needs. I can carry food for 5-7 days, but I can't carry that much water, too. If these issues aren't addressed, our mission will be severely weakened. What can I do to help?
If I could find one........I honestly would.........I have a professional PR Team Leader and she is working 12 hours a day on getting any and every source we find to talk with.......if you have contact information on anyone, send it.......
I believe you have hit yet more points on the head which require our attention. Many of these points are surely attributed to the deeper underlying roots which contribute to much of what we are seeking to remedy. As mentioned, the end to private banking's hold upon our monetary status. We should learn from Iceland's recent example of this.
I also believe that the message of OAS does incorporate all of this and much more. yes, we should all seek to band together. I have often stated to others that I do not worry whether one chooses to observer their right to keep and bear arms (just for an example), yet that inalienable right must be preserved and defended in order that it may always remain an option to the people. Certainly most would wish for peaceful and harmonious coexistence, yet we must never forget that our most precious of rights should always be protected with the utmost of prejudice.
Every American has equally to lose in this battle, though many would not recognize it until it is too late. I am not a state leader, coordinator nor recognized organizer for PFA, but as an American, I can say that this battle has as much to offer for one American as it does another. As Benjamin Franklin once said, "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."
While I feel exempting people who fire warning shots, from the 10-20-life rule is a good idea, as a combat veteran, having seen the effects of a soldiers ill-placed warning shot, I believe negligent behavior which causes damage or injury to others, should still be taken into consideration. In the heat of a confrontation, how many people out there are prepared to make this decision? Oh sure, first thing that runs through a persons head may be, "This person isn't coming back if I pull this trigger." but firing a warning shot is something that is not always so easy a decision. It can cost seconds which may lead to one's attacker closing the distance and gaining the upper hand. The use of a warning or even disabling shot, is something that takes even more training and experience than simply sailing a round center mass. Most soldiers on their first combat tour, are ill-experienced in this arena, let alone the civilian CCW holder. This is not to say I do not condone it... merely that I believe we have the responsibility to know what this entails. And while most who are reading this, are likely the III% types who actually take it upon themselves to learn and remain active, we all know someone out there who we feel is quite irresponsible and would likely draw the wrong attention in a situation such as this.
We in the shooting community, have a responsibility to ensure that firearms safety is common practice. I do agree that a well placed warning shot, may deter a would be attacker from furthering their assault on someone. What I would encourage, with an expansion to Stand your Ground Laws, is for persons who carry or that simply have a weapon at home for self protection, act responsibly. Taking courses on close quarter shooting, sitting down with someone who has been in these situations and planning out possible scenarios... these are just a few things that constitution that portion of the second Amendment, "Well Regulated".
Something to consider would be; parking lots, stores, anywhere that has steel or concrete structures hold the possibility of creating a ricochet. Firing in the air is not always a viable option either, as what goes up, must come down and even if the bullet loses velocity upon return, it still holds enough energy to cause property damage. What am I saying here? Situational Awareness. Responsible Shooters, those with CCW or that open carry, must always be thinking, "what is my best way out of this situation?" "If I have to fire on a would be attacker... what are my surroundings?"
So, in stating again... eliminating the worry for gun owners, that if they chose to do the humane thing and fire a warning shot, if they think they have the time to do so and still be prepared to use deadly force if the warning shot does not work, is a good thing. I also believe that people have the responsibility to understand their liability should they chose to do so. I for one, already know that if my firearm is drawn, there is damn good reason and absolutely no doubt of the need and will not offer a warning shot; rather, two to the chest and one to the head.
Your viewpoints are well taken Sean. Survival depends on one's ability to evaluate correct time, place, form, and event, i.e. is what is. Time, past, present, and future, are the criminals vulnerability. They are far from present time, see absolutely no consequence, are dramatizing something only they know of. When confronted with such an individual a warning shot serves up a mental image picture of consequence, and most likely, will pull them into present time where fight or flight will justify their being in front of you. Nevertheless, like you, I prefer certainty's outcome...Semper Fi V'nam 66-67
I recently suffered a very painful yellow jacket sting. I wasn't even molesting a nest - just accidentally happened to place my hand on top of one - my BAD. Dang !....Those critters mean business !!!
The thing about yellow jackets is.....if you give them a wide berth they won't bother you. They aren't inclined to go out of there way to attack anyone, but they sure weren't created with a reverse gear either.
How many American's are willing to volunteer to man a bucket brigade to throw water on Obama's parade ?
Perhaps we can reach a consensus on that ...if nothing else.............?