Posted on 05/21/2010 12:01:45 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar
The federal government is arguing in a gun-rights case pending in federal court in Montana that state plans to exempt in-state guns from various federal requirements themselves make the laws void, because the growing movement certainly would impact "interstate commerce."
The government continues to argue to the court that the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution should be the guiding rule for the coming decision. The argument plays down the significance of both the Second Amendment right to bear arms and the 10th Amendment provision that reserves to states all prerogatives not specifically granted the federal government in the Constitution.
WND has reported both on the lawsuit filed by Montana interests seeking affirmation of the 2009 Montana Firearms Freedom Act as well as the growing movement that has seen six other states, Wyoming, South Dakota, Idaho, Utah, Tennessee and Arizona, follow with similar laws.
The movement worries the federal government. In a brief filed this week in support of government demands that the case be dismissed, posted on the website for the Firearms Freedom Act, attorneys wrote, "Because an illicit market for firearms exists nationwide, a 'gaping hole' in federal firearm regulation would persist if firearms made and sold in Montana were exempted from compliance."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Yeah, those crazy Canadian gang-bangers will surely load up on machine guns and semi-automatic weapons...
Fu@k The federal government and the commerce clause they rode in on...
Our Second Amendment rights are none of the “Feds” ****ing business. The Second Amendment is a warning from We the People to the buffoons temporarily in the government informing them that We the People are not going to tolerate their bull**** when it comes to ownership of firearms.
States are finally pushing back. I agree with that. The Feds have wrecked and disregarded our Constitution long enough. What about the oath that Obama took to UPHOLD our Constitution?
Not too hard to figure out which side of this issue the founding fathers would be on, if they were alive today.
The commerce clause was intended to prevent every state from having it’s own currency and imposing duties and tariffs on other states..that’s pretty much it.
Fixed it for you. You're welcome.
★ FREEDOM! ★
Agreed. They using the Commerce Clause to try to abridge rights and push us into socialism.
BTTT
They using the Commerce Clause to try to abridge rights and push us into socialism.
Please consider joining the Obamacare Class Action lawsuit:
Obamacare Class Action Lawsuit (deadline to join is May 31)
"The purpose of this lawsuit is to reverse Supreme Court precedent related to the Commerce clause and thereby overturn Obamacare. The Supreme Court has historically erred in its interpretation of the Constitutional role of the Federal Government. Recent Supreme Court rulings hint that they may be willing to take another look at Commerce clause precedent. Obamacare is so over reaching and so onerous, that it must either be repealed in Congress or struck down in the courts. We must fight this on both fronts. This is our historic opportunity to reverse America’s trend toward Socialism by overturning this unconstitutional precedent.
If you are a US citizen and agree with the goal of this lawsuit, please join us. If you have concerns about joining, please review the FAQs for more information. Every person we add strengthens the voice of "We the People".
If the states cant enforce Federal immigration law, then the states shouldnt enforce Federal firearms laws either.
Actually, it was to give the federal government the ability to direct goods coming from overseas to the various ports in the States so the 'income', or taxes from such items could be distributed more equitably among them.
This authority was also one of the few tools the feds had to punish a noncomplying State by directing such revenue-generating items away from it as well.
but its only fedgov squeeling and fighting that I see...
They ARE afraid, aren’t they? As Heston said: “from my cold, dead hand”.
Democrats are exempt from telling the truth. An oath is just words on a page, just like the Constitution is a living, breathing document.
As it stands, we're just saber rattling. The Feds feel pretty damn safe ignoring that.
They HAVE used the Commerce Clause to successfully abridge our Rights and to complete those final steps to Socialism.
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.