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
Wha a bunch of fools...
No. Thomas voted in the dissent. Scalia in the majority.
Yeah, that’s the one.
That’s one thing I love about Free Republic. For every comment, there’s a hundred thousand people who think they know more than you, but at least one who really does. :^)
Not being familiar with the case you cite, it does seem to fit Raich a lot more closely than Montana’s law, no?
The reason the case linked and cited in post 73 "fits Raich closely" is that it is the Raich case ;-)
But SCOTUS has ordered (not suggested, but ordered) the Circuit Courts of Appeal to use the Raich case to uphold federal firearms laws against any Commerce Clause challenge, such as "made entirely in the state of Montana."
The letter of the law can be stretched and reformed and distorted to what ever the far-left national socialists would like it to be.
But the Spirit of the law cannot – would the framers of the Constitution have allowed there to be a huge loophole that would allow the government unlimited powers when the rest of the document clearly restrains the power of government?
The Leftists like to use their universal get out of jail free card In the form of the commerce clause for virtually any usurpation of the Constitution.
Would that have been “OKAY” with the framers?
Diappointing either way, both are my favorites on the SCOTUS
Now please tell me where and when the ATF have the rights to revoke the States 10Th Amendment Rights?
There is no Second Amendment protecting Pot...
True, I hope it still matters.
Exactly what this was supposed to do.
Interstate Commerce Clause has screwed up our country.
USMA Rah Rah USMA Rah Rah
Arnt Rockets fun?
Close the BAFT!
Be Ever Vigilant!
Wyoming has a watered down version of that recently introduced.
Felonies instead of capital punishment.
Know your role ATF and get the frak out of state righs, kkthx. Idiots.
I want to see the ATF jack boots raid Montana. Now that would be fun to watch. Not so much fun for the ATF though.
Sounds like the ATF is threatening Montana residents. Hummm interesting.
Sure, and they just closed all he pot shops in California. </sarcasm>
I belive you're thinking of Lon Horiuchi.
Incidentally, Horiuchi was a sniper for the FBI, not the ATF.
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.