House shoots down federal gun controls-(State Rights vs FedS)

ap ^ | 2/14/09 | KAHRIN DEINES

[Flavius]

Associated Press Writer HELENA, Mont. (AP) Firearms manufactured and used in Montana would be exempt from federal regulation, under a bill the Montana House is supporting.

House Bill 246 aims to circumvent federal authority over interstate commerce, which is the legal basis for most gun regulation in the United States. The bill could have the effect of releasing Montana gun owners from federal registration requirements.

The measure applies to firearms, firearm accessories and ammunition that are made and sold in the state.

The bill's sponsor, Republican Rep. Joel Boniek of Livingston, says his proposal is more about states' rights than about gun rights.

[djsherin]

I like this.
I like this a lot.

[shoutingandpointing]

Trying to do my part to help out those who've been misled by Hollywood and others into believing Montana is THE place for those who find New Hampshire's “Live Free or Die!” attitude too leftist. I can only wish someone would have warned my relatives who moved out to Kalispell all those years ago just how austere and depressing their lives would soon become. ;)

Maybe you will be willing to vouch for my veracity when I remind all those who think Montana is just one big “River Runs Through It” Garden of Eden that virtually ALL those “Montana” movies are filmed in . . . um . . . (thinking) . . . NEW JERSEY!

Yes. If you seek Conservatism and scenery, New Jersey is IT. Well, Joisey and maybe some parts of northern Illinois. ;)

(/sarc)

[AngryJawa]

I’m trying to figure out what part of your post reflected your {/sarc} tag.

[Cuttnhorse]

Flag: White Background with a GOLD $ dollar sign.

With an AR-15 rifle in the background.

[Cuttnhorse]

I nominate Ted Nugent for president of the new Western America nation:

[ForGod'sSake]

Done. I’m hoping, beyond hope maybe, this movement will gain a head of steam. We should be considering ways in which we can encourage the several states to start shaking the feral government’s cage. I appreciate your interest.

[PapaBear3625]

How about taxing home owners for work they do on their homes. After all, they aren’t paying taxes on the labor. ;0)

I can just see the Dems taxing homeschooling parents the market value of their work when teaching their kids, or taxing stay-at-home moms for the market value for daycare.

[PapaBear3625]

For the better part of a hundred years it seems the states were our watchmen when it came to an overbearing feral government. They jeolously guarded their, and coincidentally our rights with something approaching "eternal vigilance".

The mechanism by which that happened was the state legislatures appointing the US senators whose approval was required for legislation and for executive-branch appointments and treaties. Also, the federal government was limited in the revenue they could raise.

These limitations ended in 1913 with the passage of two Constitutional amendments, one providing for direct election of senators, the other authorizing the federal income tax. After that, there was no longer any limit on the growth of federal power, and the feds could use federal money to bribe states into going along.

[mcar]

Thanks
:)

[AngryJawa]

These limitations ended in 1913 with the passage of two Constitutional amendments, one providing for direct election of senators, the other authorizing the federal income tax. After that, there was no longer any limit on the growth of federal power, and the feds could use federal money to bribe states into going along.

Exactly. Those were short-sighted solutions to some existing problems of the time. Just like today, the brilliant minds of our political class had no idea the misery and erosion of liberty they'd eventually cause us all.

Then again, maybe they knew exactly the result they'd achieve. If so, I hope they're rotting in hell.

[ForGod'sSake]

I was wondering how long it would take the libtards to show up with their own claims under, amongst other things, the 10th Amendment.

Seems we have an ally(?) on the left. From HUFFPO, An Opportunity For President Obama: Change America's Status Quo on Drug Policy:

~snip~

Beyond staggering social costs, these policies have seriously damaged the Constitutional rights of us all. In the name of protecting us from our vices, we have assented to the evisceration of our fourth, fifth, eighth and tenth Amendment rights. And recently, in the Supreme Court's Morse v. Frederick decision (colloquially known as "Bong Hits for Jesus"), we trimmed our hallowed First Amendment rights as well: the Court actually ruled that speech can be selectively punished based merely on its marijuana-based content. This is a flagrant affront to the Framers' First Amendment intent that no idea should ever be considered too dangerous to be heard.

~snip~

Strange bedfellows??? I wonder how the libtards will react realizing they are on the same side of an argument with ((gasp))conservatives? For that matter, how do we feel about it?

Could an alliance of sorts work out; as difficult as it might seem? And let the states wanting to, issue free bongs, or free ammo for that matter, to anybody moving within their borders? Original intent has some interesting ramifications, no?

[steve86]

a scumbag who just held up a Exxon station with a 30-06 at 100 yds

That is a heavy caliber to use in a convenience store holdup.

[Idabilly]

He stopped the scumbum from getting away with a 30-06

[LifeComesFirst]

Actually that would be a net destroyer of jobs, as each state needing to have its own gun manufacturers will lead to inefficiencies in gun production, leaving fewer resources for other businesses.

The net job loss would be dispersed throughout the economy though, and less visible than an apparent gain in jobs in a single place, leading to the confusion.

http://www.jim.com/econ/contents.html

[jas3]

“Nah they’ll just use the same justification they used back in the 30s to regulate crops grown by a farmer to be fed to his own livestock. If he hadn’t grown it, it would have had to buy it, thus affecting the interstate market for grain. Same logic would apply to guns, or anything else, the bastids want to control.”

You’re right, I had forgotten that rationale. Unreal. For the Dems, their entire reason for existence is supported by rationale like that...you can (somewhat) understand their paranoia regarding control of the courts.

Yup. The Democrats couldn't care less what the US or any state constitutions say or mean. Note the Democrats in California trying to send a budget to the Governor without the required supermajority voting for it. They couldn't give a hoot what the text says, because to them any Consitution is a just a piece of toilet paper with which to wipe their ass.

jas3

[fnord]

“A couple of ruby ridges or Waco’s will definitely turn the population against the government in spectacular ways.”

Just like the first time they happened, right?

[wku man]

Ada County is getting overrun by pu**y-wimp CommieLibs, too. I live in solidly conservative West Boise, but the North End, SE Boise, and pockets in Meridian are tilted so far to the Left, is messes with radio reception. WTSHTF, we'll have our hands full here.

Grangeville is looking nicer and nicer all the time.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[Cuttnhorse]

I’m in Lemhi Co, and fortunately we have so few democrats they hold their meetings in a phone booth; of course we have to disenfect the phone booth.

[jtom36]

ForGod'sSake
For the better part of a hundred years it seems the states were our watchmen when it came to an overbearing feral government. They jeolously guarded their, and coincidentally our rights with something approaching "eternal vigilance".

PB3625
These limitations ended in 1913 with the passage of two Constitutional amendments, one providing for direct election of senators, the other authorizing the federal income tax. After that, there was no longer any limit on the growth of federal power, and the feds could use federal money to bribe states into going along.

Actually, the States themselves abandoned their 'watchman' status when they rejected the 14th amendments protecting of our rights to life, liberty or property, without due process of law.
We now have -every- level of govt, - fed, state and local, ignoring the constitutional limits of power.

[ForGod'sSake]

Actually, the States themselves abandoned their 'watchman' status when they rejected the 14th amendments protecting of our rights to life, liberty or property, without due process of law.

It might have been helpful since the 14th covers a good deal of territory to expand on your opinion. I'm guessing eminent domain???