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

So much for Montana's Sovereignty...

Discussion in 'Legal' started by NavyLCDR, Jul 21, 2009.

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

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
  2. Cougfan2

    Cougfan2 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    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.
     
  3. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    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 :)
     
  4. Cougfan2

    Cougfan2 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    "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.
     
  5. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    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
     
  6. jimmyraythomason

    jimmyraythomason Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    7,388
    Location:
    Alabama
    So much for the 10th amendment. Oh,wait that one has been dead since 1861,my bad.
     
  7. DHJenkins

    DHJenkins Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,022
    Location:
    South Texas
    I wonder what the Thune amendment nay-sayers screaming about states rights will say about this?
     
  8. Flyboy

    Flyboy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,888
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    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.
     
  9. Faitmaker

    Faitmaker Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    52
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    Thune Nay Sayer #1. Go Montana. Never Surrender! Arrrgggggg...

    :)
     
  10. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I abridged it for ya! :evil:

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

    Woody
     
  11. MT GUNNY

    MT GUNNY Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    1,450
    Location:
    Kalispell MT
    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!
     
  12. NavyLCDR

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
    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.
     
  13. j-easy

    j-easy Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    223
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    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
     
  14. gringolet

    gringolet Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Messages:
    242
    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.
     
  15. mgkdrgn

    mgkdrgn Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    3,914
    Location:
    Lexington, SC
    I hope "Squeeky Clean" likes prison food, because the feds will make it a point to make an example of them.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page