Indeed.
Posted on 08/27/2009 12:34:31 AM PDT by Ron C.
'This is an issue where the federal government has no business'
Montana statehouse
Supporters of a first-of-a-kind law in Montana that declared weapons or ammunition made and kept in the state were exempt from federal rules are preparing for a court challenge to the federal government's insistence it will regulate those items.
The Montana Shooting Sports Association and the Second Amendment Foundation have formed a strategic alliance with plans to litigate over the Montana Firearms Freedom Act.
The bill was passed by the 2009 Montana Legislature and signed into law by Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Actually, I was referring to Section 1:
...No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States...
bump
Oh yes!! This is going to be great. So much for the belief that Zero being black would ensure the capitulaiton of the country.
There are plenty of troops here, they are called ‘civilians with guns.’ Nothing, not even orders from any president, would prevent US troops from picking up stakes and getting back to the US, even if they had to do it through Mexico.
If states manufacture their own guns, jobs are going to be created overnight. Except in New York and California and Massachusettes.
The Fedgov will never let this go. For one thing, to much tax money. For another, it opens up the door to total deregulation on the federal level.
Which would be great, but not going to happen.
Initially, I have no doubt that there are a good many Federal troops who would fire (if the orders were made in the right way). Long term, less so.
Remember that part of the military’s function is putting down armed revolt. It would be a legal order.
Massive Statewide education on the Constitution and Jury Nullification would render the Fedzilla impotent. All juries should be given a copy of the US Constitution and reminded that it is their duty to judge the law as well as the facts in evidence. Only a “jury of your peers” can take your freedom away.
Amen. And there are one whole heck of a lot of people in PA who hunt and own guns. Remember, we’re bitter clingers.
I have had to delete three attempts to post on this thread.
Suffice it to say, there is going to be a civil war from the people - not a state - if the constitution is going to be restored. Therefore, it is not going to be restored now anymore than last time we got in a tizzy about the liberals going too far leading up to the Perot/Bush/Clinton election.
We tried political action and that did not work. It is not going to be done through legal manuvers as elected and government officials and globalist kings don’t respect the rule of law and they basically hate the American people. Duh. They don’t respect the constitution! What makes anyone think they are going to respect a judge! Did the libs like Bloomberg obey the USSC about the second amendment? No.
With one huge exception, California.
Prepare to lose.
Obama controls the Federal Courts.
ping.
I read that most of the african-americans in the armed forces voted for BHO. Would they side with the citizens or BHO?
Demonstrators at Kent State were shot during the hippie years of the civil rights era. Are you sure that no one would fire on civilians?
I too believe that most of the military would side with the states. But I do have the questions noted above.
That is why BHO is establishing a civilian security force just as well trained and equipped as the military. I think funding has already been passed, and the military budet was cut, unless I am not remembering correctly.
Not to mention that a national civilian security force is going to be established and equipped just as well as the military.
“There could be 25 to 30 states that eventually go this route - most of the Southeast, all of the Southwest - most if not all of ‘flyover country.’
In addition, most of these state will be among those that separate from the USA and become part of a separate Conservative nation.”
I understand your sentiment but I would like to suggest that there will be no seccession, and should never be a secessionist act, among any of these states. The Americans in those states have done nothing to require them to leave and there is nothing wrong with the Constitution or our founders’ goals for us that should be abandoned. Rather, the Americans in those states may have to stand firm and cast out those in other states who have infringed on our freedoms and siphoned our personal property to fund those infringements and other abuses of our nation. I can understand throwing the bums out, but not leaving. These states will remain the USA. The socialists will have to come up with their own country. With all respect, thanks for considering this thought.
“Whether it is a shooting revolution or not, it is still a revolution. And the revolution is to eliminate the socialists and the marxists.”
Good point about Socialists and Marxists—although it isn’t the people I am so concerned about, most are ignorant and naive, the idealogy must be illuminated and seen for the evil that it represents.
Fight hard to stop anyone from suggesting there should be shooting. Technology has evolved—any revolution in 2009 is fought with bytes: communication technology. One twitter message can achieve a positive effect but bullets will harm the shooter. Such anachronistic actions will send negative messages through the 21st century system of technology and communication. Instead of gathering bullets, Americans must grow and spread the message through technology. And, it takes money to put out the message—get funding. Just my thoughts.
8^)
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.