Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
OK2A Releases July 25, 2013 ATF Letter Regarding Oklahoma Carry Permits and Fed GFSZA
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cougar" data-source="post: 2393426" data-attributes="member: 3179"><p>1. You are correct, the court only rules on the specific issue presented to them. However, striking down one statute that contains a jurisdictional element would lead to many many more cases in which other statutes with jurisdictional elements (read all federal criminal laws) would be challenged based on the precedent.</p><p></p><p>2. The original 922(q), that was struck down in Lopez, did not have a jurisdictional element, which is why it was struck down. The revised 922(q), which is currently in effect, does have a jurisdictional element, because they put one in to satisfy the Lopez decision. Again, they literally forgot to put it into the original law, but fixed their legislative mistake after the court pointed it out in Lopez. If the original law hadn't been quietly rushed into a larger must-pass bill, they would have caught their mistake, and corrected it, before the first Fed GFSZA made it into law.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cougar, post: 2393426, member: 3179"] 1. You are correct, the court only rules on the specific issue presented to them. However, striking down one statute that contains a jurisdictional element would lead to many many more cases in which other statutes with jurisdictional elements (read all federal criminal laws) would be challenged based on the precedent. 2. The original 922(q), that was struck down in Lopez, did not have a jurisdictional element, which is why it was struck down. The revised 922(q), which is currently in effect, does have a jurisdictional element, because they put one in to satisfy the Lopez decision. Again, they literally forgot to put it into the original law, but fixed their legislative mistake after the court pointed it out in Lopez. If the original law hadn't been quietly rushed into a larger must-pass bill, they would have caught their mistake, and corrected it, before the first Fed GFSZA made it into law. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
OK2A Releases July 25, 2013 ATF Letter Regarding Oklahoma Carry Permits and Fed GFSZA
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom