Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act To Pass Without Signature

By Kleinheider Posted on June 12, 2009 at 5:52 pm

Governor Phil Bredesen will not stand in the way of House Bill 1796. He will allow it to pass without his signature.

Bredesen, in a letter to Speaker Kent Williams, states that the bill which says that federal laws do not apply to firearms, accessories, or ammunition that is manufactured in Tennessee, will likely be found to be unconstitutional.

“This bill is not about firearms. It is about a fringe constitutional theory that I believe will be quickly dispensed with by the federal courts.

The Tennessee General Assembly lacks the Constitutional authority to limit the power and authority of federal government in this way…

…While I share the General Assembly’s commitment to federalism, this legislation contravenes our Constitution. I am allowing it to become law so that it can quickly be dealt with by the federal courts.”

Excuse me? What exactly is our governor saying here? I believe in federalism — except when the states really try to take real power back? I believe in federalism — but not for things like this?

What is unconstitutional about this? If a gun is made here and kept here what the heck business of the federal government is it? If Tennessee wants to make its own laws on firearms why is that bad and how is it unconstitutional?

Bredesen says he believes in federalism but then calls the legislation “based on a fringe constitutional theory.”

What theory would that be other than federalism? This bill doesn’t contravene the Constitution, it contravenes the modern interpretation of it. If you believe in federalism it should be a principle you abide whether the modern court agrees or not.

And if Bredesen does believe the bill is unconstitutional, why not veto it? It’ll become law either way, given our weak gubernatorial veto. The governor took an oath to the constitution, right? How is letting something pass he believes to be unconstitutional in keeping with that oath.

It would be one thing if he wasn’t sure and he wanted to dispatch it to the courts without prejudice. But there seems to be prejudice here.

If he feels the way he obviously does, he should have vetoed it. Otherwise he should have let it pass without comment.

If he doesn’t have enough fortitude to stand up to a “fringe constitutional theory” why do we need to hear about it?

permalink | 68 Comments

Tags: firearms, guns, Phil Bredesen, Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, veto  

Should Liberals Go Heeled?

By Kleinheider Posted on April 1, 2009 at 3:56 pm

Ilissa Gold thinks it might be wise to take your whistle with ya if you’re fixin’ to leave your house as a progressive:

But I wonder if it’s something that all progressives, regardless of sexual orientation or other factors, have to worry about. The violent rhetoric from the right about rising up and overthrowing the government is growing. Republican leaders are actively calling for a “revolution”. Militia activity has been on the rise in the last few years, and is expected to increase with Obama’s presidency.

And while you’d rather think of people like Jim Adkisson shooting up a Unitarian church in Knoxville as an evil aberration, you do have to wonder how many others like him are out there, whose minds have been so poisoned by the violent right-wing rhetoric that they could snap at any moment, and look to take out those whom, again, they perceive as “weaker”.

This isn’t going to stop anytime soon, and I’m of the opinion that we need to be prepared. I’m not saying all liberals need to (or should) carry, nor am I saying that anyone should rely on weapons at the expense of reaching out to others through dialogue and eudcation. But it’s a civil liberties issue, as far as I’m concerned–if the Bill O’Reillys and Glenn Becks and Michelle Malkins of the country have the right to spread violent rhetoric, then those of us at whom the rhetoric is aimed have the right to defend ourselves. We cannot be caught off-guard again.

permalink | 20 Comments

Tags: firearms, guns, Ilissa Gold, liberals, Militia activity, progressives, revolution, sexual orientation  

Beware Of The Ides Of Martial

By Kleinheider Posted on at 2:12 pm

Republicans want to make sure their guns don’t get snagged by the Fedgov if our little experiment in Democracy starts falling apart:

The sponsor, House Republican caucus chair Glen Casada, explained martial law might be declared “by the governor, president or somebody like that” usually at a time of “invasion or civil unrest.”

“I’m a firm believer that an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure,” Casada told the subcommittee. “Obviously, things are bad under martial law, and we’d need our weapons to protect ourselves.”

permalink | 5 Comments

Tags: firearms, Glen Casada, guns, martial law  

Haslam, I’m Guessing, Doesn’t Have Pics Like These

By Kleinheider Posted on at 11:50 am

Lt. Governor and gubernatorial candidate Ron Ramsey at a legislative range day. Rep. Stacey Campfield looks on.

SEE ALSO: Say Uncle

permalink | 10 Comments

Tags: Bill Haslam, firearms, firing range, guns, Ron Ramsey