Quantcast

Comments about ‘Bill asserting Utah's right to bar enforcement of federal gun laws passes House’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, March 8 2013 11:40 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
mightyhunterhaha
Kaysville, UT

One must question the intelligence of the Senate and many other State leaders. They pass a law that will not hold up in the Supreme Court. Much like a law they passed many years ago banning cable TV. The State spent millions of dollars denfending what they said was thier right only to have the Supreme Court rule against the State of Utah. We should be so proud of these so called leaders.

EVG
Ogden, UT

Hmmmm...We are concerned that because the Constitution says we have the "right to bear arms" we are going to ignore the Constitution because it says "federal law trumps state law". I'm confused.

lket
Bluffdale, UT

what has happened to these people that they think they should start a law that is so silly that i cant understand how it passed. the civil war was won by strong central govenment. after that states must, and do, have to follow the federal laws. period. it was won by a republican president. i think it is mostly a revolt because the president won. it is like a child throwing a fit. i swore an oath to protect this country. maybe it will be to protect it from utah repulicans. yea we need 50 cl. weapons so we can shoot right threw a car and kill the people inside. by the way no gun control laws have been made since the last mass killing in our country anyway. mass killings are now a every other month thing just about so lets arm everyone and just have one big shoot out and then the rest of us can live in peace without the crazy people. more guns to the mentaly ill people too. why stop crazy when is enough, enough.

Obama10
SYRACUSE, UT

While I support the intention of this bill, I am not sure how it is constitutional. Federal law usurps State law. If that was not the case, Utah could just take back all of the Federal land within the state's boundary.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

Admittedly there are constitutional concerns with this legislation, but I suggest there are also constitutional concerns with Utah not passing this bill into law.

Since the federal government is weak in upholding a part of its own constitution, and given the fact that Legislators and the Governor are sworn to uphold the constitution, Trying to pass a bill such as this into law is quite reasonable.

Who knows, when Utah's enforcement actions of this law go to federal court, there is a fair chance that the courts, or at least the Supreme Court will uphold much of what Utah is doing in this regard.

nrajr
SANDY, UT

Many of you need to read the constitution. Nowhere does it say or imply that "federal law trumps state law". For whatever reason, you are just assuming that. The tenth amendment states the following:

"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.

Nowhere in the constitution is federal government given the right to legislate laws pertaining to the armament of citizens themselves. If anything the opposite is true. If any government has the right to regulate this issue it is the state government.

It is also incorrect to assert the victory in the Civil War creates some sort of law giving power to the federal government not specifically granted by the constitution, or that the states have lost their rights which were guaranteed by the constitution.

Steve Cottrell
Centerville, UT

Sounds like the most recent "message bill" and will again waste taxpayer money by any court challenge.

the truth
Holladay, UT

The right to bear arms shall not be INFRINGED.

Infringe means 'to limit'.

It is a direct violation of the constitution for the federal government to limit the right o bear arms in any way.

States must stand up for their rights.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments