Jump to content
gfl216

Coming to a town near you....

Recommended Posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..."Gun owners in north suburban Deerfield now have just over two months to remove certain types of firearms from their home, or face stiff fines.

Village trustees voted unanimously in favor of a complete ban on semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns with certain features. The new ordinance also bans magazines containing more than 10 rounds of ammunition, CBS 2’s Jeremy Ross reports.

What the hell is a "Village trustee"? When did they get the power to write laws and overthrow the 2nd Amendment?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

illinois didn't used to have state preemption. They got state preemption as law a few years ago. Part of that process was granfathering in exiting local statutes. Deerfield established a vague statute in order to get it grandfathered. Now they are changing said statute. 

Is it legal? It probably adheres to the state pre-emption statute, yes. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

here's a better question. if a town(village?) can't make a law that supersedes state law......how can a state make a law that supersedes federal law?

A state or smaller government division can't make a law that supersedes a federal law.  They can make a law that's more restrictive.  They can't make a law that contradicts federal law.

Legal marijuana, sanctuary states, and sanctuary cities are different issues.  All illegal to some extent IMO.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  
 
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Is local government has the authority to pass such a law?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A state or smaller government division can't make a law that supersedes a federal law.  They can make a law that's more restrictive.  They can't make a law that contradicts federal law."

They can make it "more restrictive"? So can a town can require more restrictions on proving you are a town resident before you vote, not just a voter ID but also say a water or electric bill? It would be more restrictive than Murphy's "let anyone vote" policy. Some would say that those additional restrictions are a violation of rights - just like imposing more restrictive firearms restrictions. To me they are similar in how they are "more restrictive".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, gfl216 said:

Wait a second, I started this thread and that's not the title that I gave it. How did get changed? Did a mod not like it and think that they had a better name?

Wouldnt be the first time.  Everytime i write porkroll.   They switch it to taylor ham.   Not joking.  Nazi mods:FLIPA:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gfl216 said:

Wait a second, I started this thread and that's not the title that I gave it. How did get changed? Did a mod not like it and think that they had a better name?

Got a PM from a Mod. Totally legit. Two threads on the same topic were merged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gfl216 said:

Wait a second, I started this thread and that's not the title that I gave it. How did get changed? Did a mod not like it and think that they had a better name?

There was a topic already existing on it so I merged things together.  Sorry if you got confused.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paulie Buffo said:

"A state or smaller government division can't make a law that supersedes a federal law.  They can make a law that's more restrictive.  They can't make a law that contradicts federal law."

They can make it "more restrictive"? So can a town can require more restrictions on proving you are a town resident before you vote, not just a voter ID but also say a water or electric bill? It would be more restrictive than Murphy's "let anyone vote" policy. Some would say that those additional restrictions are a violation of rights - just like imposing more restrictive firearms restrictions. To me they are similar in how they are "more restrictive".

States make up their own election laws.  Their is no provision for towns to make up their own election laws.  Some states require ID to vote some don't.

When you buy a gun from a FFL in any state the federal requirements must be met. Many states require only that and nothing more.  When you buy a gun in a private ftf transaction in most states it's like buying a shovel.

States are entitled to have more restrictions because the 10A gives them any powers not given the federal government in the COTUS.  There is a point where more restrictions violate Constitutional Rights.  That gets decided in courts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Matroskin said:

  
 
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Is local government has the authority to pass such a law?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

Evidently.... from what I understand, it's not the first town in IL. to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...