One of the core ideas behind the U.S. Constitution is that individual states should have far more power than the federal government; at least, that’s how it was originally intended. In 21st century America, however, the federal octopus has grown far too many tentacles, all of which seek more control, power, and subjugation of the citizenry.
In Kansas, federal government overreach has resulted in the conviction and denied the appeal of two Americans exercising their right to bear arms. And this recent, underreported decision in Kansas represents another defeat for firearm rights.
This week US District Court Judge J. Thomas Marten effectively told two American citizens that their Second Amendment rights would not stand up against federal law. And the laws of Kansas must step aside as the Fed takes precedence as well.
Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler were convicted in federal court of manufacturing and selling unregistered firearms, such as short-barreled rifles and silencers. Keep in mind that Cox was the owner of an existing gun shop. Under Kansas law, what Cox and Kettler were doing was perfectly legal.
Even so, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms – much like a group of trolls under a bridge – insists the men need to ask permission and pay a fee to exercise their Second Amendment rights. In seeking their approval, the ATF would then have authority to dig around in their lives and backgrounds. Only after all of that, if the ATF and the Internal Revenue Service decided that they were feeling charitable, Cox and Kettler would have federal permission to exercise their God-given rights. Naturally, this blessing from on high would come several months after submitting the paperwork with the caveat of yearly inspections.
Land of the free, indeed.
In 2013, the state of Kansas passed a law that nullified all federal gun laws in the state – especially the National Firearms Act, which demands that citizens ask permission before owning certain types of firearms. From now on, said Kansas lawmakers, whatever Kansas residents do regarding firearms is fine and dandy so long as the guns do not cross state lines. Cox and Kettler thought that the Kansas law would protect them from federal prosecution. Instead, they found out the hard way that the federal government insists on its pound of flesh. Certainly, the feds cannot have states defying their authority on an issue like firearm ownership and sales.
Cox and Kettler were charged and convicted of violating federal law – even though they were in accordance with Kansas state law. They appealed their conviction, and the appeal ended up on the bench of Judge Marten, who shrugged at the defense argument that the National Firearms Act is unconstitutional, violating the Second and Tenth Amendments. In all his wisdom, Marten upheld the conviction of the two men, ignoring both the constitutional arguments and the fact that the state law was designed to shield Kansas residents from this precise situation.
“I am bound to follow the law,” lamented Marten. In other words, I’m just following orders. Since the Supreme Court of the United States found the National Firearms Act to be constitutional over eighty years ago, Marten argued, it supersedes Kansas law. Never mind, of course, that the Supreme Court also used to think that blacks weren’t to be considered whole people, and currently holds the position that extinguishing a child in the womb is the right of every woman.
Firearm writer Herschel Smith called the decision a “horrible disaster for not only the defendants but for the concept of nullification generally.”
For Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler, the lesson is brutally simple: The federal government will violate the Constitutional rights of anyone it wants to, at its convenience – even if the state in question says no.
In the battle between those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights under state law, another one bites the dust.
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
