Author Topic: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty  (Read 3623 times)

MicroBalrog

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,505
New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« on: April 17, 2009, 09:13:00 PM »
New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty

By KAHRIN DEINES - Associated Press - 04/16/09
Gov. Brian Schweitzer has signed into law a bill that aims to exempt Montana-made guns from federal regulation, adding firepower to a battery of legislative efforts to assert states’ rights across the nation.

“It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana,” Democrat Schweitzer said.

Since the law applies only to those guns that are made and kept in Montana, its impact is limited. The state is home to just a handful of specialty gun makers, known for recreating rifles used to settle the West, and most of their customers are out-of-state.

But supporters of the new law hope it triggers a court case testing the legal basis for federal rules governing gun sales.

“What we need here is for Montana to be able to handle Montana’s business and affairs,” bill sponsor Rep. Joel Boniek, a Republican and wilderness guide from Livingston, told fellow lawmakers during the bill’s House debate.

The measure is one of many introduced by state lawmakers across the nation seeking to confront what some see as a federal overreach into state matters that will be extended with the national stimulus plan.

Along with the gun bill, Montana legislators are considering a resolution that affirms the 10th Amendment principle that the federal government only has those powers that are specifically given to it by the U.S. Constitution.

“The whole goal is to awaken the people so that we can return to a properly grounded republic,” Rep. Michael More, R-Gallatin Gateway and the Montana resolution’s sponsor, said at a House committee hearing Wednesday.

As many as fifteen other Legislatures have also been mulling resolutions that buck federal control in states such as New Hampshire, South Carolina, Missouri and Oklahoma.

“The balance has swung far to the extreme to the empowerment of the federal government, and to the harm of the individual states,” More said.

Opponents of the state sovereignty bids, however, warn they could give legitimacy to the kind of anti-government ideas that fueled the militia movement in Montana and elsewhere.

“When you really actually get in and look at it there is a lot of what we feel is very dangerous, very anti-government language that reads very similar to posters for the militia movement in the 1990s,” said Travis McAdam, the interim director of the Montana Human Rights Network, a group formed to oppose racism and extremism.

One of the few state Senators who voted against the gun bill — Sen. Christine Kaufmann, D-Helena — is that group’s director when the Legislature is not in session. She ties the bills’ proliferation to fears about the Democratic administration of President Barack Obama and stimulus spending.

“I do think that there is a kind of renewed vehemence to this kind of right-wing rhetoric being spewed by conservative talk show hosts to rile the troops and they are using the fact that we have a Democratic, black president as one of their rallying calls,” Kaufmann said.

The Montana bills are being sponsored by freshman legislators who ran as part of a broader effort to oust more moderate Republicans in last spring’s elections.

House Resolution 3, the one sponsored by More, follows another states’ rights declaration that deadlocked in the same committee earlier this session, although the committee’s chairman said it may have a shot on its second try.

House Bill 246, the Montana-made gun bill, cleared the Legislature easily before reaching the governor’s desk.

Its supporters next 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 rifles without federal dealership licensing. If the ATF says it’s illegal, the gun bill’s backers plan to file a lawsuit in federal court with the goal of launching a legal showdown that lands in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Montana Shooting Sports Association, which drafted the bill, has said it will raise the money to pay for any legal costs.

“It doesn’t cost us any money and I like guns,” Schweitzer said after signing the bill.

“I like big guns, I like little guns, I like pistols, I like rifles, and I would like to buy a gun that’s made in Montana,” Schweitzer said.

Micro Sez:

Considering the results of Raich, this doesn't seem as such a good idea.
Destroy The Enemy in Hand-to-Hand Combat.

"...tradition and custom becomes intertwined and are a strong coercion which directs the society upon fixed lines, and strangles liberty. " ~ William Graham Sumner

Standing Wolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,978
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2009, 10:08:18 PM »
Quote
“When you really actually get in and look at it there is a lot of what we feel is very dangerous, very anti-government language that reads very similar to posters for the militia movement in the 1990s,” said Travis McAdam, the interim director of the Montana Human Rights Network, a group formed to oppose racism and extremism.

They feel it's very dangerous language. Leftist extremists sincerely believe the First Amendment exists exclusively for their benefit.
No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.

Gewehr98

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,010
  • Yee-haa!
    • Neural Misfires (Blog)
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2009, 10:45:03 PM »
Maybe Montana will be next on the "We want to secede" bandwagon?
"Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round...

http://neuralmisfires.blogspot.com

"Never squat with your spurs on!"

Monkeyleg

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,589
  • Tattaglia is a pimp.
    • http://www.gunshopfinder.com
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2009, 10:57:02 PM »
Quote
Opponents of the state sovereignty bids, however, warn they could give legitimacy to the kind of anti-government ideas that fueled the militia movement in Montana and elsewhere.

Since when is the Constitution "anti-government"?

RaspberrySurprise

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,020
  • Yub yub Commander
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2009, 11:02:49 PM »
Since when is the Constitution "anti-government"?

The Constitution has always been anti-government to a point. A good part of it is written to protect the people from the government it established.
Look, tiny text!

41magsnub

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,579
  • Don't make me assume my ultimate form!
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2009, 12:26:10 AM »
Schweitzer is sort of a buffoon, but at least he is on the right side on this one.  I still probably won't vote for him. 

Mabs2

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,979
  • セクシー
    • iCarly
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2009, 10:17:11 AM »
It sounds very dangerous and anti government?
I thought that was the point.
Quote from: jamisjockey
Sunday it felt a little better, but it was quite irritated from me rubbing it.
Quote from: Mike Irwin
If you watch any of the really early episodes of the Porter Waggoner show she was in (1967) it's very clear that he was well endowed.
Quote from: Ben
Just wanted to give a forum thumbs up to Dick.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,800
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2009, 03:40:30 PM »
Isn't it the interstate commerce clause that allows the regulation of the sale of guns?  I could be wrong.  I sort of doubt the courts would roll that back.
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

Brad Johnson

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,093
  • Witty, charming, handsome, and completely insane.
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #8 on: April 18, 2009, 03:54:12 PM »
Isn't it the interstate commerce clause that allows the regulation of the sale of guns?  I could be wrong.  I sort of doubt the courts would roll that back.

It allows for it because the guns might cross state lines

See, there is this strange little idea...

"Iis reasonable to assume that [insert item(s)] may be transported, sold, or possessed anywhere in the United States." (paraphrased, of course)

...which has become the single most bastardized piece of legislation in our country's history.

In day-to-day parlance it means the government presumes each and every item, service, or person you can think of will eventually cross a state line.  Thus the Interstate Commerce provision is applicable to everything. 

In other words they presume they not only can but must regulate everything because, hey, it's gonna cross a state line sooner or later.

Brad
« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 03:57:28 PM by Brad Johnson »
It's all about the pancakes, people.
"And he thought cops wouldn't chase... a STOLEN DONUT TRUCK???? That would be like Willie Nelson ignoring a pickup full of weed."
-HankB

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,449
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2009, 04:03:35 PM »
And since construction materials and environmental effects will also cross state lines, we need a federal building code and permit system.  See, even a stationary building is interstate commerce.    :police:
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

lone_gunman

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #10 on: April 18, 2009, 04:06:28 PM »
Quote
In day-to-day parlance it means the government presumes each and every item, service, or person you can think of will eventually cross a state line.  Thus the Interstate Commerce provision is applicable to everything. 


Even if the gun is built entirely in Montana, with raw materials from Montanta, and sold in Montana, and kept in Montanta, an never ever leaves Montana, the federal government will still rule tht building the gun affects interstate commerce because it impacts the sale of weapons produced in other states. That is, if you buy the Montana gun, you don't have to buy one build in Connecticut, so you have affected interstate commerce.

There was a court case that involved a farmer, cows, and grain that sets precedent for this.  I believe it was Wickard v. Filburn.  Filburn was a farmer and grew some wheat that he used for feed for his cows.  He grew more wheat than he was allotted by the govt, and the govt charged him a penalty of 49cents per bushel.  He contested, and it went to the SC.  He argued that the wheat he produced was not marketed, and consumed on his own land.  The SC ruled that this had an impact on the overall market, since he did not have to buy feed.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 04:12:28 PM by lone_gunman »

Matthew Carberry

  • Formerly carebear
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,281
  • Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2009, 08:23:50 PM »
The Alaska house just passed a similar language bill.  Not sure if it went to the Senate yet.

My new pet issue is forcing the state college system to allow CCW per state law.  Right now it is a policy violation that can result in expulsion.

My end goal?  Get Alaska the worst Brady rating possible.
"Not all unwise laws are unconstitutional laws, even where constitutional rights are potentially involved." - Eugene Volokh

"As for affecting your movement, your Rascal should be able to achieve the the same speeds no matter what holster rig you are wearing."

Werewolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,126
  • Lead, Follow or Get the HELL out of the WAY!
Re: New gun law aimed at asserting sovereignty
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2009, 03:00:19 PM »
The Constitution has always been anti-government to a point. A good part of it is written to protect the people from the government it established.

That notion died in April 1865 when the Federal government began its ever expanding grab for power over the people.

I doubt if one in 20 of the 536 men who rule the USA know that "A good part of it is written to protect the people from the government it established."

Some like FDR knew it but didn't care and did things they knew to be unconstitutional - why is beyond my ability to understand but they did and still do.
Life is short, Break the rules, Forgive quickly, Kiss slowly, Love
truly, Laugh uncontrollably, And never regret anything that made you smile.

Fight Me Online