The Fabric for the Federal Goverment vs the states continues to deteriorate

[SUBMAN1]

It is Montana this time:

-S


House shoots down federal gun controls
Posted on Feb. 14
By KAHRIN DEINES of the Associated Press



HELENA (AP) - Montana lawmakers fired another shot in battles for states’ rights as they supported letting some Montana gun owners and dealers skip reporting their transactions to the federal government.

Under House Bill 246, firearms made in Montana and used in Montana would be exempt from federal regulation. The same would be true for firearm accessories and ammunition made and sold in the state.

“What we need here is for Montana to be able to handle Montana’s business and affairs,” Republican Rep. Joel Boniek told fellow lawmakers Saturday. The wilderness guide from Livingston defeated Republican incumbent Bruce Malcolm in last spring’s election.
Boniek’s measure aims to circumvent federal authority over interstate commerce, which is the legal basis for most gun regulation in the United States. The bill potentially could release Montanans from both federal gun registration requirements and dealership licensing rules. Since the state has no background-check laws on its own books, the legislation also could free gun purchasers from that requirement.

“Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I’d like to support that,” Boniek said. “But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It’s about state rights.”

The House voted 64-36 for the bill on Saturday. If it clears a final vote, the measure will go to the Senate.

House Republicans were joined by 14 Democrats in passing the measure.

“I would hope that our U.S. Supreme Court would begin to retreat from what I think is an abusive interpretation of our interstate commerce clause,” said Rep. Deborah Kottel, a Democrat from Great Falls who supports the measure.

That clause in the U.S. Constitution grants Congress authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the states. The Supreme Court has handled cases seeking to limit the clause’s application in recent years. In 2005, the court upheld federal authority to regulate marijuana under the clause, even when its use is limited to noncommercial purposes n such as medical reasons n and it is grown and used within a state’s borders.

The Montana bill follows fears here and elsewhere that the election of Barack Obama as president will trigger more gun regulation. In the months before Obama’s inauguration, Montanans rushed to stock up on guns, pushing gun sales beyond normal benchmarks despite the recession.

Opponents of the measure worry lax regulations in the state could lead to a similar surge in both gun sales and gun manufacturing.

“Who are we bringing in and is this the kind of business we want to have in this state?” asked Rep. Sue Malek, D-Missoula. “I want our state to be recognized as a state that cares about people, and that cares about the environment.”

The bill is one of a number the Legislature is considering that may extend gun rights in Montana.

Earlier in the week, the House passed another measure, HB228, that would let Montanans carry concealed weapons in city limits without having permits.

On Saturday the House Judiciary Committee narrowly passed a resolution that affirms Montanans’ right to carry weapons in national parks and wildlife refuges.

http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2...bnews/br26.txt

[GoldenRivet]

responsible gun ownership is the Cornerstone of American Liberty.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

responsible gun ownership is the Cornerstone of American Liberty.

True, but even though firearms is the subject of the bill, it is not what the bill is about. This is what the bill is about:


“Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I’d like to support that,” Boniek said. “But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It’s about state rights.”

-S

[CaptainHaplo]

I am greatly encouraged by this. First let me point out it was a DEMOCRAT speaking on this - it goes to show that you cannot define a person by the letter beside their name, but by the view of government they hold. So kudos go to those who supported this.

I am telling you all - this is just one more shot across the bow of the federal government. Its going to continue to escalate.

States are realizing that without all the unfunded mandates - and not having to send tax money to DC - they could be doing alot more of the things THEY wanted to without having to answer to big brother. The time is coming that there is going to be a really big change in the way our country does things - and a return to what the nation was founded on.

Good find!

[Kapt Z]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

The bill potentially could release Montanans from both federal gun registration requirements and dealership licensing rules. Since the state has no background-check laws on its own books, the legislation also could free gun purchasers from that requirement.

Oh, those Montanians....

They know how to bring the crazy.....

[sunvalleyslim]

Go Montana.................

[A Very Super Market]

Wait, are you saying that its good that Montana doesn't want background checks?

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

responsible gun ownership is the Cornerstone of American Liberty.

Cornerstone?
I'd say the entire Bill of Rights fits that label.

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Cornerstone?
I'd say the entire Bill of Rights fits that label.

Only if you are not fixated on killing other people.

[August]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Only if you are not fixated on killing other people.

What makes you foreign guys think you know better?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by August

What makes you foreign guys think you know better?

I'd like to know that too?

Jealousy of our independence and freedom is the only thing I can think of as the real reason.

-S

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

responsible gun ownership is the Cornerstone of American Liberty.

I know my view won't be popular here, but I've just never understood statements like that.

I understand why people like their guns. I'm from a rural state, I know plenty of hunters, and I go to school in DC so I certainly understand why somebody might want one for self-defense.

But as THE cornerstone of American liberty? I just don't get it. I've been to plenty of countries with very restrictive gun laws, and I certainly haven't felt less free because of it. In fact, I feel more free in a country where the gun laws are so restrictive that the regular police don't even carry guns. To me a fair and open judicial system where I can effectively defend myself against the government is far more important to my liberty, not to mention the power to legally overthrow my government via the ballot box.

Now I'm not necessarily in favor of further gun control. But I think it ought to be seen as a crime issue, not a liberty issue.

And yes, I'm aware that I probably just kicked a hornets' nest.

[Morts]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I'd like to know that too?

Jealousy of our independence and freedom is the only thing I can think of as the real reason.

-S

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
subman1, we(or well, most europeans) dont need assault rifles to feel safe...unlike you

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I'd like to know that too?

Jealousy of our independence and freedom is the only thing I can think of as the real reason.

-S

Yeah, jealousy and hate of the US for their freedom and independance *nods*
sure, that must be it, heared it so often, must be the case.

@August, who at least asked, I do not know better. But yanno, there is nothing much else within the design envelope of a weapon but to kill. And a bit of common sense tells that a tool intended for killing is well...used for killing.

[Aramike]

But as THE cornerstone of American liberty? I just don't get it.

Personally, I find the First Ammendment to be more of a so-called "cornerstone", but I can see how gun-ownership could also be considered such.

The reason being is that guns (and threat of force) are the only real way for a citizen to ensure and defend the practice of the remainder of his rights. Without a practical way of having this assurance, the citizenry would ultimately be at the mercy of whoever was simply stronger.