Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Raich, Montana, and Federalism

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Flyboy, Jun 20, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Flyboy

    Flyboy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,888
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    We all read with delight about Montana's HB 366, which would have exempted firearms produced and kept in Montana from Federal regulation. Obviously, with the Raich decision, that idea is dead (even if it hadn't died in committee). The fact that such a bill was even proferred, however, is heartening: it shows that at least one state is getting fed up with the Feds.

    My question, then, is this: historically, major political change is usually the result of The Powers That Be raising the temperature of the pot too high; at some point, the people get fed up, the dam breaks, and changes are made. Given that Montana was considering such legislation before the Raich decision was published, might that decision help to catalyze support for the kinds of changes proposed by HB 366?
     
  2. TallPine

    TallPine Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    7,734
    Location:
    somewhere in the middle of Montana
    Well, you know ... you just never can tell.

    And that might be a good thing.

    You just never know when you're going to push the wrong person(s) too far.
     
  3. Kim

    Kim Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,488
    Well lets see. I guess Montana could always pass that law they want and tell the Feds "Molon Labe" call up the militia and see where the line falls. That might get other states on board or enough citizens riled up that the Feds stand down. Kinda reminds me of another strong power that tried to come and take the peoples firearms. Wonder if the government remembers how that turned out!!!!!! :eek:
     
  4. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    I think it ended with the feds setting fire to their compound and putting their children in foster care. Which lead to an explosion in OK City 2 years later, which lead to concrete barriers around all the other federal buildings.

    And thanks to 9/11, the fed gov continues to accumulate power. I personally think the war on terror ended several years ago when we invaded iraq. The question is how much longer the government can keep everyone fooled.
     
  5. TallPine

    TallPine Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    7,734
    Location:
    somewhere in the middle of Montana
    slurpy, I think Kim was referring to a little incident at Lexington/Concord ;)

    MT doesn't have too much to fight with, unless of course you counted the nuclear missiles in our state :what:
     
  6. CletusFudd

    CletusFudd Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    70
    Feds stand down?

    "That might get other states on board or enough citizens riled up that the Feds stand down"

    The administrations of the other states don't have the stones to stand up but I'm betting that Montana would have many volunteers to give them a hand.

    The Feds couldn't back off as it is not in their nature. They have to crush all opposition to prove that they are right.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page