Skip to comments.
MONTANA DEFIES FEDS - THREATENS SECESSION!
Post Scripts ^
| 5/4/09
| Jack Lee
Posted on 05/05/2009 11:31:04 AM PDT by OneVike
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at norcalblogs.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Montana
KEYWORDS: 10a; 10thamendment; 2ndamendmant; banglist; donttreadonliberty; donttreadonme; fubo; gunownershiprights; liberty; lping; montana; obama; secession; sovereignty; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 281-296 next last
To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
I’m a little hazy on this as I read it some time ago.
But Mark Levin in “Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America”, said there was a precedent setting case involving a midwestern farmer who was selling wheat. I don;t remember the specifics, but how he was selling it didn’t comply with Federal Law. He maintained he was only selling it in state. The Feds challenged him in court and SCOTUS in a BAD and precedent setting decision said his products COULD cross state lines even though he personally didn’t sell them across state lines and this allowed the camel of federal control to get its nose under the tent and start getting involved in all kinds of regualtions.
Hope Montana wins.
21
posted on
05/05/2009 11:50:06 AM PDT
by
ZULU
(God guts and guns made America great. Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam.)
To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
Except the Supreme Court ruled against this almost 70 years ago.
...the classic case of Wickard v. Filburn (1942). The Court here decided that a farmer growing wheat for his own use on his own property did in fact fall under the heading of "interstate commerce" and thus was subject to federal regulation. Homegrown wheat, in the Court's words, "supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Homegrown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce."
It absolutely makes one's head hurt.
22
posted on
05/05/2009 11:50:18 AM PDT
by
Straight Vermonter
(Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
To: OneVike
Texas has the same law now introduced in it’s House. I heard a State Senator on local Houston radio yesterday saying if it got traction he would introduce it into State Senate...
23
posted on
05/05/2009 11:50:21 AM PDT
by
El Laton Caliente
(NRA Life Member & www.Gunsnet.net Moderator)
To: OneVike; SendShaqtoIraq; ChicagahAl; SandRat; mia; HiTech RedNeck; SolidWood; Canedawg; rrrod; ...
Ping;
Big 2nd and 10th amendment article on Montana. This could be huge.
24
posted on
05/05/2009 11:51:30 AM PDT
by
OneVike
(Just a Christian waiting to go home)
To: skeeter
Good plan. I don’t think naval gunfire could reach Montana.
Cruise missles, on the other hand, are a different story.
Looks like the balloon may be gaining some much needed altitude.
To: OneVike
26
posted on
05/05/2009 11:52:12 AM PDT
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: Squantos
This is all meaningless posturing until somebody actually
does something. What would garner attention would be something like a
gun raid on behalf of the federal authorities, immediately followed by their arrest and incarceration by the local Sheriff.
THAT would be something to watch! But this doesn't mean anything until somebody takes it from paper and makes it
physical.
The next logical step is a
blockading of the harbor at some level...at some point, followed by escalation.
27
posted on
05/05/2009 11:53:01 AM PDT
by
hiredhand
(Understand the CRA and why we're facing economic collapse - see my about page.)
To: skeeter
28
posted on
05/05/2009 11:53:02 AM PDT
by
Eagle Eye
(Defending RINOs is the same as defending Liberals.)
To: OneVike
Only problem is the Montanans lost their guts and did not include automatic firearms. I don't know exactly what this does except prevent registration or a future assault weapons ban. It didn't challenge the 1934 Federal Firearms act (which was wrongly decided by the way)
Anybody out there in MT land that can correct me on my interpretation I would appreciate it. I am a 1967 UofM grad by the way and love the state except for all the libs from CA moving in and buying up land.
29
posted on
05/05/2009 11:53:49 AM PDT
by
mosaicwolf
(Strength and Honor)
To: central_va
Manufactured means assembled. A person could buy components and assemble them and they will have “manufactured” a gun in the state.
The Japanese used to import cars, with a few parts missing, and put the parts on here so they were then manufactured in the USA.
30
posted on
05/05/2009 11:54:15 AM PDT
by
Straight Vermonter
(Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
To: willgolfforfood
31
posted on
05/05/2009 11:55:07 AM PDT
by
Gabrial
(Obama Lied - The Republic Died)
To: Buckeye McFrog
The author is a conservative member of the Ca North Sate. He usually does to them what they do to Republicans.
Jack Lee is a former special forces member of the military and a long time conservative activist who has been fighting the good fight for a very long time.
32
posted on
05/05/2009 11:55:54 AM PDT
by
OneVike
(Just a Christian waiting to go home)
To: OneVike
Hmmm, the actual article name is “MONTANA DEFIES FEDS OVER RESTRICTIVE GUN LAWS”. Succession is only mentioned as speculation by the author. Your title is misleading.
33
posted on
05/05/2009 11:56:09 AM PDT
by
FourPeas
(I am the pink flamingo on the great lawn of life.)
To: ZULU
34
posted on
05/05/2009 11:56:32 AM PDT
by
Straight Vermonter
(Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
To: OneVike
They'd have to raise taxes. Montana survives on a net inflow of Federill Funds.
35
posted on
05/05/2009 11:57:01 AM PDT
by
Carry_Okie
(It's time to waterboard that teleprompter and find out what it knows.)
To: hiredhand
I like your image! I put this one together after the election:
36
posted on
05/05/2009 11:59:04 AM PDT
by
Straight Vermonter
(Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
To: FourPeas
37
posted on
05/05/2009 12:00:14 PM PDT
by
OneVike
(Just a Christian waiting to go home)
To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
Unfortunately, this technique was tried in agriculture back during FDR’s reign. The supreme court decided that a local farmer was still engaged in interstate commerce even if the wheat never even left the farm! This is in Mark Levin’s new book Liberty & Tyranny.
But it still sends a message.
38
posted on
05/05/2009 12:00:20 PM PDT
by
Geoffrey
To: OneVike
We in Texas welcome Montana to the secession.
They can keep that Hannah girl, though.
39
posted on
05/05/2009 12:01:09 PM PDT
by
humblegunner
(Where my PIE at, fool?)
To: OneVike
Looks like they stopped short of the end zone, by excepting machine guns in Section 5, (4). Odd, considering that they included firearms chambered for 30mm anti-tank rounds.
40
posted on
05/05/2009 12:01:29 PM PDT
by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 281-296 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson