Most people never make a citizen's arrest.
Most people never use a gun in self defense.
Most people never use a fire extinguisher.
Most people never do CPR on someone.
Most people never do the Heimlich maneuver on someone.
The list goes on. But all of them are useful to society and should...
Local law enforcement has no access to the NFRTR, and it is a violation of federal law for the ATF to share information from it with local law enforcement. There is no way for local law enforcement to verify registration other than by asking the putative registrant.
Congress has exclusive authority to regulate interstate commerce. FL can punish crimes that occur within its borders, but it cannot punish crossing state lines.
But these are laws the GOVERNOR of FL is talking about imposing as STATE OFFENSES.
And even federal law cannot impose stiffer penalties on a GA resident than a FL resident for the same offense. Crossing state lines to commit the crime may be a (federal) offense, but the crime there is...
Stiffer penalties if you come from out of state? Um, you can't have one set of punishments for your own residents and a different set of punishments for residents of other states.
I'm not sure that proves anything. Anyone could take a rifle, turn it into a pistol, take a picture of it with the newspaper, and say it was just built. That is, the newspaper doesn't really add anything.
It hurts a lot. Our legislative session is, by Constitutional provision, only 40 days long. Legislators only have so much time to introduce bills, read bills, confer about bills, debate bills, hold hearings on bills, and, ultimately, vote on bills. Then the same process that takes place in...
Not exactly. Here, if you violate a bond condition, you can be arrested and taken to the court that issued you a bond for a determination of what to do with you. In WI, violating a bail condition is actually a separate crime. He was out on bail in another county, and was arrested in Brown...
The issue here is not whether they can deny his application -- they can. The issue is whether they can keep the $200 in the process. Maybe they can, maybe they can't. But it's not fiscally sound for them to find out.
"It's going to cost us thousands of dollars to hire a lawyer to defend against refunding your $200, and against your discovery requests to find out whether our discriminatory practices are reasonable or not, so here's your f-ing money."