Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law-(DARES Obama To Challenge it!)
Gather ^ | 5-5-09 | George W.

Posted on 05/06/2009 7:24:33 AM PDT by tcrlaf

The 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 Obama's 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 sol 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 !


TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; Extended News; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Montana
KEYWORDS: banglist; bho44; bhotyranny; donttreadonme; fubo; guns; law; liberty; montana; obama; shallnotbeinfringed; sovereignty; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 321 next last
To: Eaker; Squantos
Utah legislators eye Montana gun law
May 4th, 2009 @ 8:05am
By Andrew Adams

SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah lawmakers are considering following Montana's lead and claiming state's rights in the war over gun control.

The Montana Legislature passed and its governor signed into law a measure making guns that are made and kept within state boundaries exempt from federal regulations. That means they're exempt from things like background checks, licensing and registration.

Several Utah lawmakers want to do the same thing here. They say President Barack Obama and the Congress are anti-gun and will infringe on states' rights.

Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman, tells the Salt Lake Tribune he or another Utah lawmaker will introduce a similar measure next year.

Rep. Ken Sumsion, R-American Fork, told the Tribune he wishes he'd thought of it and would support such a measure "in a heartbeat."

But some legislators, like Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck, D-Salt Lake City, have reservations. They say Montana's law is expected to face legal challenges and they don't want the same thing to happen in Utah.

201 posted on 05/06/2009 3:57:14 PM PDT by glock rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: An.American.Expatriate
This is decided precedent (wrong, but decided) and will not likely be revisited by an Obama court.

In this Montana instance, I disagree. The direct focus of the Montana law disallows any obliquity in which the feds can assert additional interests. So in the event of a case against a Montana person, who in turn retreats behind Montana state law, the specificity of this new state law would require a SCOTUS rehearing on direct merits (should they choose to grant cert.).

In fact, I think that the Montana law might actually have been created to force just this showdown.

202 posted on 05/06/2009 4:06:38 PM PDT by Talisker (When you find a turtle on top of a fence post, you can be damn sure it didn't get there on it's own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks

Cool! The more the better.


203 posted on 05/06/2009 4:12:50 PM PDT by Eaker (The Two Loudest Sounds in the World.....Bang When it should have been Click and the Reverse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

If California can invoke State Nullification for medical marijuana, Montana can do so regarding gun rights.


204 posted on 05/06/2009 4:32:03 PM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

“This Montana law is grandstanding boob-bait for suckers. Same for the effort in Texas.”

I agree. This law simply invites the foolhardy to get themselves sent to Federal prison.

Being a test case is vastly overrated.


205 posted on 05/06/2009 4:37:16 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: b4its2late

Obama already flunked his big tests; but he bent over for the Russians and Chinese, and we never heard peep from the media.

Did you miss those heartwarming moments?


206 posted on 05/06/2009 4:40:13 PM PDT by patriciaruth (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1993905/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Obama already flunked his big tests; but he bent over for the Russians and Chinese, and we never heard peep from the media.

Don't forget the King of Saudi Arabia.

207 posted on 05/06/2009 4:42:38 PM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Repeal 16-17

Yeah, but that was face forward.


208 posted on 05/06/2009 4:47:25 PM PDT by patriciaruth (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1993905/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice

Gotta love Montana and Texas. This gives me hope that people in power will stand up to the Obama Administration and at the same time protect our most sacred document, the Constitution of the United States in the process.


209 posted on 05/06/2009 4:57:31 PM PDT by Pride in the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Yeah, see no it won`t work.

The Un-Constitutional USSC already ruled in 1942 mind you that anything falls under the Commerce Clause, specifically Wickard v. Filburn.


210 posted on 05/06/2009 5:04:53 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

do you know anything about an attempted take over of Smith and Wesson by the Fed?

I couldn’t find any real substantiation of the story I saw.


211 posted on 05/06/2009 5:09:14 PM PDT by HonestConservative (http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/49252)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
A QUIET bump... PFFFFT!
212 posted on 05/06/2009 5:16:52 PM PDT by Tainan (Where's my FOF Indicator?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

The obama admistration is going to lay low on the gun laws until his second term. He’ll have international people in here by then and I think they passed the brown shirt voluntary mandatory law.
With acorn, and states with no ID for voter registration he’ll get the vote unless America wakes up, and with the majority of the people more interested in American idol than they are in there own lives we’re in trouble.
Who will be the republican leader?? Jeb bush, Romney, Palin??/
I want John Bolton to step up to the plate.


213 posted on 05/06/2009 5:27:59 PM PDT by sunny48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sunny48
I want John Bolton to step up to the plate.

Now your talking!

214 posted on 05/06/2009 5:54:27 PM PDT by AvOrdVet ("Put the wagons in a circle for all the good it'll do")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
Montana could join some of the Western Canadian provences to form a new nation based on our original constitutional freedoms. That nation may quickly spread south toward Texas and even some of the northern Mexican states. What an event to witness! Freedom will not tolerate fascist dictators like Obama.
215 posted on 05/06/2009 6:02:24 PM PDT by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HonestConservative
do you know anything about an attempted take over of Smith and Wesson by the Fed? I couldn’t find any real substantiation of the story I saw.

The old Smith & Wesson cut a deal with NY or Boston regarding gun liability. They were owned by the British at the time. Everyone boycotted S&W and the company cratered. The Brits sold it back to an American group who ripped up the agreement and repented. We now buy S&W products. Fine wheel guns and a great (if blemished) history. This all happened during the Clinton onslaught on the 2A.

216 posted on 05/06/2009 6:05:14 PM PDT by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Nathan, have you ever been in Montana in the Winter?? Let's say east of the Divide, I have certificate from the Great Falls Tribune, that I survived 28 days in Great Falls in 1968 in which the maximum temperature was -10, and the lowest temperature was -44 degrees. Add in a nice breeze at about 20 MPH, and I think it meets every requirement to be called cold. West of the Mountains is a different matter.
217 posted on 05/06/2009 6:05:20 PM PDT by BooBoo1000 (Some times I wake up grumpy, other times I let her sleep/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks
Remember, once a state leaves the union, United States Federal law no longer applies. They'll have to send in the military to suppress the secession and that will trigger some need for defense of the new nation. It will all be very complicated if the USA decides to send in the troops. Expect the UN to be a hoppin and Russia, China and many other states to support the secession because they want to break up the USA. Should be interesting. It would be much easier if the Democrats would just get out of Washington and let the people have their federal government back!!!
218 posted on 05/06/2009 6:08:34 PM PDT by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Maryhere
The problem I can forsee is that states that liberalize their gun laws can expect an influx of a criminal element because they use guns too. Also, terrorists might be interested in moving to easy gun open states.

Are you kidding? Only if they want to get their butts shot off! Criminals and terrorists don't move into armed camps!

219 posted on 05/06/2009 6:10:18 PM PDT by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
The interstate commerce clause essentially became meaningless after the FDR.

The interstate commerce clause won't apply if Montana is a sovereign state...it only applies to the remainder of the united states...

220 posted on 05/06/2009 6:11:37 PM PDT by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 321 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson