To: OneVike
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.Whoever wrote this doesn't understand how the Interstate Commerce clause of the Constitution has been (mis)interpreted by the courts. That interpretation reflects the view that by the simple act of manufacturing guns and ammunition in Montana that is not sold outside Montana still affects interstate commerce since fewer guns and ammo will be imported into Montana as a result. That will affect the sale and transport of guns and ammunition in the other 49 states. Sound convoluted? It is convoluted but it is also "the law".
To: InterceptPoint
It is convoluted but it is also "the law".
It may be "the law", but it is also illegal, i.e. in violation of the Constitution - of which Montana apparently has a few well-thumbed copies.
Any tyrant can enact a law. Whether it'll stand enforcement is another question.
88 posted on
05/05/2009 12:39:18 PM PDT by
LearsFool
("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
To: InterceptPoint
Looks like Montana just stood up and told the FedGov’s they are WRONG on this.
To: InterceptPoint
Whoever wrote this doesn't understand how the Interstate Commerce clause of the Constitution has been (mis)interpreted by the courts. That interpretation reflects the view that by the simple act of manufacturing guns and ammunition in Montana that is not sold outside Montana still affects interstate commerce since fewer guns and ammo will be imported into Montana as a result. That will affect the sale and transport of guns and ammunition in the other 49 states. Sound convoluted? It is convoluted but it is also "the law".It's not that they don't "understand" the way the law has been perverted. They're not asking for clarification. They're simply saying what anyone smarter than an elected official already knew but also repudiating that wrong interpretation as respects firearms and saying that they'll no longer pretend it's correct. I fail to see a problem.
105 posted on
05/05/2009 12:52:47 PM PDT by
Still Thinking
(Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
To: InterceptPoint
Whoever wrote this doesn't understand how the Interstate Commerce clause of the Constitution has been (mis)interpreted by the courts.I am sure they looked into that, and like you said, understand how it has been misinterpreted.
255 posted on
05/05/2009 9:37:31 PM PDT by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson