Montana leading the charge in the 2A

[marklbucla]

http://montanahuntingtoday.com/blog/index.php/2009/04/15/flash-good-news-gov-signs-hb-246/

FLASH - Good News - Gov signs HB 246

April 15, 2009

GOOD NEWS! Governor Schweitzer signed HB 246, MSSA’s Montana-made guns bill, today. HB 246 declares that any guns and ammunition made and retained in Montana are not subject to ANY federal regulation under the authority of Congress to regulate commerce “among the states.”

HB 246 will become effective on October 1, 2009. MSSA is beginning now to plan our legal strategy for vetting the legal principles involved. Soon after October 1st, MSSA will determine if it is necessary to file a lawsuit in federal court to prove the principles established in HB 246. If we do need to file this lawsuit (probably will), MSSA will need to do some serious fundraising to defray the expenses involved.

Meanwhile, we firmly recommend that no Montanans begin making the proposed Montana-made guns until we are able to vet the legal principles. We do not want any Montanan to become subject to possible federal criminal charges until the legal issues associated with HB 246 are resolved.

We are ready now to accept any donations for this project. Remember, MSSA is not a tax-exempt entity - we’ve never sought that status because of the political limitations on tax exempt organizations. So, any donation you may care to make for this effort is NOT tax deductible. If you care to make a donation to MSSA for this purpose, you can make a check payable to MSSA and mail it to MSSA at P.O. Box 4924. Missoula, Montana 59808. In the memo portion of your check, write “Montana-made guns.” Thanks!

Our hearty thanks go out to valiant HB 246 sponsor Rep. Joel Boniek (R-Livingston). Joel is a real hero for having carried this bill and having done it so well. This result is especially complimentary to Joel because he is a freshman legislator. He had a steep learning curve going into this session with no prior legislative experience.

We also thank those many Montana legislators who supported HB 246 during the legislative process, and we thank Governor Schweitzer both for demonstrating the right Montana attitude by signing HB 246, and for doing what he said he’d do on his 2008 MSSA Candidate Questionnaire.

Finally, thanks to ALL of you for having supported HB 246 with messages to legislators. We couldn’t have done it without you!!!

Best wishes,

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

 

[JeFF D]

great news! i'll definitely be following this one closely

 

[Dokkalfar]

sweet now we just need states with large gun factories (Remington, Colt, etc) to pass similar legislation so they have even less they can regulate!

 

[CoRoMo]

I'm glad this has gone this far. Hopefully nobody screws this up.
I don't know why the NRA wouldn't want to back this legal maneuver. I really hope this goes smooth and our side is victorious throughout. Many more states need to follow suit.

 

[TAB]

Every one that thinks this is great... prove it. be the 1st one to go build a Machine gun, then tell all the news papers.

This is a step backwards, not forwards.

 

[Animal Mother]

Every one that thinks this is great... prove it. be the 1st one to go build a Machine gun, then tell all the news papers.

This is a step backwards, not forwards.

IIRC, Class III is specifically exempt from this law. That bridge will be crossed much later.

 

[crebralfix]

Many people fundamentally do not understand that GCA 1968 and other federal gun laws are based on INTERSTATE commerce (which has been so perverted that they're using it for almost everything). That's the whole point: if it stays in Montana, with "Made in Montana", then it has not crossed a state line. If it does, it would in violation of Federal law.

It's not a step backwards because it's a state exerting its power AGAINST what .gov wants. It's been far too long.

 

[REDEYE]

Every one that thinks this is great... prove it. be the 1st one to go build a Machine gun, then tell all the news papers.

This is a step backwards, not forwards.

Would you like to expand on your notion?

 

[femoralis]

I read elsewhere that, though this does not apply to machine guns, it DOES apply to sawed offs and sound suppressors!

Good luck with this, Montana!

(and add MGs to the law too!)

 

[crebralfix]

The law specifically excludes any weapon that fires two or more bullets with one trigger pull.

 

[CoRoMo]

How is this a step backwards?????

 

[MT GUNNY]

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm

Section 5 may be interesting to you Tab

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Governor Schweitzer signed HB 246, MSSA’s Montana-made guns bill, today. HB 246 declares that any guns and ammunition made and retained in Montana are not subject to ANY federal regulation under the authority of Congress to regulate commerce “among the states.”

There is already legal precedent set by the Supreme Court that items produced and consumed or used with one state still has an implact on interstate commerce, and can therefore be regulated by the federal government.

 

[jim in Anchorage]

(D) in fact, even before the sale of a firearm, the gun, its
component parts, ammunition, and the raw materials from which
they are made have considerably moved in interstate commerce;

18 USC 992[q] I don't know how there going to pull this off. This is from my tread below on gun free school zones-its how it was justified under the 10th. Sounds like you would have to make your own steel.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Even if the raw materials were mined and refined in Montanan, all parts made in Montana, the gun assembled, sold, and used in Montana.... it would still be regulated under the interstate commerce clause. The Supreme court ruled this about 60 years ago in Wickard v. Filburn.

A farmer grew wheat. He grew more than the government alotment. The excess, he used on his farm as feed and ground it into flour for his personal use. The government charged him a penalty of 49 cents a bushel. He refused, the case went to court, all the way to the Supreme Court. He argued that since this wheat was never marketed, and since it was grown and consumed in his state, that it was not regulatable under interstate commerce.

The Supreme Court felt differently, and ruled that even if it was grown and consumed in a single state, it still impacted interstate commerce, in that the farmer did not have to buy any.

 

[General Geoff]

That farmer didn't have the considerable resources and political clout of the state of Montana behind him, though.

 

[jim in Anchorage]

Remarkable logic from the justices. What if he bought it from his in state neighbor?

 

[Lone_Gunman]

What if he bought it from his in state neighbor?

It would have still affected interstate commerce in two ways. First, it would have prevented his neighbor from being able to sell it to someone lese in another state. Second, it would have kept some farmer in another state from being able to sell it to him.

That farmer didn't have the considerable resources and political clout of the state of Montana behind him, though.

I doubt Montana's resources compare favorably to those of the US government, which is presently controlled by anti-gun politicians.

 

[General Geoff]

Maybe not in sheer manpower, but I bet Montana has more money than the federal government, which has been in red ink since 2001.

 

[jim in Anchorage]

Yeah but they can print more. Or take yours. Montana can't.

 

[General Geoff]

Difference between "can't" and "hasn't yet."


This court battle will decide which way it goes. I don't see Montana backing down easily. And the feds have bigger fish to fry than Montanans with free market guns.

 

[akodo]

also, the earlier ruling regarding the wheat did not have a specific state law backing it up.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

If the question is one of Constitutional law, and I believe it is, given that the interstate commerce clause is how it will be justified, then a State law cannot supercede the Constitution.

 

[armoredman]

It's called a Consitutional challenge for a reason, and I wish Montana the best of luck! The Commerce Clause has been dreadfully abused for a very longtime to justify any odd law they want to pass, until we accept any odd law they want to pass!

 

[40S&Wfan]

This is an awesome step forward for our illustrious state! I, for one, am stoked about this whole thing!!
As for TAB, the link that MT GUNNY posted should take you to the part that says this bill does not pertain to firearms that can fire two or more projectiles with one activation of the firing mechanism!!
Maybe they'll catch this provision the next time around!!