Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Montana legislature puts down fed. "gun control"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Montana legislature puts down fed. "gun control"

    I thought this was mighty encouraging.


    Jon

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2...bnews/br26.txt


    House shoots down federal gun controls
    Posted on Feb. 14
    By KAHRIN DEINES of the Associated Press

    HELENA (AP) - Montana lawmakers fired another shot in battles for states’ rights as they supported letting some Montana gun owners and dealers skip reporting their transactions to the federal government.

    Under House Bill 246, firearms made in Montana and used in Montana would be exempt from federal regulation. The same would be true for firearm accessories and ammunition made and sold in the state.

    “What we need here is for Montana to be able to handle Montana’s business and affairs,” Republican Rep. Joel Boniek told fellow lawmakers Saturday. The wilderness guide from Livingston defeated Republican incumbent Bruce Malcolm in last spring’s election.
    *
    Boniek’s measure aims to circumvent federal authority over interstate commerce, which is the legal basis for most gun regulation in the United States. The bill potentially could release Montanans from both federal gun registration requirements and dealership licensing rules. Since the state has no background-check laws on its own books, the legislation also could free gun purchasers from that requirement.

    “Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I’d like to support that,” Boniek said. “But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It’s about state rights.”

    The House voted 64-36 for the bill on Saturday. If it clears a final vote, the measure will go to the Senate.

    House Republicans were joined by 14 Democrats in passing the measure.

    “I would hope that our U.S. Supreme Court would begin to retreat from what I think is an abusive interpretation of our interstate commerce clause,” said Rep. Deborah Kottel, a Democrat from Great Falls who supports the measure.

    That clause in the U.S. Constitution grants Congress authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the states. The Supreme Court has handled cases seeking to limit the clause’s application in recent years. In 2005, the court upheld federal authority to regulate marijuana under the clause, even when its use is limited to noncommercial purposes n such as medical reasons n and it is grown and used within a state’s borders.

    The Montana bill follows fears here and elsewhere that the election of Barack Obama as president will trigger more gun regulation. In the months before Obama’s inauguration, Montanans rushed to stock up on guns, pushing gun sales beyond normal benchmarks despite the recession.

    Opponents of the measure worry lax regulations in the state could lead to a similar surge in both gun sales and gun manufacturing.

    “Who are we bringing in and is this the kind of business we want to have in this state?” asked Rep. Sue Malek, D-Missoula. “I want our state to be recognized as a state that cares about people, and that cares about the environment.”

    The bill is one of a number the Legislature is considering that may extend gun rights in Montana.

    Earlier in the week, the House passed another measure, HB228, that would let Montanans carry concealed weapons in city limits without having permits.

    On Saturday the House Judiciary Committee narrowly passed a resolution that affirms Montanans’ right to carry weapons in national parks and wildlife refuges.
    Nurse by night, Alaska adventurer by day!

  • #2
    Hopefully that is the beginning of a trend soon to be followed by the majority of other states.

    Comment


    • #3
      I love it! Let's see more states follow that lead.
      Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?


      Comment


      • #4
        And being isolated such as we are, it makes even more sense for Alaska to do something like this. Time to write the state legislature & our Gov about this idea...
        Winter is Coming...

        Go GeocacheAlaska!

        Comment


        • #5
          Good for Montana!

          In states that pass something like this, I'll bet you see a lot of small machine shops putting out finished receivers. Everything else could be mail ordered.

          Comment


          • #6
            Interesting article. Very relevant to some work I'm doing right now exploring the limits of state and federal authority under the federal and state constitutions. Good for Montana. I predict it will ultimately end up in the Supreme Court since I doubt the BHO administration will just sit by and let this happen. Hard to say what will happen there. The current make-up of the Court might be in our favor, but that is difficult to predict with certainty.
            We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.
            James Madison

            Comment


            • #7
              New Hampshire as well

              This is an excerpt from an article re: New Hampshire's push for state's rights.

              Four New Hampshire legislators introduced HCR-6 [1] to re-invoke states rights enumerated in Jefferson’s and Madison’s Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. [2] The resolution is a clear shot across the bow of the New Leftist Administration in Washington DC, which is rushing to expand federal control over every aspect of American life, industry and enterprise.

              HCR-6 borrows much of its text from Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions, but adds more specific warnings concerning several real affronts to state and individual rights currently under attack by the new Washington elite.

              The New Hampshire document resolves…

              “That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court; and

              That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:

              I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.

              II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

              III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

              IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.

              V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

              VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

              That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and

              That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.”

              Comment


              • #8
                Great piece of leg.

                Great piece of legislation. I too hope this will be the start of a trend. Great read.
                Marc Theiler

                Comment


                • #9
                  Welcomed news

                  I appreciate you guys taking the time to post these examples of preemptive actions by New Hampshire and Montana to preserve the civil liberties of their citizenry. These actions and your posts are bright spots on a landscape that has been awfully dark and discouraging lately.

                  I'll pass these actions along to my state representatives and the governor's office. Thanks again for the spirit boost.

                  Doc

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Wonderful

                    I can only say that this is renewing my faith in the strength and courage of those in our country who still believe in our Constitution. Our enemies have made this mistake before, thinking the US just a decadent somnambulant giant, until we are caused to show our wrath at those who would try to bring us down, foreign or domestic. I can only hope that other states follow suit. God Bless the USA!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      That doesn't surprise me about Montana but New Hampshire??? I'm still shaking my head over that one. That is a beautifully crafted, powerful instrument the have! One thing every State needs to do is to clairfy their sovereignty over the "war powers act". As I understand it, the war powers act gives the president sweeping powers that he was never given by the constitution, never was intended to have and should never have. It's not just talking about war in the common sence but also when used as "war on terror", "war on poverty", "war on hunger", "war on ignorance", etc. Anytime the president says he is declaring war on some noble sounding "enemy", what it really means is he's keeping the war powers act alive. God bless America!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        State sovereignty

                        Just wanted to let you know that I passed along information to my state representative about other states taking a stand on the 10th Amendment - and I received what sounded like a positive response. More encouragement from fellow Alaskans can only help.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Remember the Civil War nearly 150 yrs ago?

                          Although the liberal history books make it look like the war was fought over slavery it was much more about states rights. The north was supporting the government with import / export taxes (and continued to do so for many years afterwards) that was a huge and unfair burden on the South. I didn't realize until recently what the real significance of Ft. Sumpter was - it was a customs house for the collection of taxes off the goods the South imported and exported - it was not a significant military fortification.

                          Of course the South has been know politically for supporting states rights in many areas.

                          Looks like the north and other parts of the USA may finally be catching on to the concept of states rights!
                          Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
                          ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I emailed Gene Therriot (cant spell his last name) about this. I am hoping to hear back soon. Maybe something like that will get going up here.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Email your senator and rep

                              Everyone reading this should email their state senator and local house rep and encourage a similiar type of state legislation. Let Palin know also, if they get enough pressure maybe they will do something.

                              Comment

                              Footer Adsense

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X