Ammo For Sale

« « Testing | Home | Go to carry guns » »

Second amendment incorporated

So says the Washington Supreme Court.

4 Responses to “Second amendment incorporated”

  1. John Smith Says:

    This is like a bitch slap to the brady bunch. I think the Washington supreme court knows what is in the winds already and is falling in line early. Better to have your state prepared for the upcoming supreme court ruling then not.

  2. Shootin' Buddy Says:

    John, Washington Supreme Court has long considered Second Amendment incorporated.

    Many states, even antebellum in the South (!!!), have held that the Second Amendment applies to the States.

  3. chris Says:

    The end of the decision:

    Sieyes’s objection may be that he was 17 years old at the time of his arrest, and his right to bear arms should be equal to that of an 18-year-old’s, but his arguments fail to challenge the statutory age limit set by this statute. In sum appellant offers no convincing authority supporting his argument that Washington’s limit on childhood firearm possession violates the United States or Washington Constitutions. Accordingly we keep our powder dry on this issue for another day.

    That is simply full of awesome!

  4. Butrack Odumba Says:

    THATS AWESOME!!!!

    But wait around a bit folks …. another major case will be coming up in 2011.

    vs Treasury

    an unnamed individual is now in the process of incorporating for the sole purpose of requesting a NFA Tax Stamp. said individual (who we will call CBI) is expecting that such a stamp will be denied. The founder of CBI actually spent about 2 years looking for a way to Kill the NFA laws and recently found it.

    RIA vs US and Dalton vs US both charged with having a full auto without a tax stamp. BOTH cases were dismissed due to the fact that Taxes are not intended to be a penalty. If a tax is imposed then you MUST have a remedy to pay those taxes.

    BUT in both cases the SCOTUS came just short of killing the 922r provision and instead RIA vs US instructed the legislature to revisit 922r, and Dalton Vs US simply dismissed the charges.

    Now CBI is going to apply, and have denied a tax stamp with the BATFE relying on 922r as the reason for the denial. (CBI has asked 2 times before but was denied for compliance reasons and NOT for the 922r restrictions) Once the BATFE denies CBI the tax stamp. CBI will then file the law suit against the BATFE as the fulfillment arm of the treasury. By doing this CBI can request remedy ….. then we will see how the sparks fly

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives