Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law
05-08-2009 03:39 AM
Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law
Executive Summary The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.
The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal confiscation of privately owned firearms.
Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.
Important Points If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.
Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.
Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.
Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.
There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.
Discussion Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.
Text of the New Law
HOUSE BILL NO. 246
INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON
AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:
Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the "Montana Firearms Freedom Act".
Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:
(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:
(1) "Borders of Montana" means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.
(2) "Firearms accessories" means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.
(3) "Generic and insignificant parts" includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.
(4) "Manufactured" means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.
Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.
Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;
(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;
(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or
(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.
Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words "Made in Montana" clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.
Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].
Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.
05-08-2009 08:47 AM
At least whoever wrote this gets the ploy. The federal government has used the interstate commerce clause to regulate everything from drugs to wheat, even if it is grown, sold, used in, and never leaves one state. The reasoning being it still affects the overall market. Bull****? Yeah. But the precedent is against Montana so if this goes to the courts they will lose.
Originally Posted by hillbilly_210
05-08-2009 11:37 AM
Not if they secede from the USA, and from what i gather that is their next move.
05-08-2009 11:56 AM
Montana’s argument is sound. Unfortunately, this is the inevitable result of an aggressively out of control growing central government that has run out of external enemies to prosecute because this dumbass who calls himself president released America's enemies to our enemies. Now, the liar obama is going after Americans that have the 2nd amendment right to challenge and overthrow a government when it becomes a tyranny.
Originally Posted by CDB
05-08-2009 12:26 PM
If you give a **** about the law and what it means, yeah. But...
Originally Posted by blackdiamund
Didn't work out too well last time we tried that though, if you'll recall. While I personally would love to throw in and leave the union as well, it's not going to be taken lightly should a state try. And what if they succeed?
Unfortunately, this is the inevitable result of an aggressively out of control growing central government that has run out of external enemies to prosecute because this dumbass who calls himself president released America's enemies to our enemies. Now, the liar obama is going after Americans that have the 2nd amendment right to challenge and overthrow a government when it becomes a tyranny.
Every state has their share of lunatics and statists. Most of the time it's not the scope or level of the Fed's policies and powers people disagree with, but their targets. I really don't see any state doing much of anything if it secedes from the union other than the state government taking up the reigns and powers of the Feds and, depending on which state you're talking about, instituting some kind of religious or hedonist rule. Perhaps I'm cynical, but I think most people are just pissed because they want their own version of tyranny, and I seriously doubt any state that secedes from the union will be a beacon of freedom. More likely the state's government will take the Fed's power and for all purposes say, "No, this is how it's done, these are the people you're supposed to be harrassing, these are the civil rights that don't count, these are the expendable citizens, etc."
Slavery to the government is not something people by and large object to. They just want to be the one to hold the whips more often than not. There's little truly principled objection to state power in and of itself left in the US.
05-08-2009 05:07 PM
Texas and Utah is supposed to follow Montana on this.
05-08-2009 05:15 PM
05-08-2009 10:48 PM
****ing awesome. Im ****ing proud if so. Ready to secede and fight if necessary.
Originally Posted by hillbilly_210
This hangs in my room.
Texas Legislature Online - 81(R) History for HB 1863
05-09-2009 07:20 PM
05-09-2009 09:00 PM
Proud to say I've got Montana plates on my truck.
However, MT won't go as far as to secede.
ADVANCED MUSCLE SCIENCE
Strongest On The Market
RECOVERBRO: Est. Post #3222
05-10-2009 01:13 PM
It's about time we get our given rights back to bear arms. No gov't should be allowed to supress their people they govern.
05-11-2009 09:23 PM
If and when this gets kicked up to the supreme court, and it likely will if enough other states follow suit, the repercussions of the decision would be huge. There are least 4, maybe 5, justices who are known to oppose the interstate commmerce clause in one way or another. It could go either way.
Win... and the way business is done in America becomes free to operate in a way independent of government intervention not seen in many years.
Lose... and congress steps in an inconceivably large powergrab that will make everyone involved wish they had never brought it up.
This would be much more than about guns, as if that isn't big enough. There's a lot at stake...
Win big, lose BIG.
05-11-2009 10:06 PM
Originally Posted by natas9
Your right it is about much more than guns. It's about states rights.
ADVANCED MUSCLE SCIENCE
Strongest On The Market
RECOVERBRO: Est. Post #3222
05-12-2009 10:31 AM
It looks like Texas' legislative session will end before this can be considered.
05-12-2009 10:55 AM
Something similar is going on here in California too. Except we want solar powered cars, birkenstocks and dildos.
05-12-2009 11:13 AM
This will be fun to watch - more power to Montana and its residents. As for the rest of us - stockpile.
Similar Forum Threads
By roids1 in forum Politics
Last Post: 07-11-2009, 11:01 PM
By yeahright in forum News and Articles
Last Post: 06-11-2006, 12:41 PM
By T-Bone in forum News and Articles
Last Post: 03-20-2005, 03:06 PM
By Brodus in forum General Chat
Last Post: 08-14-2004, 05:22 PM
By Beta BBer in forum General Chat
Last Post: 05-21-2003, 07:02 PM
Tags for this Thread