Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
There are a wide array of laws where there is murky ground between the Federal and state government. In my opinion, those murky areas belong to the states not the Federal government. Don't put words in my mouth. If I have a kid that openly flouts my authority, I have the right to not grant privileges to that kid, that I grant to my other kids. Its no different here.
|
Kids is a ridiculous comparison. Your kids don't pay you taxes and then see those taxes unevenly distributed based on political affiliation.
No one is flouting the federal governments authority. They are free to go in and arrest who they like. The state is saying "we aren't going to do your job for you" which they have every right to do (and do on many other laws).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
Most tax dollars that are collected by income tax are not earmarked towards anything, they go into a fund and Congress votes on the budget. From that fund, grants and expenditures are determined and voted upon. From there, the cash is allocated, and for the most part spent. Not all money allocated to a fund or part of the budget needs to be spent. Should this money be given back to the people, yes, but that is a separate argument.
|
It's not a separate argument. You are taking money from a group of people and not providing them with the same law enforcement protection because of political affiliation. It goes against what the Byrne Grant was set up to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
With regards to the Byrne Grant, it helps fund law enforcement and forensics. Those areas help the executive branch enforce laws at the local level. (If they do not, then is the grant even needed?) It is within the power of the Federal government to withhold the grant. Just as it was within the power of the Federal government to grant the money under Obama if the Federal laws were selectively enforced at the local level.
|
This is just wrong. It is not used to help the executive branch enforce laws at a local level. In fact, the federal government takes a hands-off approach and allows states and localities to use the funding for their specific needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
ust as I would not begrudge Obama the ability to do the same thing.
|
I'm sure if Obama cut funding for roads to states that allow open carry, there would be a different response from the people supporting this.
This is the federal government punishing states who don't follow their political ideology. Something a state's rights person would be irate over. No amount of mental gymnastics covers that hypocrisy.