Posted on 02/21/2010 9:46:46 AM PST by fight_truth_decay
We all predicted this would happen.
In a move typical for that fear-mongering organization with an ever-swelling acronym, the BATFE has written gun dealers in the states of Montana and Tennessee to let them know the BATFE will be disregarding the states' sovereign gun laws.
The "Montana Made" law, just like Tennessee's Firearms Freedom Act, is very simple.
Much of the claimed federal authority to regulate firearm sales and transfers stems from a liberal interpretation of every American tyrant's favorite subterfuge, the "interstate commerce" clause. In essence, this is what gives the BATFE its nasty teeth.
With this in mind, Montana correctly understood that any weapon made in Montana by Montana residents and sold in Montana to Montana residents is Montana's business and Montana's business alone.
Montana thus sought to take charge of its firearms industry with the application of a simple truism:
Any gun made in Montana by Montana residents and sold in Montana to Montana residents is intrastate commerce, not "interstate commerce," and thus does not full under the purview of the federal government.
Potentially, the state would be able to say goodbye to NICS checks; Brady background checks; NFA taxes, bans and NFA databases -- and most importantly, federal "assault weapons" bans, which Montana and Tennessee rightly anticipated.
In effect, the "Montana Made" law would have permitted Montana gun companies to manufacture any kind of weapon banned by federal law -- including so-called "assault weapons" -- and sell them to fellow Montana residents.
Moreover, in this scenario, no one -- neither the manufacturer nor the dealer nor the buyer -- would have to kowtow to the BATFE by paying them a $200 tax and surrendering one's privacy to their notoriously inaccurate and oft-abused National Firearms Registry.
It was a new day for freedom -- and other states besides Tennessee were thinking of following suit: Alaska, Colorado, Oklahoma and Texas.
Well, the BATFE -- never one to have its power downplayed (or acronym belittled)-- has written letters to both Montana and Tennessee gun dealers letting them know that they proceed at their own risk.
We can only guess what new horrors those words portend -- probably more dead housewives and children as disgruntled ATF thugs shoot-to-kill anyone suspected of perhaps owning a firearm not properly taxed and regulated by Washington, D.C., power brokers.
What else would be new.
A few of our members expressed interest in contacting the BATFE to vent some righteous anger -- the same thing we did when the Department of Defense said they were going to ban all once-fired military brass for resale.
Remember how the DoD reneged on that commitment after just a few days due to the widespread backlash from gun owners and law enforcement?
Well, this is a bit different. Writing the ATF and providing them with your information is akin to giving thieves your home address and the hours you won't be home.
We're going to take a different, less dangerous approach.
We've been talking to state officials from both Montana and Tennessee today to try to figure out the best way we can help these state laws succeed.
For now, click here to read Luke's commentary on his blog and leave a comment as this development unfolds.
*Snip
In Liberty,
Dudley Brown Executive Director National Association for Gun Rights
Much to the eternal embarrasment of that august institution...
NO. The sheriff - THEY are the ultimate law in the states http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiBcC8_goVg
I say immediate arrest for Federal Personnel in these circumstances and incarceration in STATE prisons, judged under STATE laws. Dunno about you but I had all the Federal Government I need for one lifetime.
Obama would back down. Heck. he backed down from itsy bitsy Honduras.
****************
He will not back down from patriots and US citizens.
Of course, but the State Police as a backup ain’t too shabby. Just go for the Force - total overpowering local force.
IIRC, the argument over marijuana was that local producers were putting their product on the national market effecting interstate commerce; the federal government recognized no legitimate purpose for marijuana, so making it cheaper to buy marijuana inherently served an aim in opposition to the federal regulation of the “commerce.”
In the gun case, Montana seems to have anticipated this issue. By certifying that they are produced and sold locally, takes them out of the sphere of federal interest. The only way this could be dragged back into a commerce-clause situation would seem to me to be if the federal government affirmed that, as in the case of marijuana, they had a federal interest in reducing demand by artifically, purposely inflating prices, an argument which would put them into direct opposition with the 2nd amendment.
There fixed it. When's the call to arms?
IIRC, the argument over marijuana was that local producers were putting their product on the national market effecting interstate commerce; the federal government recognized no legitimate purpose for marijuana, so making it cheaper to buy marijuana inherently served an aim in opposition to the federal regulation of the “commerce.”
In the gun case, Montana seems to have anticipated this issue. By certifying that they are produced and sold locally, takes them out of the sphere of federal interest. The only way this could be dragged back into a commerce-clause situation would seem to me to be if the federal government affirmed that, as in the case of marijuana, they had a federal interest in reducing demand by artifically, purposely inflating prices, an argument which would put them into direct opposition with the 2nd amendment.
CAVEAT: When the issue is banning the gun outright, such as automatic rifles in the Brady bill, this then can go into the area of interstate commerce under the marijuana case.
That's because he has an enormous protection ring. No, I'm not talking about the SS - I'm talking about academia, the mainstream media, and the rest of the democRAT thug machine that carry his tainted water day in and day out.
We saw how he reacted to a real citizen - you can bet that he'll never let anyone normal (like Joe the Plumber) get near him again.
If only they wore blue helmets so we could win in a snowball fight.
Actually, in real life, the feds have given up on this, they are leaving the states with Medical MJ laws alone. In CA alone, if you have a medical MJ prescription you can carry about as much as you want around with you. I know one guy that has bags full of it he gets on his prescription. I don't use it but the feds have decided it can't enforce in a state that has such laws.
The SCOTUS was wrong to rule like that, BTW. Just as they would be wrong to rule that States don't have the right to ignore fed laws if they keep their firearms that are made, sold solely, in their states free from federal interference. The interstate commerce BS is just that, BS.
Proceed and tell them to POUND SAND!
I was barely aware of the ATF until they botched that raid on the Branch Davidians. I remember affirmative action female ATF agents bawling their eyes out at the chaotic scene. They were traumatized because some crazies had actually shot back at the ATF crazies. A big publicity stunt gone bad. They figured Bill Clinton would increase their funding
The head honcho David Koresh could have been easily arrested off the compound with a minimum display of force
I think that the first published account of IRS agents invading premises with shotguns (while it happens frequently) will be the their last. The people are in no mood for this.
Like when the Feds gave up on forced busing.
The government is not your friend, and contrary to what we were taught in civics class, the people are NOT really the master of the government. They are just told that, and as long as sufficient number accept the line, society remains civil.
More like bow down. That's more his style.
Let us not forget michigan in that mix too!
They already did. The pot case is Raich, and it was applied to a firearms conviction, by order of SCOTUS.
There is a case on the books of a fellow with a homemade machine gun, probably never left his house, and he was convicted (upheld too) on federal charges, via application of Raich, per order of SCOTUS. That is, SCOTUS told the Circuit Court to apply Raich to a conviction for the possession of a homemade weapon that never crossed a state line. United States v. Stewart.
If it ever comes down to that, it will come down to a contest of wills.
As long as the people targeted are under attack and the people doing the attacking don't suffer any serious losses on the field of battle and are safe from reprisal in their own homelands, then there is no cost to continuing to keep using overwhelming force to keep slapping the people around.
If that dynamic ever changes, then it will get to be a true contest of wills.
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.