National Possible to force newly manufactured ballistics through NIBIN?

[scrandall01215]

"States rights kind of guy"?? left to that, Oregonians won't be able to protect themselves at all especially with Ms. Brown and her ilk.
I've been subjected to that states rights argument before in attempts to hood wink me into distraction from the real issue.
(possibly present company excepted)
NO!
Privacy and gun rights laws are not a "State rights Issue" they are Federal, a united states constitutional "guarantee" issue for its citizens, and must be supported, upheld, and forced on the individual states if necessary, or those in federal office are more than remiss in their duties and oath to protect them.
Until a state succeeds from the union, they must comply, and the federal regime must enforce the constitution that the individual states agreed to abide by when they asked for , and entered the embrace of the union.

At least that's the way I feel, but there sure seems to be no end of folk (many paid directly by us) working overtime to create a plethora of backdoor scams to subvert our laws and fool its citizens.
Spin it any way you want, rearrange and change the meaning of words, it is still a dishonest con, and it still stinks.

Love everything you had to say Thorborg!!!

 

[Hueco]

"States rights kind of guy"?? left to that, Oregonians won't be able to protect themselves at all especially with Ms. Brown and her ilk.
I've been subjected to that states rights argument before in attempts to hood wink me into distraction from the real issue.
(possibly present company excepted)
NO!
Privacy and gun rights laws are not a "State rights Issue" they are Federal, a united states constitutional "guarantee" issue for its citizens, and must be supported, upheld, and forced on the individual states if necessary, or those in federal office are more than remiss in their duties and oath to protect them.
Until a state succeeds from the union, they must comply, and the federal regime must enforce the constitution that the individual states agreed to abide by when they asked for , and entered the embrace of the union.

At least that's the way I feel, but there sure seems to be no end of folk (many paid directly by us) working overtime to create a plethora of backdoor scams to subvert our laws and fool its citizens.
Spin it any way you want, rearrange and change the meaning of words, it is still a dishonest con, and it still stinks.

Perhaps you misunderstand my (all too abrupt) point. Let me clarify: If I had been alive at the start of the country, I would have allied myself with Jefferson. Jefferson played a little fast and loose with the Constitution but his perspective was on granting power to the people over the federal government. In that, we agree. I am also in full agreement with a strict interpretation of the bill of rights as laid out by the tenth amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

This thread isn't a discussion on rights so, to keep this brief (perhaps again, too much so), My thought is that the Fed is restricted in enacting any law infringing on 2A and the wording of 2A makes it clear that, so too, are the states. In other matters, I would lean towards authority going to the most local of government bodies.

Regarding this thread, the NIBIN system and the process for collecting ballistics data on every manufactured firearm has little to do with 2A. At the point in time that a firearm is ready for sale, the buyer has not even entered into the picture. The ATF has declared that FOPA prohibits them from collecting ballistics on newly manufactured guns, but I fail to see where. That's the question behind this thread.

The ATF did not bring up 2A as limiting its scope for NIBIN; but, if you'd like to make a constitutional argument instead of a FOPA argument, I'm all ears.