So much for Montana's Sovereignty...

Status
Not open for further replies.
And we expected different from ATF? They're calling the State's bluff. It should be interesting to see how and if the Montana State AG or Governor responds.
 
This was the whole point, to drive it to a court case and bring this stuff to light.

If anyone thought this was just going to stand with no challenges they were crazy.

I don't believe it was a bluff by the states at all, far from it.

Sooner or later someone will end up challenging this, either intentionally or by accident, and it will get to the Supreme Court.

Either that or enough states do it that it begins to cause a shift of some kind at the Federal level.

Whether or not it works is another story :)
 
"Bluff" was probably a poor choice of words. TexasRifleman is correct. The whole point is to get this into court. Where it goes from there is another story.
 
Without looking beyond the surface, licensed FFLs might have a problem with this. But, guns made entirely in and kept and borne in a state would not fall under the auspices of the usurped power added to the Commerce Clause and should be able to be made and sold by anyone. The BATFE only has usurped power over firearms traded in interstate commerce. For that reason, I can buy a gun from my neighbor and vise versa without BATFE interference. All the BATFE BS has been taken care of when that gun was first bought from a dealer by me or my neighbor.

Woody
 
But, guns made entirely in and kept and borne in a state would not fall under the auspices of the usurped power added to the Commerce Clause and should be able to be made and sold by anyone. The BATFE only has usurped power over firearms traded in interstate commerce.
Click to expand...
Usurped or not, the jail cell will have real bars. Ever since Wickard, the Feds have enforced jurisdiction over anything that may be traded in interstate commerce, whether or not the object in question actually crosses state lines.
 
Usurped or not, the jail cell will have real bars. Ever since Wickard, the Feds have enforced usurped jurisdiction over anything that may be traded in interstate commerce, whether or not the object in question actually crosses state lines.
Click to expand...

I abridged it for ya! :evil:

It's too bad you have to end up behind bars to have standing in such matters.

Woody
 
Whats Going to happen is Gary Marbut (President of MTSSA) will try to find a Squeaky clean Person to Write a Letter to the ATF telling them he or she is going to build 10 or 20Firearms under HB246 to be sold Within the state. Which will spark a Court Battle.

Then we will see!
 
So, what would happen if an unlicensed Montana manufacturer makes handguns, sells them only to Montana residents and then the Montana resident takes it out of state and later sells it out of state. Seems like it would be impossible to guarantee that a product stay entirely within a state.

Don't get me wrong, I am NOT on the side of the ATF and I am all for state sovereignty - I believe the Federal government has entirely too much power.
 
NavyLT said:
So, what would happen if an unlicensed Montana manufacturer makes handguns, sells them only to Montana residents and then the Montana resident takes it out of state and later sells it out of state. Seems like it would be impossible to guarantee that a product stay entirely within a state.

Don't get me wrong, I am NOT on the side of the ATF and I am all for state sovereignty - I believe the Federal government has entirely too much power.
Click to expand...
ATF will more than likely kick down the door and raid the place, similar to what the DEA was doing in California when the Californians declared medical weed legal and started opening up dispensaries selling it to people with prescriptions in violation of a federal law
 
tennessee

tennessee has a similar provision...(same discussion on another sight concerning it: TFL). Most federal criminal laws are applied to the states through either the taxing power or the commerce clause. Some may recall a few years ago a federal statute concerning guns and schools was struck down by Justice Thomas on grounds it was not within the scope of the interstate commerce clause. These state provisions, montana's and tennessee both, are working below the scope of the commerce clause. Notice the "in state" requirement. So long as applied only to guns "in state" and not in interstate commerce this law may hold up. However, the ATF I think generally takes position gun entered interstate commerce when left state of manufacture...it willprobably argue ALL gun components and
gun itself myst state in state to avoid federal control. But, worth a run,
the commerce clause is getting stretched pretty thin and its limits need to be
explored and set.
 
MT GUNNY said:
Whats Going to happen is Gary Marbut (President of MTSSA) will try to find a Squeaky clean Person to Write a Letter to the ATF telling them he or she is going to build 10 or 20Firearms under HB246 to be sold Within the state. Which will spark a Court Battle.

Then we will see!
Click to expand...

I hope "Squeeky Clean" likes prison food, because the feds will make it a point to make an example of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top