Comments by "dbergerac" (@dbergerac9632) on "Titty-Baby Bidens DOJ Whines about Missouris Non-enforcement of Unlawful Anti-Gun Laws" video.

  1. Sates have traditionally assisted federal agents enforcing federal law because it was in the state's interest to do so. Catching bank robbers and fugitives, etc. The federal government (who have zero policing powers other then collecting taxes and regulating interstate commerce ) cannot compel any state to do their work for them. (an unfunded mandate). I am an old man. When I was a young man, congress still made laws with an eye on their constitutional limits. They did not "Ban" weapons they did not like, they lacked the authority, so they taxed them out of the market. Later, instead of banning pot, they required a tax stamp. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was legal because it was "regulating interstate commerce". While it was somewhat anti 2nd amendment, I do like that it eliminated the ability of a 14 year old to drop a money order in the mail and receive a Luger pistol in the mail 3 weeks later. And then our Democratic ( autocratic ) Congress under Nixon, was all too happy to toss The Constitution out the window and began decades of banning anything it did not like without regards to interstate commerce or taxes. A practice which continues to this day, from showerheads, freon and toilets to drugs and guns. I have mixed feelings about these laws, but I liked things better when we could count on Congress to remember that The Constitution was written to direct and LIMIT their power, not enhance it.
    1