NFA removal in a state

In every other case States can do anything, but the MOMENT the ZOG catches wind that they are being outgunned.... States can completely piss on the Constitution, NY, NJ, CA, but the Fed's don't care, make weapons that you are Constitutionally guaranteed to have, but the ZOG can't tolerate that.

>Here's the thing about California, they make the country a shitload of money through Silicon Valley and Hollywood,

Hollywood and SV are minor parts of the CA economy. Ag, manufacturing, and to a lesser degree, oil and forestry products are where the serious money is at.

Attached: 1510465239973.jpg (965x427, 27K)

The reason those laws were struck down is because they tried to argue that the state should be able to arrest federal agents who were enforcing federal law.

The major difference in this situation is that the ATF is actually interested in enforcing the NFA and would be on the asses of any gun store that just started selling NFA items illegally, while the DEA and ICE aren't as interested in doing their job in the areas that cities/states have stopped assisting.

I'd love to see it tried. Every state should ignore the feds on whatever issue they don't like locally.

Then finally I'll see this damned bloated government fail like it needs to.

Holy fuck it's you again. Ag in California is worth at most 100 billion, the state touts over 2 trillion a year.

>sanctuary cities win another lawsuit
heh

Yeah, but any production of new automatic weapons would have to take place entirely within the state in question. I imagine that the materials and machinery used in production might also be subject to similar restrictions.

The business would have to be cash-only, and even internet advertising might be restricted. The federal government has been abusing the interstate commerce clause for two centuries at this point, so it can get pretty creative with it's overreach.

Not him. However:
statista.com/statistics/304869/california-real-gdp-by-industry/

in 2016 their agricultural gdp was about 30 billion. Not 100 billion.

I'd pay to see the shit show from local cops arresting feds.

No.
Leftists can blatantly ignore federal law and protect illegal spics so that they can shitout More subhuman welfare leeches and more voters for leftists, but you can’t have a machine gun to shoot for the funz.

Illegal violent subhuman 10 grand a year costing to white tax payer spics >>>>>>>> you having a shotgun .5 too short.

This is the priorities of “our” government.

Anything is interstate commerce, even if it doesn’t leave the state.

Won't work. The only reason states like California can legalize weed is because 99% of the time those laws are enforced by state/local police while the ATF are the ones shooting people's dogs over the NFA.

Attached: quoteificouldhavegotten51votesinthesenateoftheunitedstatesforanoutrightbandiannefeinstein589743.jpg (850x400, 73K)

>The feds don't have the time, nor the will to drag some pothead to court for an eighth of weed
FPS Russia might disagree

who is this cute girl and why is she wearing a t-shirt with that dork on it?
more importantly, i wouldn't mind licking her clitty

Kansas has legalized the manufacture of suppressors (and sbr's if I remember right) for personal use as long as it's stamped 'Made in Kansas'. The wording of the bill prohibited federal agents from entering the state and attempting to enforce federal law against such items, but to my knowledge there hasn't been an instance yet of the feds attempting to do this so no one is really sure how such a confrontation would play out.

.

Yeah the probably "could" if California can ignore federal law, but there is not state currently that would ignore federal law on firearms for more freedom instead of less.

>someone paid to have Samu Al'Hayyid's face printed onto a t-shirt