Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« “You can reject the post but not the will of God” | Main | Good bills advancing in Utah »

Reform in Tennessee

Posted by David Hardy · 11 March 2009 05:19 PM

Via Instapundit comes this report from Rustmeister's Alehouse. I found the ban on microstamped guns and ammo interesting. Normally, of course, it makes sense to manufacture stuff to the specs of the tightest (large) State, so it can be sold anywhere. But if some States ban the same, then the equation changes.

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Rustmeister | March 11, 2009 8:13 PM | Reply

Hopefully that would lead arms and ammo manufacturers to not sell their product in states requiring microstamping.

George Mocsary | March 12, 2009 8:42 AM | Reply

There's a good thread on this at Volokh Conspiracy: http://volokh.com/posts/1236798215.shtml

jnheath | March 12, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply



If I were an ammunition manufacturer, and CA required microstamping but TN banned it, I would be looking for ways to sue CA, arguing that the conflict between CA and TN law interferes with interstate commerce; that Congress has by a series of statutes expressed its will regarding the serializing of guns with regard to interstate commerce; that the CA law interferes with the unified national plan for interstate commerce as enacted by Congress; and that the CA law could be considered preempted by Congress without treading on a reserved power. Conversely, the TN cannot be preempted without treading on a reserved power.

Congress could pretty clearly preempt CA from requiring microstamping, as an interference with interstate commerce, if Congress doesn't want microstamping. Just like Congress can preempt CA's stricter car emissions regulations as an interference with a federally-regulated plan.

Congress might mandate microstamping, in which case TN's law would still not preempted, but would have the effect of banning all ammunition in TN. But in no scenario is TN's ban of microstamped ammunition preempted, I think.



Leave a comment