>>23826460
I'm trying to figure out if this is constitutional. Isn't there some legal precedent for Congress regulating certain firearm restrictions under the commerce clause?

>>23826460
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Alaska also flat-out refuse to enforce any of the draconian federal gun laws as well?

>>23826487
Federal law in theory overrides State law, but there's probably some loophole or something in the bill.

>>23826511
yup

you want to build your own suppressed short barreled machinegun in alaska you go right ahead, nobody will stop you or care

>>23826514
Yeah, like the 10th amendment.

>>23826866
based alaska.
I'd move there if there was anything to do up there.
fuck who am I kidding, all I do is go shooting and post on /k/ anyways.
Any good manufacturing jobs up there? I got metalshop experience.

>>23826886
Hell, are there any oil/fracking companies that need fresh out of college marketing majors to better promote the oil industry?

They're doing this in my state too. Im just concerned this is going to backfire and get some people in a lot of trouble and/or cost them a shitton in legal bills.
Whats to stop state or local cops from "arresting" you while feds are informed of the violation and come to "enforce" the law?
Also, just seems like an typical politicattention-grabbing move. Headlines a plenty, not much changing in reality. We'll see I guess.

I think this is over the UN treaty that restricts firearms trading.

The treaty would be unenforceable in the U.S. but this sort of thing keeps the constituency happy.

What does this mean for machine guns in texas?

>>23827907
Nothing, yet.