Proposal to ignore any new federal gun laws clears Kentucky Senate panel
Published: February 21, 2013 Updated 3 hours ago
State Sen. Jared Carpenter, R-Berea. Photo provided by Legislative Research Commission.
RECENT HEADLINES
Proposal to ignore any new federal gun laws clears Kentucky Senate panel
3 hours ago
By Jack Brammer — jbrammer@herald-leader.com
FRANKFORT — Kentucky would not enforce any federal law or regulation made after Jan. 1, 2013, if it bans or restricts ownership of a semi-automatic firearm or requires gun registration under a bill a state Senate committee approved Thursday.
The measure is needed to protect the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which gives people the right to keep and bear arms, said Sen. Jared Carpenter, R-Berea, who sponsored the measure.
Sen. Kathy Stein, D-Lexington, rejected that argument, saying it is Senate Bill 129, not federal gun regulations proposed in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, that would violate the U.S. Constitution.
President Barack Obama unveiled several gun control initiatives last month that he wants Congress to pass. They include legislation to require universal background checks for gun purchasers and reinstating a federal ban on assault weapons.
Stein said Carpenter's bill reminded her of recent news reports about Jackson County Sheriff Denny Peyman's public pronouncement that he would not enforce any new gun control laws he considers unconstitutional.
"I'm fearful and saddened that one sheriff's declaration has inspired an idea in this body that makes actual law to pass a bill that violates federal law," Stein said.
She said that amounts to treason.
Her arguments did not deter the Senate Veterans, Military Affairs and Public Protection Committee from overwhelmingly approving the bill and sending it to the full Senate for consideration. Stein cast the only "no" vote in the committee.
Carpenter said some people think taking away gun rights is tyranny.
Stein acknowledged that public sentiment in Kentucky about gun restrictions might not mesh with her stance on the issue.
"I dare say in Kentucky that the public will say, 'Hear, hear, it's about time we told those feds to quit passing gun laws," Stein said.
The bill carries an emergency clause, meaning that it would take effect immediately upon becoming law.
The committee also unanimously approved SB 150, sponsored by Sen. Brandon Smith, R-Hazard, that reduces from 90 days to 60 days the amount of time state police have to approve or deny an application for a license to carry a concealed deadly weapon.
Jack Brammer: (502) 227-1198. Twitter: @BGPolitics. Blog: bluegrasspolitics.bloginky.com
ORDER REPRINTBACK TO TOP
< PREVIOUS STORY
Kentucky school safety bill clears House panel
NEXT STORY >
Beshear: Ashley Judd wants to talk about U.S. Senate race
LikeNo
Post as …
Rayetta Hull
Yesterday 07:14 PM
Hopefully when Senator Stein comes up for re-election, voters in her district will restrict her from voting in favor of taking our rights away.
(Edited by author 13 hours ago)
hide 4 replies reply
companion01
Yesterday 10:21 PM
NO rights are being taken away unless you are dangerous enough to be on a watch list(s).
hide 3 replies reply
Jaed Deaj
Yesterday 11:50 PM
"NO rights are being taken away unless you are dangerous enough to be on a watch list(s)."
and what qualifies someone to be on a watch list:
Do you have a gripe about govt. and it's policies?
Do you post about the govt. especially anything critical of govt.?
Do you believe the Constitution is the law of the land and should be followed by our govt.?
Are you a Christian?
Are you white?
Are you a gun owner?
Do you believe the Constitution was written to LIMIT federal govt. as the founders wrote?
and you get the idea...
DHS, FEMA, the police are NOW the equivalent of Hitler's Gestapo in this little Third Reich our "beloved leaders" have created for themselves with NDAA, the Patriot Act, presidentially ordered assassinations of U.S. citizens, indefinite, illegal, unlawful detention without trial or charges, the new anti-protest law, coming internet control legislation, torture, secret prisons, etc.
Welcome to the United STATE of Amerika!
Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/0..."
hide 2 replies reply
jayc22
Today 07:36 AM
This is exactly the sort of paranoia that leads someone to attack government offices, shoot policeman and blow up buildings.
hide 1 reply reply
aha moment
7 minutes ago
And the Titanic was unsinkable.
reply
Lara Sutherland
Yesterday 09:49 PM
Nobody wants to take your guns away, stop letting the fear mongers drive you into illogical thinking. Federal law trumps state law and it would be illegal for this measure to be upheld. I know people like to forget this, but this is a country of LAWS, shame we elect idiots that clearly have no clear understand of government. Go back to 9th grade Civics Sen Carpenter, and try again.
hide 8 replies reply
Kentuckyjoe777
Yesterday 10:20 PM
Read the Constitution....2nd Amendment and 10th Amendment. Also the Kentucky State Constitution section 1 states we have the right to bear arms. Good thing we are a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy. You should go back to the 5th grade.
(Edited by author 10 hours ago)
hide 6 replies reply
McAllister Bryant
Yesterday 11:28 PM
Cool...that 2nd Amendment...what well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State do you train with and follow orders of the militia command?
hide 1 reply reply
AlvinAmbers
Today 02:51 AM
You do know that the Founders elaborated to considerable lengths on the issue of citizens and guns, no? A "militia" then would have been, ostensibly, any group of locals who cared to participate, and who would have established whatever "command" or leadership that they saw fit WITHIN their local group. That's PRECISELY the nature of militia we are now. No one then issued a decree regulating how much powder to add to their musket or what kind of "bullet", and no one now will dictate to us how many rounds our magazines can hold or what kind of gun should be "good enough" for us. We understand perfectly well what the opposers of the Constitution want, and that is whether incrementally or wholesale to deprive us of our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms so that it will be easier to deprive us of any other rights the Ismists (Marxism, Socialism, Communism, etc.) in their elitist fervor may decide we don't need. We have tolerated too mnay restrictions already, and that bad is on us. But we're going to put a stop to it, and good perhaps that those who don't like or want guns content themselves with not having any in THEIR house, and keep their nose and infringing ideology away from OUR rights.
Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/02/21/2525876/proposal-to-ignore-any-new-federal.html#storylink=cpy
Published: February 21, 2013 Updated 3 hours ago
State Sen. Jared Carpenter, R-Berea. Photo provided by Legislative Research Commission.
RECENT HEADLINES
Proposal to ignore any new federal gun laws clears Kentucky Senate panel
3 hours ago
By Jack Brammer — jbrammer@herald-leader.com
FRANKFORT — Kentucky would not enforce any federal law or regulation made after Jan. 1, 2013, if it bans or restricts ownership of a semi-automatic firearm or requires gun registration under a bill a state Senate committee approved Thursday.
The measure is needed to protect the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which gives people the right to keep and bear arms, said Sen. Jared Carpenter, R-Berea, who sponsored the measure.
Sen. Kathy Stein, D-Lexington, rejected that argument, saying it is Senate Bill 129, not federal gun regulations proposed in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, that would violate the U.S. Constitution.
President Barack Obama unveiled several gun control initiatives last month that he wants Congress to pass. They include legislation to require universal background checks for gun purchasers and reinstating a federal ban on assault weapons.
Stein said Carpenter's bill reminded her of recent news reports about Jackson County Sheriff Denny Peyman's public pronouncement that he would not enforce any new gun control laws he considers unconstitutional.
"I'm fearful and saddened that one sheriff's declaration has inspired an idea in this body that makes actual law to pass a bill that violates federal law," Stein said.
She said that amounts to treason.
Her arguments did not deter the Senate Veterans, Military Affairs and Public Protection Committee from overwhelmingly approving the bill and sending it to the full Senate for consideration. Stein cast the only "no" vote in the committee.
Carpenter said some people think taking away gun rights is tyranny.
Stein acknowledged that public sentiment in Kentucky about gun restrictions might not mesh with her stance on the issue.
"I dare say in Kentucky that the public will say, 'Hear, hear, it's about time we told those feds to quit passing gun laws," Stein said.
The bill carries an emergency clause, meaning that it would take effect immediately upon becoming law.
The committee also unanimously approved SB 150, sponsored by Sen. Brandon Smith, R-Hazard, that reduces from 90 days to 60 days the amount of time state police have to approve or deny an application for a license to carry a concealed deadly weapon.
Jack Brammer: (502) 227-1198. Twitter: @BGPolitics. Blog: bluegrasspolitics.bloginky.com
ORDER REPRINTBACK TO TOP
< PREVIOUS STORY
Kentucky school safety bill clears House panel
NEXT STORY >
Beshear: Ashley Judd wants to talk about U.S. Senate race
LikeNo
Post as …
Rayetta Hull
Yesterday 07:14 PM
Hopefully when Senator Stein comes up for re-election, voters in her district will restrict her from voting in favor of taking our rights away.
(Edited by author 13 hours ago)
hide 4 replies reply
companion01
Yesterday 10:21 PM
NO rights are being taken away unless you are dangerous enough to be on a watch list(s).
hide 3 replies reply
Jaed Deaj
Yesterday 11:50 PM
"NO rights are being taken away unless you are dangerous enough to be on a watch list(s)."
and what qualifies someone to be on a watch list:
Do you have a gripe about govt. and it's policies?
Do you post about the govt. especially anything critical of govt.?
Do you believe the Constitution is the law of the land and should be followed by our govt.?
Are you a Christian?
Are you white?
Are you a gun owner?
Do you believe the Constitution was written to LIMIT federal govt. as the founders wrote?
and you get the idea...
DHS, FEMA, the police are NOW the equivalent of Hitler's Gestapo in this little Third Reich our "beloved leaders" have created for themselves with NDAA, the Patriot Act, presidentially ordered assassinations of U.S. citizens, indefinite, illegal, unlawful detention without trial or charges, the new anti-protest law, coming internet control legislation, torture, secret prisons, etc.
Welcome to the United STATE of Amerika!
Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/0..."
hide 2 replies reply
jayc22
Today 07:36 AM
This is exactly the sort of paranoia that leads someone to attack government offices, shoot policeman and blow up buildings.
hide 1 reply reply
aha moment
7 minutes ago
And the Titanic was unsinkable.
reply
Lara Sutherland
Yesterday 09:49 PM
Nobody wants to take your guns away, stop letting the fear mongers drive you into illogical thinking. Federal law trumps state law and it would be illegal for this measure to be upheld. I know people like to forget this, but this is a country of LAWS, shame we elect idiots that clearly have no clear understand of government. Go back to 9th grade Civics Sen Carpenter, and try again.
hide 8 replies reply
Kentuckyjoe777
Yesterday 10:20 PM
Read the Constitution....2nd Amendment and 10th Amendment. Also the Kentucky State Constitution section 1 states we have the right to bear arms. Good thing we are a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy. You should go back to the 5th grade.
(Edited by author 10 hours ago)
hide 6 replies reply
McAllister Bryant
Yesterday 11:28 PM
Cool...that 2nd Amendment...what well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State do you train with and follow orders of the militia command?
hide 1 reply reply
AlvinAmbers
Today 02:51 AM
You do know that the Founders elaborated to considerable lengths on the issue of citizens and guns, no? A "militia" then would have been, ostensibly, any group of locals who cared to participate, and who would have established whatever "command" or leadership that they saw fit WITHIN their local group. That's PRECISELY the nature of militia we are now. No one then issued a decree regulating how much powder to add to their musket or what kind of "bullet", and no one now will dictate to us how many rounds our magazines can hold or what kind of gun should be "good enough" for us. We understand perfectly well what the opposers of the Constitution want, and that is whether incrementally or wholesale to deprive us of our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms so that it will be easier to deprive us of any other rights the Ismists (Marxism, Socialism, Communism, etc.) in their elitist fervor may decide we don't need. We have tolerated too mnay restrictions already, and that bad is on us. But we're going to put a stop to it, and good perhaps that those who don't like or want guns content themselves with not having any in THEIR house, and keep their nose and infringing ideology away from OUR rights.
Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/02/21/2525876/proposal-to-ignore-any-new-federal.html#storylink=cpy
Comments
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment, just make sure they are not vulgar or they will be removed.