The madness that is the gun craze has reached levels unseen in more than a century.
Immediately strumentalized by the republicans, the notorious claim to a right to arms enshrined in the constitution has now led to what could be described as a second 'civil war'.
States since the second term of Obama's presidency, have tried in any way they can to bypass federal statutes and claim some kind of sovereignty they do not truly have, by passing outrageous laws in complete defiance with federal statutes.
The latest offering is the sweeping legislation from several states that attempts to sever any influence from federal statute, by declaring that the federal government has overreached its scope and therefore invoking the "nullification" principle used in the civil war as a pretext in passing legislation that would make any gun owner in the state free from federal supervision or enforcement. Alaska was one of the first to pass such laws.
Not only has Kansas passed laws to sever federal enforcement, it has gone a step further. It has enshrined in its statutes a law that would make it a 'felony' for the federal government to try to enforce federal statutes on any gun made in Kansas.
37 other states are preparing to follow suit.
Even though the NRA is usually clapping when pro-gun legislation is passed, this time they are staying mum. Could it be that they see the sign of a very significant conflict both from the government and from the public that could translate into a powerful backlash?
If that is so, however, it matters little if these statutes are passed. Many people say that it is all bluster, and that these laws will never be enforced because the courts will strike them down. But do we really need to have the courts flooded with cases brought forth by gun owners or their lobbyists only to see what purchase these cases can get?
Legal experts say that nullification laws violate the Constitution, which makes federal laws the law of the land.
But the insistence with which states are now passing laws in defiance of federal statutes, and not only on guns, is very troubling. The federal government cannot be burdened with having to defend all these statutes, which could see those laws become in all effects, enforceable.
What's at stake here is the incredible overreach and defiance of the states, which are succeeding in portraying a sitting president and his Supreme court as 'dictatorship'. This type of rethoric and the actions it engenders are dangerous, because it makes citizens entitled to believe that the laws of the land do not apply to them.
Nullification had been invoked in 1958 when states were trying to defy the integration laws in school. But that was one case, and it was somewhat easily handled.
What is more dangerous is that each state could begin presenting and passing myriad laws, ones against reproduction rights, labor rights and so forth, in defiance of the federal statutes and that could put the whole concept of unity and political integrity at risk. Not to mention the erosion of human, civil, labor and health protection rights.
Partial source : MoJo 5.4.13
No comments:
Post a Comment