MOre 1811 questions

[Switchback]

Yeah, I am with Group on this one. State laws cannot impede federal authority. If I recall, the AUSAs thumbed their noses to the state prosecutors that wanted to charge the FBI sniper from RUby Ridge. The fefds foud that he was acting within the scope of his duties and that was the end of it. If you can't do it with what the state believes to be a homicide, there is no way it would fly with a firearms violation!

[txinvestigator1]

I buy the argument that states cannot regulate the federal government, and by virtue of that cannot regulate the official actions of the employees of the federal government.

I do not buy the blanket statement that federal firearms laws trump state law.

I still wonder why Texas made the 2.122 list so short.

[ngcsubutterbar]

I buy the argument that states cannot regulate the federal government, and by virtue of that cannot regulate the official actions of the employees of the federal government.

I do not buy the blanket statement that federal firearms laws trump state law.

I still wonder why Texas made the 2.122 list so short.

well considering that many states have stricter weapon laws than the feds, that's a good question Tx.

[Sleuth]

The general concept is that a state may be more, but not less, restricitive than the Federal Statute. Thus, Federally, full autos are legal PROVIDED that you comply with state laws.
And "officers of the United States" can carry anything they are issued or authorized, in any state. Like full autos (owned by the Gov't) in California or New York City.

[Ranger__101]

US Constitution Article VI, Section II

Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

It says that any federal laws must be held up in each state as federal laws are legally binding and no states can interfear with a federal law.

[coyote135]

Actually there are 1811's that RARELY (and I do mean RARELY) carry weapons, and i'm not talking by choice. For security reasons, I will not reveal which agency, but it is a small one (actually I know more than one). This agency does NOT allow its 1811 Special Agents to carry routinely on duty, rather only in certain circumstances. Their sidearms are locked in a safe at the office.

People who are not 1811's would be surprised just how many agenices have them. In my CITP class (which is the basic Special Agent / 1811 training program), there were people in there from agencies which I had no clue had 1811's. And I was already in Fed LE prior to coming on as a 1811...

[Switchback]

Why can't you mention the agencies. I am sure the agencies will not take offense.

[richcecil]

And, I have never heard of 1811's were were not armed (except maybe senior management out of stupidity).

I know some I wish were not armed :D

[insanediplomat]

Does anyone know how long ago the country would have broken apart if state laws overruled those set by the feds? The theory applies to counties and cities, and counties and states as well. An ordinace cannot overrule a statute. Better yet, a city ordinace cannot overrule a county's, unless you find yourself in the great city of New York, in which case it is all backwards. There are only two or three laws the feds have that have not been applied to states yet. The one that I remember right now is excessive bail. I can't remember the other two.