Go Montana go

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Marlin T, Apr 6, 2009.

  1. Marlin T

    Marlin T Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,914
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Mont.-made gun bill awaits governor’s OK
    By KAHRIN DEINES Associated Press - 04/06/2009
    Rep. Joel Boniek, R-Livingston

    Montana-made guns may form the basis for a court showdown over states’ rights if the governor signs a bill to release some firearms in the state from federal regulation.

    The proposed law aims to exempt firearms, weapons components and ammunition made in Montana and kept in Montana from federal gun laws. Since the state has few gun laws of its own, the legislation would allow some gunowners and sellers in the state to skirt registration, licensing requirements and background checks entirely.

    “We’d like to just be able to make our own guns here in Montana and have the feds stay out of it,” said Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, which helped draft the bill.

    The real target, though, is the U.S. Supreme Court. And Marbut and others believe they can hit that mark with a simple Montana-made youth-model single-shot bolt-action .22 rifle.

    In particular, they plan to find a “squeaky clean” Montanan who wants to send a note to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives threatening to build and sell about 20 such rifles without federal dealership licensing. If the ATF tells them it’s illegal, they will then file a lawsuit in federal court — with any luck triggering a legal battle that lands in the nation’s highest court.

    House Bill 246 sailed through the Montana Legislature, but Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer has not yet offered a position on the measure, which awaits his action.

    The federal enforcement agency for gun laws has also not taken a firm stand.

    “ATF is not going to take a position on this because we don’t make any of the laws, we just enforce the laws that Congress makes,” said Carrie DiPirro, spokeswoman for the Denver field division, which oversees Montana.

    Through the Constitution, Congress has authority to regulate interstate commerce, which serves as the legal basis for gun regulation in the United States.

    Efforts to bypass that authority have been heard before by the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2005, the court upheld federal regulation of marijuana in California, even if its use is limited to noncommercial purposes — such as medical reasons — and it is grown and used within a state’s borders.

    However, Randy Barnett, the lawyer and constitutional scholar who represented the plaintiff in the California case, said the introduction of a “Made in Montana’ stamp — and stay in Montana guideline — might give some mettle to Montana’s latest pitch for sovereignty.

    In the Gonzalez v. Raich case argued by Barnett, the court said that because marijuana produced within and outside of California is essentially indistinguishable, the government must regulate both to enforce national drug laws. Montana, though, could potentially argue that its guns are sufficiently unique and segregated as to lie outside of overarching federal regulatory schemes, Barnett said.

    The Montana effort follows fears here and elsewhere that the election of Barack Obama as president would trigger more gun regulation, sparking a rush to stock up on firearms in the months following the inauguration.

    But supporters insist House Bill 246 has been tailored to hit a different bull’s eye than gun freedoms.

    “Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I’d like to support that,” said bill sponsor Rep. Joel Boniek, R-Livingston, during its House debate. “But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It’s about state rights.”
     
  2. glocknut

    glocknut Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2003
    Messages:
    12,490
    Location:
    THE FORUM MASCOTT...
    Its my opinion that the federal government has completely overstepped the original boundrys set by the founding fathers of our country...
    The congress and the senate has it completely backwards. They think WE serve THEM.... when it is supposed to be THEM serving US!

    I hope Montana wins this fight. And i will go a step further by saying that i think things are bad enough that if there is ever a state or group of states that decide to break away from this Fascism that has swept our country of late...if they ever do break away...that is where i will be headed as quickly as i can manage!!!!

    mike
    gn
     

  3. 94z07

    94z07 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    337
    Yes the Federal Government is involved in way more things than it has the constitutional basis for.

    There is one clause in the Constitution, in particular, that has been used by the far left extremist Justices to give some cover to Federal government power grabs. The power granted to the Federal government to regulate interstate commerce was intended to keep the States from charging duties on out of state goods. It was intended to promote commerce not to strangle it. From bridges and housing projects to cheese and school lunches, the Federal government has grabbed power from the people using this power to regulate interstate commerce.

    It is worth your time to read up on Wickard v. Filburn.

    In a nutshell, FDR’s socialist packed SCOTUS said that a farmer, Filburn, could not grow wheat for his own use on his own land.

    So I hope Montana does well with its attempt to undermine the Federal power grab. The argument in Wickard v. Filburn was that the wheat Filburn grew on his own land for his own use would reduce the demand in the area, state, region and nation to the point that it would affect the wheat price and therefore fell under the interstate commerce power. Mind you, we’re only talking about 200 or so bushels.

    So if the Feds use the Filburn case and say that the Montana guns affect demand outside of Montana then they’ve got case law on their side.

    I really do hate those who legislate from the bench.
     
  4. Marlin T

    Marlin T Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,914
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Montana sovereignty bills have national scope
    By KAHRIN DEINES Associated Press - 4/15/09

    HELENA — Gov. Brian Schweitzer has signed into law a bill that aims to exempt Montana-made guns from federal regulation.

    House Bill 246 was sponsored by Republican Rep. Joel Boniek of Livingston. It applies only to guns made and kept in Montana. Its supporters hope it triggers a court case to test the legal basis for federal rules governing gun sales.

    The measure is one of many introduced this year by state lawmakers across the nation that seek to assert state sovereignty.

    Along with the gun bill, Montana legislators are also considering a resolution that affirms the federal government only has those powers listed in the U.S. Constitution.

    House Resolution 3 follows an effort that failed earlier this session. It was heard Wednesday by the House Judiciary Committee.
     
  5. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Yeah baby!!! At least one state has some real brass b@lls when it comes to telling the fed where it stands.

    Now if the 20 or so other states with "state sovereignty issues in the works will get off the pot we may have a chance at restoring a constitutional form of federal government.
     
  6. TranterUK

    TranterUK Guest

    Tell them I can be there in 8 hours, what sort do they want to make....